Sitting of 18 January 1993

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  Israel
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations on the case of the imprisonment of Mordecai Vanunu were made during the visit of Prime Minister Rabin of Israel to London on 10 December 1992.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister did not raise this subject. But we have privately made representations to the Israelis about certain humanitarian aspects of Mordecai Vanunu's case.

  United Nations
  Sir Nicholas Fairbairn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the total size of the staff of the United Nations; and what is its cost.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  According to the United Nation's proposed programme budget for the biennium 1992–93, staff costs funded from the regular budget of the United Nation's for the calendar year 1992 amounted to $893 million, representing 75.6 per cent. of the total budget. This represents a provision for 10,129 posts.

  In addition, according to the Secretary-General in his report "Composition of the Secretariat" dated 7 October 1992, there are approximately 21,000 staff occupying posts funded from voluntary contributions. The report states that the total staff employed in the United Nations and its subsidiary organs is 31,127.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the currrent conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Goodlad
  The Treasury have given Departments discretion to offer up to £100 advance of salary for the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel. This discretion has not been taken up by the FCO diplomatic wing, which has no plans to do so. The Overseas Development Administration, which administers itself separately, has given its staff an entitlement to a salary advance of up to £100 for this purpose. Its has no plans to change this.

  Bosnia (No-fly Zone)
  Sir Russell Johnston
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what information he has concerning breaches by Croatia of UN Resolution 781 concerning the no-fly zone over Bosnia-Herzegovina.

  Mr. Garel-Jones
  The UN Secretary General has issued regular reports to the Security Council giving details of violations of the no-fly zone established by resolutions 781 of 9 October and 786 of 11 November. It is clear from these that, to varying degrees, all parties in Bosnia-Herzegovina, including the Croats, have conducted flights outside the terms permitted in the resolutions. The total of unauthorised flights to 10 January was 375.

  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what evidence he has of the number of Croatian air force flights in contravention of UN resolution 781; and what steps he will take to enforce impartially the no-fly zone in Bosnia-Herzgovina.

  Mr. Garel-Jones
  The UN Secretary General has issued regular reports to the Security Council giving details of violations of the no-fly zone established by resolutions 781 of 9 October and 786 of 11 November. It is clear from these that, to varying degrees, all parties in Bosnia-Herzegovina, including the Croats, have conducted flights outside the terms permitted in the resolutions. The total of unauthorised flights to 10 January was 375. The Security Council is currently considering a resolution on enforcement of the no-fly zone which will apply to all parties.

  Somalia
  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what measures he has taken to inquire into the facts of the killings at Kismayu in Somalia; and what representations he has made to prevent such massacres from recurring.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The alleged killings in Kismayo are of great concern. Belgian troops deployed there are investigating the reports. A recent meeting in Addis Ababa between the Somali factions has reached provisional agreement on a cease-fire, disarmament and encampment of militias. This should help prevent such incidents.

  Cameroon
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the current human rights situation in Cameroon.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: We welcome the lifting of the state of emergency in North West province announced by the Cameroon Government on 29 December and the release of detainees. We hope that the situation in the country will now improve. These encouraging developments do not, however, absolve the Government of Cameroon from their responsibilities for earlier serious human rights abuses in Cameroon. We have called upon the authorities to investigate the allegations. A statement in similar terms was issued by the European Community and its member states on 11 January, a copy of which has been placed in the Library.
  3
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Government of Cameroon concerning human rights abuses.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave the hon. Member for Clydebank and Milngavie (Mr. Worthington) on 3 December at column 316. We have continued to make our views known to the Cameroon authorities.

  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement concerning the message to all Christians by the Archbishop of Bamenda in Cameroon, a copy of which has been sent to him.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: We strongly support the Archbishop's call for the abolition of torture and warmly welcome his appeal for peace and reconciliation.

  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what information he has concerning the use of torture in Cameroon.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: We have received numerous reports from different sources alleging ill-treatment or torture of detainees. We have called on the Cameroon Government to institute inquiries into these cases.

  Nuclear Conference
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will make a statement on the purpose of and participants in the conference on the nuclear future-dilemmas of arms control, reduction and proliferation, to be held at his departmental conference centre at Wilton Park from 11 to 15 January.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Responsibility for the subject in question has been delegated to Wilton Park under its chief executive, Mr. Geoffrey Denton. I have asked him to arrange for a written reply to be given.

  Letter from Geoffrey Denton to Mr. Llew Smith, dated 21 December 1992:
  Thank you for your question asking for a satement on the purpose of and the participants in the conference on "The Nuclear Future: Dilemmas of Arms Control, Reduction and Proliferation". I hope the following will answer your question.
  The purpose of the conference, as for all Wilton Park conferences, is to provide a forum for the exchange of views, in order to promote international understanding of the issues and to enhance the reputation of the UK as a country that believes in resolving international problems through peaceful dialogue.
  The participants will be drawn from 15–20 countries, and several professions: military and civilian defence staff, diplomats and other officials, businessmen, academics, media.
  More specifically, the conference will discuss the future of nuclear weapons with due reference to the fact that the ending of the East-West military confrontation has coincided with a situation where the role of nuclear and chemical and biological weapons has increased outside Europe.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

  Scott Inquiry
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Attorney-General how many members of the Attorney-General's Department are involved full-time or part-time in supporting Lord Justice Scott in his inquiry.

  The Attorney-General
  One lawyer from the Treasury Solicitor's Department has been transferred on loan to the Department of Trade and Industry and assigned on a full-time basis to be Secretary to the inquiry.

  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Attorney-General what legal documentation has been supplied by his Department to Lord Justice Scott in regard to his inquiry into arms and military exports to Iraq.

  The Attorney-General
  No legal documentation has been supplied so far. Departmental papers will be made available to Lord Justice Scott as and when he requests them.

  Serious Fraud Office
  Mr. Skinner
  To ask the Attorney-General if he will make a statement on the objectives set for the Serious Fraud Office in 1993.

  The Solicitor-General
  In 1993 it remains the objective of the Serious Fraud Office to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of its work in investigating and prosecuting serious and complex fraud.

  Right to Silence
  Mr. Bennett
  To ask the Attorney-General what comments he made on the right to silence in his evidence to the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice.

  The Attorney-General
  I discussed this issue with the Royal Commission at a meeting when they sought my views on a range of issues. My personal thoughts on the ability of the court to draw inferences from silence were set out in my speech last October to the Howard League for Penal Reform, a copy of which I have placed in the Library of the House.

  Crown Prosecution Service
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Attorney-General if he will make a further statement on recruitment to the Crown prosecution service.

  The Solicitor-General
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to my reply today to the hon. Member for Hendon, South (Mr. Marshall).

  Racial Hatred
  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the Attorney-General how many prosecutions there have been in each of the past three years for incitement to racial hatred.

  The Attorney-General
  In 1990, there was one prosecution for offences contrary to part III of the Public Order Act 1986; in 1991, there were four such prosecutions; and in 1992, one. At present two cases are waiting to be tried.

  Paintings (Charity Commission)
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Attorney-General what response he has made to submissions he has received from senior University of London academics, concerning the scheme devised by the Charity Commission for the sale of paintings from the Founder's collection, Royal Holloway and Bedford new college.

  The Attorney-General
  I have replied that I have found nothing in those submissions to cause me to revise my view that the Charity Commissioners had sufficient evidence before them to reach a decision to approve a scheme and that I would not be furthering the interests of charity by commencing an appeal against their decision to do so.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Attorney-General if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  The Attorney-General
  Staff in the Departments for which I have responsibility (the legal secretariat, the Crown prosecution service, the Treasury solicitor's department and the Serious Fraud Office) are aware of the availability of salary advances for the purchase of bicycles. All permanent staff with a minimum of two months service (other than the Serious Fraud Office which has no minimum requirement) are eligible to apply. Any advance made for the purchase of a bicycle is currently limited to £100. I have no plans to review these conditions.

  Seamus McElwaine
  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Attorney-General what examination is being undertaken by the Director of Public Prosecutions of the papers arising from the verdict of the jury in the inquest into the death of Seamus McElwaine.

  The Attorney-General
  On 13 January 1993 the Director of Public Proscutions for Northern Ireland asked the Royal Ulster constabulary for a full report on the inquest into the death of Seamus McElwaine.

  The director will consider this report and decide what further steps, if any, are required.

  Ambiguous Statutes
  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Attorney-General what guidance he has issued to Government Ministers about the implications of the ruling in the case in the House of Lords of Pepper v. Hart about the right of courts to have access to the Official Report in seeking to interpret the wording of ambiguous statutes; and if he will make a statement.

  The Attorney-General
  On 26 November 1992 the House of Lords decided by a majority that courts could look at parliamentary materials if the legislation is ambiguous or obscure or leads to an absurdity; the material that could be relied upon consists of a statement by a Minister or other promoter of the Bill; and the statements relied upon are clear.
  6
  By established convention advice given by the Law Officers, and the fact that they have advised, is not normally disclosed.

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Joyriders
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will issue guidelines to police authorities to discourage the misuse of the term joyriders to describe offences arising from taking vehicles without the owner's consent.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The law provides for offences of taking and driving away of motor vehicles without the owner's consent and for aggravated taking of motor vehicles. These are the terms which are used by the Home Office for statistical returns. Chief officers of police view such offences with great seriousness, but the use of other terms in less formal circumstances is a matter for them. It would not be an appropriate subject for Home Office guidance.

  Replica Guns
  Mr. James Hill
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps are being taken to control the sale of replica guns.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Under the Firearms Act 1982 the sale of any imitation firearm which can be readily converted to fire live ammunition is already subject to the same strict licensing controls as real firearms. My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary agrees with the advice offered to him by the Firearms Consultative Committee that controls on the sale of other types of replicas would be neither feasible nor effective. But he intends to implement the committee's recommendation to extend the range of offences which apply to the misuse of imitation firearms.

  Computers (Prisons)
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prisons in England and Wales do not have a computer; and what is his Department's policy on the provision of such equipment in each prison.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Every prison in England and Wales has a computer. The prison service information technology strategy incorporates plans to extend the use of information technology throughout the service where clear benefits in cost and efficiency can be identified.

  Mr. Paul Malone
  Mr. Miller
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what assessment he has made(a) of the reliability of evidence produced at the trial of Paul Malone and (b) of new evidence presented to his office in this case;

  (2) if he has decided to refer the case of Paul Malone back to the Court of Appeal.

  Mr. Jack
  My right hon. and learned Friend will be in a position properly to consider all the representations made on Mr. Malone's behalf—including those about the reliability of evidence given at his trial, as well as the new
  7
  evidence submitted to him—only when the Metropolitan police have completed the inquiries they are presently carrying out at the request of the chief constable of Cheshire. He will then decide whether there are grounds for referring Mr. Malone's conviction to the Court of Appeal.

  Police (Firearms)
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions(a) in 1992, (b) in 1987, (c) in 1982 and (d) in 1977, Metropolitan and City of London police officers were authorised to carry firearms in the course of their duty; and on how many occasions those firearms were used.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The only readily available information is contained in the following table:

  Year

  Number of operations1

  Number of occasions when shots were fired

  1991

  City of London

  71

  0

  Metropolitan

  1,520

  6

  1987

  City of London

  16

  0

  Metropolitan

  1,248

  3

  1982

  City of London

  255

  0

  Metropolitan

  6,035

  1

  1 The figure for 1982 is for the number of occasions on which firearms were issued. From 1987 onwards, the figures are for the number of firearms operations.

  I will write to the hon. Member when the information for 1992 is available.

  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what distinction is drawn between the use of concealed weapons and rifles, carbines or semi-automatic weapons when authorisation is granted to Metropolitan police and City of London police officers to carry firearms; and on what basis.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Firearms may be issued only on the authority of a senior officer, to an authorised firearms officer. Decisions as to whether a firearm is concealed when carried, and the type of firearm, are based on an assessment of operational requirements.

  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many recorded incidents of assaults against Metropolitan and City of London police officers occurred in(a) 1992, (b) 1987, (c) 1982, and (d) 1977; and in how many of these incidents firearms were used against police officers.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The numbers of officers in the Metropolitan police who have suffered serious assault necessitating periods off work are as follows:

  Year

  Number of officers

  Number of incidents involving firearms

  1977

  779

  7

  1982

  464

  1

  1987

  752

  20

  1992

  n/a

  n/a

  8
  There were 12 assaults on officers in the City of London police in 1992, none of which involved firearms. The City of London police do not hold a record of the number of assaults on police officers prior to 1991.

  Prisoners (Self-injury)
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what arrangements exist for ensuring that any tendency to deliberate self-harm in an inmate is known to the authorities of a prison to which such an inmate is sent from court or transferred from another prison establishment; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Where a prisoner is being handed over from police custody into prison custody, or vice-versa, information about possible suicide risk is conveyed via the exceptional risk form, instructions on which have been issued to both police forces and prison establishments.

  In London special arrangements exist under which prisoners' inmate medical records accompany them in a sealed pouch when they are escorted to court, so that they are immediately accessible should the prisoner for any reason be returned from court to a different prison establishment.

  All prisoners are seen by a member of health care staff on arrival at the establishment as part of the reception process. Prisoners must also be examined by a doctor within 24 hours in cases of first reception and reception following conviction, sentence or transfer. This examination includes an assessment of possible risk of suicide or self-harm.

  Where prisoners are transferred between prison establishments, any warnings about possible risk of suicide or self-harm will be contained in the inmate medical record (IMR), which accompanies the prisoner when transferred under escort.

  In many cases the prison service also receives information about possible risk of suicide or self-harm from a variety of agencies and individuals who are involved with prisoners in the pre-trial period and at court, including probation officers, solicitors, court staff, social workers, psychiatrists and the prisoner's family. Such information is generally conveyed to the receiving prison by telephone or via the escorting officers.

  It is the continuing responsibility of the suicide prevention management group at each prison establishment to ensure that liaison with other agencies works effectively and that any information received is carefully assessed and acted on appropriately.

  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the number of deaths from an act of deliberate self-harm that took place in prisons in England and Wales during 1992.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Forty-one prisoners died from an act of deliberate self-harm in England and Wales in 1992.

  Travellers
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the traditional travelling community is classified as an ethnic minority.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The criteria for defining a racial group for the purposes of the Race Relations Act 1976 were established by the judgment in Mandla v. Davell Lee

  9
  (1983). Gipsies have been accepted as meeting these criteria—Commission for Racial Equality v. Dutton (1988); the position of other travelling groups would depend on whether they satisfied the same criteria.

  Squatters
  Mrs. Mahon
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what assessment he has made of the reasons for the trend in the numbers of squatters: and what estimate he has made of the trend in the average age of squatters;

  (2) if he will make a distinction in policy on squatting between privately owned properties that are squatted which are individually owned and those owned by commercial bodies; if he will give estimates for the numbers involved in both these categories in London and elsewhere; and from what sources his Department makes its estimate;

  (3) what assessment has been made of the criminality of squatters relative to their neighbours.

  Mr. Jack
  Cases of squatting do not necessarily come to official notice and no central records are kept of the numbers and characteristics of squatters, or of which properties are squatted in. This absence of accurate statistical information, combined with the shifting nature of the squatting population, means that it is difficult to make an accurate assessment of squatters' numbers, average age, their criminal behaviour, or of the type of properties occupied.

  However, the Home Office consultation paper on squatting, which was issued in November 1991, reported the 1986 London housing survey's estimate that at that time there were 12,500 squatters occupying 7,500 properties in London. It also estimated that 52 per cent. of these squatters were under 25; 40 per cent. were between 26 and 40; and 8 per cent. were over 40. The consultation paper also reported a survey of local authority housing in April 1990, when 5,200 dwellings in England were reported as being squatted in; 90 per cent. of these were in London. More recent estimates of the total number of squatters have ranged from 30,000 to 50,000.

  The Home Office consultation paper on squatting suggested, as one option for changing the law, that additional protection could be extended to private individuals who own property which is squatted in, but not to commercial owners of property, on the ground that more hardship is likely to be caused in the former type of case. This distinction was not, however, supported by the majority of respondents to the consultation paper, and the Government are, in any case, committed to strengthening the law against those who squat in a range of different premises.

  Charities
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will seek to amend the Charities Act 1992 to allow charities operational exclusively within Wales to refer to themselves as national charities.

  Mr. Jack
  Section 4 of the Charities Act 1992 empowers the Charity Commissioners to direct a charity to change its name where that name includes any word or expression for the time being specified in regulations by the Secretary of State, and the inclusion of the word is, in the opinion of the commissioners, likely to mislead the public in any respect 10
  as to the status of the charity. The word "national" has been so specified. It is therefore for the commissioners to determine whether the use of the word is misleading in arty particular case.

  My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary has no plans to amend section 4 of the 1992 Act nor the regulations made by him under that section.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make it his policy to seek to amend section 3(2) of the Charities Act 1992 to allow charities producing Welsh language publicity to use the words "elusen cofrestredig" either in addition to or instead of the words "registered charity" on publicity materials.

  Mr. Jack
  Section 3(2) requires a registered charity to include a statement indicating that it is so registered in certain publications and documents issued by or on behalf of it. The statement must be made in English. However, there is nothing to preclude a charity from also providing the same information in another language if it so wishes. The Government have no present plans for further legislation on this matter.

  Wolds Prison
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many reported incidents took place at the Wolds prison during 1992.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  In 1992, 49 incidents at Wolds remand prison were reported to the incident management support unit at prison service headquarters. From 5 April 1992, when Wolds opened, until the end of 1992, a total of 13,300 incidents at all prisons were reported to the unit.

  Prison Transfers
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what policy his Department adopts in respect of an inmate being moved from one prison establishment to another to ensure that there is no delay in the transfer of the moneys belonging to that inmate.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Governors of all prison service establishments have been instructed to ensure that moneys are forwarded promptly when prisoners are transferred, where possible by the day following transfer. This is not achieved in all cases, and we continue to look at ways, including computerisation of prisoners' money and earnings, to minimise delays.

  Qat
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what consideration he has given to banning the import of the qat plant from Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia; and what advice he has received on qat from. the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.

  Mr. Jack
  The plant is not subject to international control, and the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs advised in 1988 that there was insufficient evidence to justify bringing the plant under the controls of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. That remains the present position, but the situation will continue to be monitored carefully.

  Gambling
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is taking to monitor the effects of excess gambling.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The Government do not routinely monitor the effects of excessive gambling. Research on specific issues is commissioned as necessary, most recently into the extent and nature of amusement machine playing by young people ("Amusement Machines: Dependency and Delinquency. Home Office Research Study 101, 1988").

  Sentencing
  Mr. George
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the average sentence for someone convicted of murder.

  Mr. Jack
  The mandatory sentence for murder in England and Wales is life.

  The average time served under sentence in prison service establishments by those first released on licence is published annually in "Prison Statistics, England and Wales" (table 8.5 of the volume for 1990, Cm. 1800), a copy of which is in the Library.

  Assaults on Women, Walsall
  Mr. George
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many assaults, including rape, were committed against women in the H division of Walsall, since 1980.

  Mr. Jack
  The available information for H division has been provided by the West Midlands constabulary. It is in terms of notifiable offences recorded by the police, with the most appropriate offence categories being rape and indecent assault on a female. Other types of assault do not distinguish between male and female victim.

  Year

  Rape

  Indecent assault on a female

  Total

  1980

  6

  77

  83

  1981

  3

  58

  62

  1982

  11

  72

  83

  1983

  11

  56

  67

  1984

  3

  47

  50

  1985

  9

  77

  86

  1986

  3

  56

  59

  1987

  12

  61

  73

  1988

  17

  78

  95

  1989

  13

  56

  69

  1990

  9

  63

  72

  1991

  17

  60

  77

  11992

  9

  28

  37

  1 January to June.

  Racial Incidents, Walsall
  Mr. George
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many recorded racial incidents have occurred in Walsall each year since 1985.

  Mr. Jack
  The information is not available centrally.

  Dangerous Dogs Act
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many pit bull type dogs have been destroyed in each county or sheriff court area in the United Kingdom since the legislation permitting destruction was introduced; and what assessment he has made of whether the court procedures to identify the characteristics of the breed of dogs destroyed are proving a satisfactory and consistent basis for court procedures.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Information on the number of pit bull terriers destroyed in each county and sheriff court area in the United Kingdom as a result of proceedings under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is not collected centrally.

  The decision whether any particular dog is of the type known as the pit bull terrier is ultimately a matter for the courts, having regard to all relevant evidence and advice. Circulars on the Act were issued to the police, the Crown prosecution service and the courts, both at the time of coming into force of the Act and subsequently. These contained general guidance on the provisions, and on the assistance which may be available in determining whether a particular dog is of the pit bull type.

  Mr. Hardy
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce amendments to the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 to provide that a dog with a pure-bred pedigree as a Staffordshire bull terrier shall not be treated as a pit bull terrier.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 applies—amongst others—to dogs "of the type known as the pit bull terrier". It is ultimately for the courts to decide whether a particular animal falls within this definition, and they will take into account all relevant considerations. Evidence of pedigreee may in some circumstances be a factor in determining the question.

  A Home Office circular containing advice about the operation of the Act, issued last August, and sent to the police, the Crown prosecution service and the courts, drew attention to a list provided by the Staffordshire Bull Terrier Breed Council of clubs and societies willing to give advice in cases where there is doubt whether the dog is a Staffordshire bull terrier.

  Mr. Hardy
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prosecutions under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 have been successful.

  Mr. Jack
  The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 did not come into force until August 1991. Information on the number of prosecutions under this Act for 1992, the first full year for which information will be recorded centrally, is expected to be available around the autumn of 1993.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Kenneth Clarke
  The current conditions applying in the Department and its agencies are that there should be
  13
  an operational need or other identifiable value for money improvement justifying the advance—maximum £100—and that the advance is repayable over one year. Only one such advance has so far been made to an official of my Department. Departments and agencies generally have recently been given discretion to offer a larger advance and to revise the eligibility and repayment rules. These changes are being considered in the context of a Departmental review of travel allowances, and revised rules are expected to be promulgated in the spring.

  Reed Report
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he will publish his response to the Reed report.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  The final summary report of the Department of Health and Home Office joint review of services for mentally disordered offenders—the "Reed report"—was published on 27 November 1992. In reply to a question on that day from my hon. Friend the Member for Teignbridge (Mr. Nichols), my hon. Friend the Member for Suffolk, South (Mr. Yeo) explained how the Government intended to respond or were already responding to the review.

  So far as my Department is concerned, a key objective identified and endorsed by the review is the diversion of mentally disordered offenders from the criminal justice system wherever possible. Since my hon. Friend's announcement, this has been given a further boost by the issue of an invitation to local agencies to apply for funding to support court-based duty psychiatrist schemes. We are already funding a number of other diversion projects as well as a series of regional conferences organised by the Mental Health Foundation which are intended to promote inter-agency co-operation in this field.

  Police Central Computer
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has any plans to privatise or contract out the operation of the police central computer in whole or in part.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  As announced last year in "The Citizens' Charter: First Report" (Cm 2101), the operation of the police national computer is among the functions of the Home Department which are included in the current market testing programme.

  Police Complaints
  Mr. Sedgemore
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will provide police complaints figures, under the headings used in the annual report of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, for the following police stations for each of the past five years(a) Hackney, (b) City Road and (c) Stoke Newington.

  Heading

  1988

  1989

  1990

  1991

  1992

  Hackney

  Incivility

  3

  6

  2

  0

  1

  Assault

  49

  24

  38

  26

  20

  Irregularity in practice

  2

  1

  0

  1

  4

  Traffic irregularity

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Neglect of duty

  8

  3

  1

  0

  1

  Corrupt practice

  0

  0

  1

  1

  1

  14

  Heading

  1988

  1989

  1990

  1991

  1992

  Mishandling of property

  1

  0

  0

  1

  1

  Irregularity in relation to evidence/perjury

  0

  0

  7

  2

  0

  Oppressive conduct or behaviour

  4

  2

  3

  5

  3

  Racially discriminatory behavour

  1

  1

  0

  0

  1

  Unlawful arrest or detention

  4

  1

  2

  3

  5

  Impropriety in connection with the search of premises

  3

  2

  2

  0

  3

  Other crime

  1

  1

  0

  1

  3

  Other

  0

  0

  0

  0

  2

  Complaints in the Metropolitan police are counted by the main allegation known at the time of receipt.

  Heading

  1988

  1989

  1990

  1991

  1992

  Stoke Newington

  Incivility

  2

  1

  3

  2

  1

  Assault

  22

  25

  46

  58

  35

  Irregularity in practice

  0

  0

  2

  1

  1

  Traffic irregularity

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  Neglect of duty

  2

  0

  1

  1

  1

  Corrupt practice

  2

  0

  0

  5

  0

  Mishandling of property

  2

  4

  0

  0

  0

  Irregularity in relation to evidence/perjury

  1

  0

  3

  6

  1

  Oppressive conduct or behaviour

  5

  2

  0

  5

  2

  Racially discriminatory behavour

  1

  0

  0

  0

  1

  Unlawful arrest or detention

  2

  1

  2

  7

  2

  Impropriety in connection with the search of premises

  3

  4

  1

  3

  0

  Other crime

  0

  0

  0

  0

  3

  Other

  0

  0

  1

  1

  0

  Complaints in the Metropolitan police are counted by the main allegation known at the time of receipt.

  Heading

  1988

  1989

  1990

  1991

  1992

  City Road

  Incivility

  5

  2

  1

  0

  0

  Assault

  13

  7

  6

  10

  10

  Irregularity in practice

  0

  1

  1

  0

  1

  Traffic irregularity

  1

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Neglect of duty

  1

  0

  0

  0

  1

  Corrupt practice

  0

  1

  0

  0

  0

  Mishandling of property

  0

  3

  1

  0

  0

  Irregularity in relation to evidence/perjury

  1

  0

  1

  0

  0

  Oppressive conduct or behaviiour

  3

  4

  2

  1

  1

  Racially discriminatory behavour

  0

  0

  1

  0

  0

  Unlawful arrest or detention

  1

  0

  1

  0

  0

  15

  Heading

  1988

  1989

  1990

  1991

  1992

  Impropriety in connection with the search of premises

  0

  0

  0

  0

  2

  Other crime

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Other

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Complaints in the Metropolitan police are counted by the main allegation known at the time of receipt.

  Betting Shops
  Mr. Tim Devlin
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what comments and advice were received from the Association of Chief Police Officers in answer to his consultation document on the evening opening of betting shops.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Neither the Association of Chief Police Officers of England, Wales and Northern Ireland nor the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland were opposed to the evening opening of betting offices, though both favoured the continuation of a prescribed latest closing time.

  Alcohol and Drug Misuse
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what arrangements he is making for payment in respect of treatment for alcohol or drug misuse ordered by the courts prior to 1 April 1993 but not completed by that date; and who will pay(a) for that part of the treatment prior to 1 April and (b) that part of the treatment after 1 April.

  Mr. Jack
  [holding answer 15 December 1992]: Treatment for drug or alcohol misuse may be ordered by the courts (as an additional requirement of a probation order, under provisions introduced on 1 October 1992 by the Criminal Justice Act 1991) only if suitable treatment is available.

  Alcohol and drug misusers who are receiving treatment prior to 1 April 1993 and are eligible for income support will generally have preserved rights after 1 April to their existing level of benefit.

  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department who will pay for residential treatment for alcohol or drug misuse ordered by the courts after 1 April 1993.

  Mr. Jack
  [holding answer 14 December 1992]: Residential treatment for drug or alcohol abuse may be ordered by courts—as an additional requirement of a probation order, under provisions introduced on 1 October 1992 by the Criminal Justice Act 1991—only if suitable treatment is available.

  From 1 April 1993 local authorities will be responsible for assessing the social care needs of alcohol and drug misusers. People who commence treatment in a residential setting after 1 April 1993 and who are eligible, will be entitled to claim ordinary income support, including premiums, and a residential allowance. The local authority will take account of these payments and any other income when assessing the individual's ability to contribute towards the cost of care. Local authorities and probation services will need to liaise to ensure that the needs of those
  16
  offenders supervised by the probation service who have drug and alcohol misuse problems are considered within community care.

  A special transitional grant of £539 million is being made available to local authorities in England in 1993–94 which is ring fenced for use on community care, including the provision of care for alcohol and drug misusers.

  Where such residential treatment is to be provided by local authorities then, from 1 April 1993, assessment, availability and funding will be in accordance with the community care arrangements which come into effect on that date. Other residential treatment (not under community care arrangements) could also be ordered—again, provided that was available.

  Police Forces
  Mr. Tipping
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department by how many extra police officers the police forces in Thames Valley and Nottinghamshire have been supplemented in 1993–94; if these officers are permanent augmentations; and for what duties they have been provided.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  [holding answer 11 January 1993]: In common with all provincial police force, Thames Valley and Nottinghamshire have been given no increase in their permanent establishments for 1993–94. I understand that my right hon. and noble Friend has written to the hon. Member about detailed aspects of this matter.

OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT

  South Africa
  Mr. Hain
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what aid is being given to South Africa in the current year.

  Mr. Hurd
  We expect our bilateral aid to black South Africans to rise to over £11 million this financial year. Our share of EC aid will add a further £11 million. This is money well spent.

  Southern Africa
  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what percentage of aid from Her Majesty's Government to southern Africa is for educational purposes.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  In 1991–92, 13 per cent. of British bilateral aid to southern Africa was for educational purposes.

  Somalia
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much aid has so far been paid to Somalia since the present food shortage began; upon what items; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Since the beginning of the current crisis Britain has committed £45.2 million of humanitarian assistance to Somalia. So far £37.9 million has been spent on food supplies, transport and logistical support, medical supplies, water and sanitation equipment, and tools and seeds.

  India
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on current aid levels to India.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Aid for India in 1992–93 is expected to be £95 million.

  Aid Allocation
  Sir Thomas Arnold
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what criteria are used to determine the proportion of overseas aid allocated(a) bilaterally and (b) multilaterally.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  A high proportion of our multilateral aid spending is determined by negotiated or assessed international commitments, including our share of the European Community's aid budget. Otherwise, our aid resources are mostly spent bilaterally.

  ACP Countries
  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what action is being taken to enable ACP countries to get real increases in prices paid for primary products.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Prices for primary products are primarily determined by international markets. We participate, however, in the European Community's Stabex and Sysmin schemes under the Lomé convention to help compensate African, Caribbean and Pacific countries for falls in their commodity export earnings.

  Black Rhino
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what allocations have been made by his Department to schemes for the protection of the black rhino.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Since 1990. Britain has committed £167,200 to projects which aim to protect the rhinoceros, including £33,600 specifically for a project in Tanzania on the black rhino. We are also supporting a number of projects, worth over £18 million, concerned with the protection and conservation of wildlife. Many of these should also benefit the rhinoceros.

  Rwanda
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what attempts have been made by his Department's Overseas Development Administration to assist refugees from Rwanda.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Rwandian refugees are being assisted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, to which Britain is a major contributor. We are, not assisting Rwandan refugees bilaterally. We are, however, funding an agricultural resettlement project run by ACORD in Sud-Gisaka, Rwanda, which has existed since 1986 and was set up following the arrival of 2,000 refugees of Rwandese origin from Uganda.

  Children
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what consideration his Department's Overseas Development Administration 18
  has given to the recent report by UNICEF on the state of the world's children, in regard to the effects of United Kingdom's aid policy on children abroad.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  UNICEF's annual "State of the World's Children" report is a valuable guide to issues affecting mothers and children. Staff in the ODA value its information.

  Kashmir
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans there are for an aid Minister to visit Kashmir to discuss aid projects; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  There are no plans for my noble Friend the Minister for Overseas Development to visit Kashmir. Aid projects are clearly difficult in the current situation, but we would be happy to consider appropriate projects when circumstances permit.

  Developing Countries
  Mr. Andrew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list (i) Britain's official flows to developing countries, broken down into official development assistance and other official flows in 1991, (ii) Britain's private flows to developing countries, broken down into private export credit, direct investment, bank lending and voluntary agencies, in 1991 and (iii) the percentage shares of gross national product for net overseas development aid and total flows to developing countries in 1991.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The information is as follows:

  United Kingdom net aid flows

  1991 £ million

  Official development assistance (oda)

  1,814

  Other official flows

  293

  Total official flows

  2,107

  Guaranteed private export credits

  -2

  Direct investments1

  3,000

  Other bilateral securities and claims

  -680

  Total private flows

  2,318

  Net grants by private voluntary agencies

  215

  Total flows

  4,640

  Percentage share of gross national product

  Net oda

  0·32

  Total flows

  0·81

  1 The 1991 figure for direct investment is a preliminary estimate.

  I also refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. and noble Friend, the Minister for Overseas Development, in another place on 25 November 1992, Official Report, column 69–70, corrected on 9 December 1992 at column 9–10, which set out revised figures for 1990 and the basis on which banking flows were calculated.

  Yugoslavia (Aid)
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has received regarding aid to former Yugoslavia; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The Government have received a great many representations from many sources.

PRIME MINISTER

  Engineers
  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will make it his policy to restrict the use of the term "engineer" in official Government documents to only chartered or incorporated engineers.

  The Prime Minister
  In referring to engineers, Government documents should make it clear whether particular qualifications are envisaged but, in the absence of any general restriction on the use of the term "engineer", it would not be appropriate to restrict its use to specified categories of engineer which form only part of the wider engineering profession. The Fairclough initiative is, however, examining this issue and the Government will consider its recommendations when received.

  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Prime Minister what recent representations he has received from the Institution of Electrical Engineers.

  The Prime Minister
  I have recently received a letter from the institution concerning vocational qualifications and my office will respond in due course.

  Travel Expenses
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his reply on 9 December 1992,Official Report, column 668, if he is now in a position to publish the total cost to the Exchequer for his travels within the European Communities since 1 July 1992.

  The Prime Minister
  The total cost of my travels within the European Communities between 1 July and 31 December 1992 is estimated to be £328,000.

  Polling Stations (Access)
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Prime Minister what proposals he has to co-ordinate policies between Scotland and England and Wales on the operation of schemes to purchase temporary ramps to improve access to polling stations; and if he will make a statement.

  The Prime Minister
  None. In England and Wales and in Scotland, a grant of 50 per cent. of the cost is available towards the purchase of temporary ramps to provide access to polling stations for disabled voters.

  Standards of Conduct
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will introduce legislation to require(a) political parties in advertisements, (b) lawyers in court and (c) journalists in newspapers to (i) tell the truth, (ii) provide equal length or space to a right to reply, (iii) submit controversial claims
  20
  to a statutory tribunal and (iv) submit themselves to fines for transgressing or for appearing at the time of judgment to have transgressed good taste or a code of conduct.

  The Prime Minister
  I have no plans to do so.

  Forestry
  Mr. Hanson
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will bring forward proposals to introduce an integrated United Kingdom policy on forestry, covering(a) consumption of forests, (b) problems caused by deforestation, (c) the links between forestry and third world debt and (d) import controls on hardwoods.

  The Prime Minister
  The Government are committed to working for the effective implementation of the statement of principles on the world's forests agreed at the United Nations conference on environment and development in Rio last June. As part of this process we are preparing a United Kingdom national plan for forests. Policies on the issues listed in the question need to be integrated and co-ordinated with our broader environmental aid and trade policies. Co-ordination is achieved by regular contact between the Government Departments responsible for these matters.

  Office and Travel Costs
  Mr. Winnick
  To ask the Prime Minister what is the total cost to public funds of overseas travel by himself and those accompanying him on official business since he has held his present position to the most recent available date.

  The Prime Minister
  The total cost of my overseas official visits undertaken between 22 November 1990 and 31 December 1992 is estimated to be £1,816,000.

  Mr. Winnick
  To ask the Prime Minister what are the total costs of running his office, including travel, in each year since 1989–90.

  The Prime Minister
  The costs are as follows:

  £

  1989–90

  7,669,276

  1990–91

  8,225,816

  1991–92

  8,663,758

  Note: Salaries and wages, notional pension liability, administration costs, the costs of office and the grant-in-aid to the Chequers Trust are included. The Prime Minister's salary is excluded.

  Jamaica
  Mr. Kaufman
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will make representations within the European Community for the suspension of all economic aid to, and favourable trade arrangements with, Jamaica until that country improves its human rights record.

  The Prime Minister
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: We discuss aid policy towards specific developing countries regularly with other member states and with the European Commission. Full account of human rights considerations is taken in these discussions. We have no plans to argue for the suspension of economic aid to, and favourable trade arrangements with, Jamaica.

  Company Directors
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the progress made to date in his policy of encouraging company directors to voluntarily keep their wages and other remunerations at levels that do not promote wage inflation.

  The Prime Minister
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: As I have previously made clear, pay in the private sector is a matter for the private sector to determine. However, I am encouraged by evidence that average boardroom pay increases are now falling to more realistic levels.

  Press Office
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Prime Minister how many staff were employed by his press office in each year since 1979.

  The Prime Minister
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: Ten people including support staff are currently employed in 10 Downing street on press and public relations activities. Detailed figures were not recorded separately prior to 1987–88, but until 1 April 1992 the complement was eight. This was then increased to 10 by the addition of one press officer and one typist, to enable the press office to respond effectively to the growing number of press inquiries.

  Value Added Tax
  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his reply to the right hon. Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe on the level of value added tax on bloodstock in the United Kingdom and the rates levied in France and Ireland,Official Report, 28 October 1992, column 288, what subsequent representations he has received on the issue; what replies were made; what action has now been taken; and if he will make a statement on the Government's current policy on this issue.

  The Prime Minister
  [holding answer 10 December 1992]: The Commissioners of Customs and Excise have just received the Jockey Club's report to the Paymaster General on this subject. It is being considered as quickly and constructively as possible.

NATIONAL FINANCE

  Exports
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will set out, as a percentage of the total value of United Kingdom exports, for each year since 1979, the value of(a) manufactured goods and (b) services.

  Mr. Nelson
  Information on exports for manufactured goods is published regularly in the Central Statistical Office (CSO) "Monthly Review of External Trade Statistics" and is also available on the CSO database which may be accessed by the House of Commons Library. Information on services credits and exports of goods and services is available on the CSO database.

  European Communities (Budget)
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what changes he will be making to the cash limit on the vote of the budget of the European Communities.
  22
  Sir John Cope
  The cash limit for this vote—class XX, vote 1—will be reduced by £1,217,503,000 to £132,497,000.

  Provision of £1,350,000,000 was taken on this vote to cover the difference between, on the one hand, United Kingdom contributions to the EC up to the level provided for under Community legislation, and paid direct from the Consolidated Fund under the terms of the European Communities Act 1972, and, on the other hand, those contributions sought by the EC Commission, reflecting a budget adopted by the European Parliament, but not agreed by the Council.

  The council, Commission and European Parliament have subsequently adopted an amending and supplementary budget, resolving the legal uncertainty. Payments from May 1992 have reverted to full payment from the Consolidated Fund. Therefore, April's payment of some £132·5 million from this vote will be the only expenditure incurred.

EDUCATION

  Teacher Training
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) what assessment he has made in the last two years of the effectiveness of basic counselling skills for students in initial teacher training establishments; and how many establishments have been studied for this purpose;

  (2) what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of teacher training courses in developing group management skills; and if he considers further specific measures are needed in this regard.

  Mr. Forth
  The Secretary of State's criteria for the approval of courses of initial teacher training (ITT) require that students should be trained both in the effective management of groups of pupils and in the pastoral skills required to interact well with individual children. All ITT courses must be approved by my right hon. Friend before they start. Courses are also monitored regularly by OFSTED to ensure that they continue to comply with the Secretary of State's criteria.

  Mr. Bowls
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many students successfully completed courses in the teaching of pupils with severe learning difficulties for each of the last five years(a) on initial teacher training, (b) on postgraduate certificate of education courses and (c) on in-service training courses; and what is his projection to the next five years.

  Mr. Forth
  The Secretary of State's criteria for the approval of courses of initial teacher training require that all courses should develop in students the ability to identify special educational needs or learning difficulties Since 1984, it has been the Government's policy that specialist qualifications of this kind should be acquired after initial training and a period of classroom experience. The specialist courses of initial training have therefore now been phased out. Data on the final output of these courses is not readily available.

  The long in-service training courses which equip teachers with such specialist qualification have been a priority for specific grant support for a number of years. For 1992–93, this is sufficient to support the training of 206

  23
  new and 90 existing students. Information on the numbers successfully completing such courses is not collected centrally. Projections beyond 1992–93 are for local determination.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of in-service training for articled teachers; and what percentage have withdrawn from the scheme since its inception.

  Mr. Forth
  An evaluation of the management and organisation of the articled teacher scheme, which is a two-year course of initial teacher training leading to a postgraduate certificate of education, was carried out by the National Foundation for Educational Research during the first year of the scheme's operation. Her Majesty's inspectorate has recently completed a two-year study which focused mainly on five articled teacher schemes. I understand that OFSTED will shortly be publishing a report of this study. Both of these studies focused on the articled teacher scheme in England. During the first two years of the scheme approximately 4 per cent. of students withdrew before completing their training.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) if he will make a statement about the way in which the principles of good classroom management are being implemented by teachers and their trainers; and what contribution his Department has made in this process and the extent to which implementation has been achieved;

  (2) what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of those involved in the provision of teacher training in determining whether potential teachers have the ability to relate well to pupils.

  Mr. Forth
  The Secretary of State's criteria for the approval of initial teacher training—ITT—courses require that courses must provide satisfactory training for students in classroom management. No students can gain qualified teacher status unless they have demonstrated in the classroom both the ability to teach effectively and secure effective learning, and the ability to manage pupil behaviour. Assessment of students' ability to relate well to children is done both when the application for teacher training is submitted—by means of an interview—and also through assessment of the student's teaching practice. My right hon. Friend has not studied the effectiveness of trainers in making such assessments.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of initial teacher training establishments in introducing students to the concept of peer support and its uses.

  Mr. Forth
  My right hon. Friend has not made an assessment of peer support within ITT courses.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many local education authorities provide midday supervision and other non-teaching staff with training in the management of pupils' behaviour; and what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of this training.

  Mr. Forth
  Information about training of this kind is not collected centrally and my right hon. Friend has made no assessment of its effectiveness.
  24
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many local education authorities provide in-service training in classroom management for supply teachers.

  Mr. Forth
  This information is not collected centrally.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what percentage of staff providing training in teaching skills have had at least one term's regular teaching experience in the last five years.

  Mr. Forth
  The Secretary of State's criteria for the approval of initial teaching training courses include the requirement that, from the beginning of the current academic year, all staff at institutions who are concerned with training students in teaching skills must have had at least one term's experience of teaching in school in the previous five years.

  OFSTED monitors courses regularly to ensure that accredited courses comply with this requirement.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) how many schools counted separately in the primary, secondary and special education sectors offer pupillages to prospective initial teacher training students; and what is the percentage of schools involved;

  (2) how many entrants to initial teacher training last year undertook a period of pupillage, or other work with children, before starting their courses; what percentage of all students this was; and what contribution his Department has made to encourage this practice;

  (3) how long a period of pupillage in a school lasts on average; what are the longest and shortest periods of times; and what advice is given by his Department to encourage high quality student experience.

  Mr. Forth
  Many courses of initial teacher training—ITT—require students to spend soem time in schools prior to the start of the course. However, information about the numbers of schools and prospective students involved in such schemes of work experience, and the lengths of the schemes, is not held centrally.

  The Government have given financial support to a number of taster courses providing school experience for people who are interested in teaching.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what steps have been taken in the last two years to promote multicultural awareness and equal opportunities in school and initial teacher training establishments.

  Mr. Forth
  In the last two years the Government have continued the phased introduction of the national curriculum, which is designed to challenge and stimulate all pupils whatever their ethnic or cultural origin. The National Curriculum Council and the Schools Examination and Assessment Council, which advise my right hon. Friend on the curriculum and assessment, are required in exercising their functions to take account of the ethnic and cultural diversity of British society and the importance of promoting equal opportunities for all pupils regardless of ethnic origin and gender. The Government are also proposing to strengthen religious education, which provides opportunities to study other faiths and cultures and develop greater tolerance and understanding.

  The criteria for the approval of courses of initial teacher training—ITT—include a requirement that they should

  25
  help student teachers to develop an awareness of individual differences, including social and cultural dimensions. The Department has encouraged the development of ITT courses for people from ethnic minority communities. The Department issued guidance in August 1992 about the design and management of such courses, drawing on conclusions from Her Majesty's Inspectorate inspections.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what steps he is taking to encourage the recruitment of teachers from minority ethnic backgrounds; and what success has been achieved in the last two years.

  Mr. Forth
  The Government have adopted a range of measures to encourage people from ethnic minority backgrounds to consider a career in the teaching profession. They include "Teaching as a Career"—TASC—publications, advertising, participation at careers events, stimulating the development of special access courses, and supporting relevant local projects.

  The Government introduced ethnic monitoring of teachers in January 1990 following recommendation by the Swann committee, but response so far has been poor, though it is improving. As a result, it is not yet possible to draw conclusions about the percentage of teachers nationally who are from ethnic minorities, nor to identify improvements over the last two years.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of local education authority induction programmes for new teachers.

  Mr. Forth
  The Department published a report in March 1992 by Her Majesty's inspectorate on the induction of new teachers. A new grant to support expenditure by local education authorities on improvements in induction training was introduced, through the grants for education support and training programmeGEST—with effect from the 1992–93 financial year. Evidence about the effectiveness of local education authorities' induction arrangements is taken into account when decisions about the allocation of GEST support are made.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement about the way in which initial teacher training establishments are selecting applicants on the basis of their personal qualities for effective classroom management and for relating well to children, the way in which his Department is contributing to more effective selection procedures and the number and percentage of applicants who are not accepted for initial teacher training.

  Mr. Forth
  The Secretary of State's criteria for the approval of initial teacher training—ITT—courses require institutions to ensure that entrants to teacher training have the necessary personal qualities for the profession, including an ability to manage and to get on well with children. No one can be accepted on an ITT course without being interviewed.

  The number of applicants not accepted for ITT courses in 1992 were, for undergraduate courses, around 9,900 (39 per cent. of applicants); and for postgraduate courses around 8,800 (35 per cent. of applicants).

  School Buildings
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what advice has been published in the last two years on school building design; and what were the principal purposes of such advice in each case.

  Mr. Forth
  The Department has published nine documents over the past two years to assist those concerned with the provision and management of school buildings. These are: "Educational Design Initiatives in City Technology Colleges" (Building Bulletin 72); "A Guide to Energy Efficiency" (Building Bulletin 73); "A School for Armenia" (Building Bulletin 74); "Close Circuit TV Surveillance Systems in Educational Buildings" (Building Bulletin 75); "Maintenance of Electrical Systems" (Building Bulletin 76); "Designing for Pupils with Special Educational Needs (Building Bulletin 77); "Energy Efficient School Refurbishment" (Broadsheet 27); "School Glazing and Vandalism" (Broadsheet 28); "Energy Use in Educational Buildings" (Broadsheet 29). Copies are available in the Library.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what is the latest information available to him on the money needed to bring all school buildings into a good state of repair.

  Mr. Forth
  The latest information available is that contained in the "Survey of School Buildings" published by the Department in 1987. A realistic estimate of the cost of remedying the principal deficiencies identified by the survey, which covered county and voluntary controlled schools in England, is some £2 billion at 1990 prices. LEAs in England spent over £2 billion on capital expenditure on school buildings between 1986–87 and 1989–90. We estimate that between 1990–91 and 1993–94 LEAs will spend some £2–5 billion on their schools. Much of this will go on remedying deficiencies.

  Education matters in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are the responsibility of my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Wales and for Scotland and of my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

  Personal and Social Education Programmes
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the effective provision of personal and social education programmes in schools in the last two years.

  Mr. Forth
  During the last two years Her Majesty's inspectors of schools have published a number of reports focusing specifically on aspects of personal and social education; and have also addressed the subject, as appropriate, in their reports on individual schools. OFSTED is now responsible for providing my right hon. Friend with information and advice about all aspects of school education, which includes personal and social education.

  Examinations
  Mr. George
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what percentage of(a) Walsall and (b) west midlands school children of GCSE age take the exams; and what proportion carry on from GCSE to A-level.
  27
  Mr. Forth
  It is estimated that 91·8 per cent. Of pupils, who were 15 years old at the beginning of the 1991–92 academic year in Walsall schools, were entered for GCSE examinations compared with 91·7 per cent. in the whole of the west midlands. Information on the proportion who carry on from GCSE to A-level is not available centrally for individual local authority areas.

  School Discipline
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many local education authorities have used their powers of intervention under section 28 of the Education (No. 2) Act 1986; and on how many occasions.

  Mr. Forth
  This information is not collected centrally.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what is the latest information he has concerning the number of indefinite exclusions of pupils from(a) local education authority maintained schools and (b) grant-maintained schools.

  Mr. Forth
  Information on indefinite exclusions is not collected centrally.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of local education authority serious incident reporting systems.

  Mr. Forth
  My right hon. Friend has made no assessment of the effectiveness of local education authority serious incident reporting systems.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what action he has taken on recommendations(a) 68 and (b) 69.1 of the Elton report on discipline in schools.

  Mr. Forth
  Recommendation 68 deals with the importance of positive parental influence. The Government's stance on this is well known: parents should instil the values of responsible citizenship into their children. Recommendation 69.1 concerns education for parenthood. The National Curriculum Council has issued guidance to schools on the content of family life education, including education for parenthood, and its place in the wider curriculum.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what steps have been taken by his Department to overcome bullying and racial harassment in schools.

  Mr. Forth
  The Government expect schools to deal firmly with bullying and racial harassment. Copies of the pack "Action against Bullying" were sent to all schools in England in July 1992. The Department is also funding research to develop and test a range of intervention strategies against bullying in schools and further guidance will be issued in due course. Guidance on responses to racial harassment was given to chief education officers in 1989 and 1992. OFSTED has been asked to ensure that all inspecting teams appointed under the Schools Act 1992 pay particular attention to the arrangements for securing good discipline and behaviour.

  Records of Achievement
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of records of achievement in giving due weight to a wide range of pupil achievements and personal qualities.

  Mr. Forth
  Records of achievement are a valuable means of recording and reporting pupils' achievements. The national record of achievement is an effective summary for school-leavers to take forward to further education and working life. Recent evaluation has shown that take up of the NRA among schools has been high. New regulations governing reports on pupils' achievements require schools to use the format as part of the NRA to provide a specified minimum of information for school-leavers. Copies of the regulations and the explanatory circular have been placed in the Library.

  Management Training
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of management training programmes for head teachers and other senior staff.

  Mr. Forth
  It is for individual schools and teachers to decide which training programmes can most effectively meet their particular needs. The Department has helped by supporting the development and assessment of a number of new management training initiatives in recent years. We also commissioned a survey of overall provision for school management training in February 1989 to guide and support the work of the school management task force, the body we established to lever up standards of provision in this field. The Office for Standards in Education has responsibility for inspecting the training of teachers including management training programmes.

  Articled Teachers
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many people have become articled teachers since the inception of the scheme; and in what sectors and subjects.

  Mr. Forth
  Around 1,200 primary and secondary phase students have been recruited to the articled teacher scheme in England since its inception in 1990. Secondary training has been in the subjects of business studies, design and technology, English, modern foreign languages, mathematics, science and religious education.

  Pupil Behaviour
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the provision that local education authorities make for their most difficult pupils; and how many local education authorities have been studied in this regard.

  Mr. Forth
  As part of its detailed enquiry into discipline in schools, the Elton committee asked LEAs about their provision for pupils whose behaviour teachers found most difficult to manage. Its report commented on both the nature and quality of the provision made. For the future
  29
  inspecting teams appointed under the Schools Act 1992 will pay particular attention to schools' arrangements for securing good discipline and behaviour.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of local education authorities in promoting better co-ordination between various local agencies dealing with pupils with behaviour or attendance problems and their families.

  Mr. Forth
  The importance of effective co-ordination with other agencies is stressed in much of the guidance produced by the Department of Health on the Children Act 1989 and in the guide to the Act for the education service which the Department of Education commissioned from the Open university. Where school attendance is concerned, the education welfare service has a long history of close collaboration with social services and other agencies. The importance of these contacts was stressed in the Department's circular 2/86 "School Attendance and Education Welfare Services".

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many cases of bullying have been reported in each local education authority in the primary, secondary and special education sectors in each of the last three years; and what percentage of those cases were racially motivated.

  Mr. Forth
  This information is not collected centrally.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what research his Department has sponsored in the last two years on the implications for pupil behaviour of arranging pupils in groups for teaching purposes; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Forth
  No such research has been commissioned in the last two years. The behavioural implications of grouping pupils for teaching purposes were however discussed in Her Majesty's inspectorate's 1987 publication "Good Behaviour and Discipline in Schools" and in "Discipline in Schools", the report of the committee of inquiry into discipline in schools chaired by Lord Elton, published in 1989.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how much money under the grants for education support and training scheme has been allocated since 1990–91 for programmes dealing with the management of pupil behaviour; and what percentage of overall funding this is.

  Mr. Forth
  Some £7·6 million of expenditure has been supported over the three years from 1990–91 to improve support services for the most difficult pupils through approved projects in 24 local education authorities (LEAs). A further £3·5 million was supported over the two years from 1990–91 to help improve teachers' practical skills in managing pupil behaviour. Together, these grants supported £4.2 million in 1990–91 (1·2 per cent. of the overall education support grants and LEA training grants programmes in that year); £4·2 million in 1991–92 (1·2 per cent. of the overall grants for education support and training—GEST—programme); and are supporting £2·7 million in 1992–93 (0·7 per cent. of the overall GEST programme).

  Education Welfare Officers
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many education welfare officers are employed by each local education authority; what is the ratio of officers to pupils in each local education authority and if he will make a statement about the adequacy of this provision.

  Mr. Forth
  This information is not collected centrally. It is for each individual local education authority to determine whether the number of education welfare officers employed is sufficient to enable it to meet its statutory responsibilities.

  Special Educational Needs
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the number of educational psychologists, physiotherapists, speech therapists, qualified specialists in hearing and visual impairments and other specialist support staff needed to ensure that all statements of special educational needs are prepared within six months while work with other children with special needs is maintained at satisfactory levels.

  Mr. Forth
  The provision of suitable numbers of specialist staff to ensure that all statements of special educational needs are prepareed within six months is for LEAs to determine. The recent Audit Commission/HMI report on provision for pupils with SEN noted, however, that the time taken for making assessments and statements is largely a matter of effective management. In discharging their duties under the Education Act 1981, it is essential for LEAs to work closely with district health authorities and social services departments, who also have important roles to play in this process.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Boswell
  Advances of salary up to a maximum of £100 are available to junior staff for the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel. The conditions applying to the scheme are being reviewed in the light of the reply that my hon. Friend the Member for Loughborough (Mr. Dorrell) gave on 16 December 1992 to my hon. Friend the Member for Chelmsford (Mr. Burns) at columns 285–86.

  Grant-maintained Status
  Mrs. Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will list each one-day conference in the "Going GM: A conference for Heads and Governors" series, hosted by his Department, that has been held or is planned, giving dates, venues and the speakers for each one.

  Mr. Forth
  The information available is as follows:
  31

  Speakers/Workshop contributors

  Venue

  Date

  GM Heads

  DFE Officials

  Leeds

  16 November 1992

  3

  4

  Bolton

  12 December 1992

  6

  7

  Sheffield

  15 January 1993

  5

  5

  Manchester1

  30 January 1993

  6

  5

  1 Planned.

  My noble Friend the Minister of State spoke at the initial conference in Leeds. A GM bursar contributed at Bolton. A representative of the GMSC has attended to run a workshop explaining the services that the GMSC can offer to schools once they are approved for GM status.

  Additional DFE conferences are planned as follows:

  Newcastle: 10 and 11 February

  Leicester: 15 February

  Nottingham: 1 and 29 March

  Birmingham: 19 March

  Details of contributors to these conferences have yet to be confirmed.

  Mrs. Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) what are the(a) editorial, (b) design, (c) printing, (d) distribution and (e) total costs, of the conference material sent to potential participants in the series of one-day conferences called "Going GM: A conference for Heads and Governors";

  (2) if he will list the total conference costs of the series of one-day conferences hosted by his Department entitled "Going GM: A conference for Heads and Governors", including staff time for civil servants within his Department; and what are the projected costs for all such conferences.

  Mr. Forth
  The conference material sent to potential participants includes a letter of invitation and a copy of the standard GM information pack. Printing and distribution costs for the information pack included with the invitations were approximately £18,000. The initial mailing of invitations and packs was carried out at a total cost of around £15,000. Further mailings have fallen within the terms of the contract with the departmental despatch centre and therefore costs cannot be identified separately.

  The total costs to date for conference accommodation and facilities for the three conferences held at Leeds, Bolton and Sheffield are approximately £20,000. The expected cost of a further seven conferences is approximately £45,000. There is a contract for specialised support services for the conference series at a total cost of £67,000. Disaggregating the costs of civil servants' time could not be achieved other than at disproportionate cost.

  Education, Enfield
  Mrs. Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what action he will take to ensure that Enfield is able to fulfil its duty to provide full-time education to all its pupils.

  Mr. Forth
  There is no reason why all pupils in Enfield should not receive full-time education. Enfield council will get its fair share of the underlying 2.6 per cent. increase in education standard spending, once account has been taken of the transfer of responsibility for further education from local authorities to the new funding council.

LORD CHANCELLOR'S DEPARTMENT

  Interpretation of Legislation
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will make a statement on the decision of the House of Lords in the case of Pepper v. Hart on references to the utterances of Ministers on the contents and intent of Bills during their passage in Parliament, when Acts are subsequently interpreted in the courts.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  On 26 November 1992, the House of Lords decided by a majority that courts could look at parliamentary materials if the legislation is ambiguous or obscure or leads to an absurdity; the material that could be relied upon consists of a statement by a Minister or other promoter of the Bill; and the statements relied upon are clear.

  Legal Aid
  Mr. John Marshall
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many of the claims made by solicitors for payment by the legal aid fund were settled within one month in 1991–92.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  In 1991–92 the Legal Aid Board had a general target of paying 80 per cent. of solicitors' bills within six weeks of receipt measured by its performance in March 1992. This target was surpassed, with 87 per cent. of bills being paid within that time.

  Mr. John Marshall
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many claims for payment by solicitors are awaiting payment from the London legal aid area office; and how many have been outstanding for over one month.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  On 6 January 1993 the London area office had a total of 31,651 costs claims of all types in the process of being paid. Of these 2,844, or 9 per cent. had been held in the office for more than one month.

  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many people in(a) Pendle, (b) Lancashire and (c) England received legal aid for each year since 1987 in respect of (i) advice and assistance for divorce, (ii) road or work accidents, (iii) regaining custody of children taken into local authority care and (iv) alleged criminal acts triable at a Crown court; and what is his estimate for the total number of people eligible for legal aid in the categories mentioned for the next financial year.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The information is not available in the form requested. The following table shows the number of bills paid for advice and assistance for divorce for each of the last five years for England and Wales, for legal aid area 7 which comprises parts of Lancashire including Pendle together with Greater Manchester, and for legal aid area 15 which comprises the rest of Lancashire and Merseyside.

  England and Wales

  Legal Aid Area 7

  Legal Aid Area 15

  1987–88

  237,056

  18,531

  13,599

  1988–89

  232,494

  18,005

  13,412

  1989–90

  225,066

  18,132

  12,460

  33

  England and Wales

  Legal Aid Area 7

  Legal Aid Area 15

  1990–91

  215,895

  17,315

  11,681

  1991–92

  231,065

  16,867

  11,770

  The number of legal aid certificates for proceedings related to road and work accidents is available only for England and Wales. Figures for the last five years are:

  Year

  Number

  1987–88

  26,113

  1988–89

  27,745

  1989–90

  29,181

  1990–91

  30,416

  1991–92

  38,679

  The following table shows for each of the past five calendar years the total number of criminal legal aid orders made in: (a) England and Wales; (b) the magistrates' courts in Lancashire and the Crown court centres in the northern circuit of the Lord Chancellor's Department; and (c) the Pendle magistrates' court and the Crown court at Burnley.

  Year

  (a) England and Wales

  (b) Lancashire and Northern Circuit

  (c) Pendle and Burnley

  1987

  496,975

  12,639

  670

  1988

  511,895

  1—

  1—

  1989

  502,675

  10,303

  708

  1990

  507,813

  13,583

  880

  1991

  517,118

  10,889

  737

  1 No figures available.

  Figures are not available for certificates issued for proceedings for regaining children taken into local authority care. In England and Wales it is estimated that in the next financial year 48 per cent. of households will be eligible for civil legal aid and 21 per cent., for advice and assistance. There is no upper financial eligibility limit for criminal legal aid.

  Commercial Court
  Sir Thomas Arnold
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, pursuant to his answer of 10 December,Official Report, column 757, from what date Mr. Justice Colman will be available to commence sitting in the commercial court.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  Mr. Justice Colman was eligible to sit in the commercial court immediately following his appointment. The day to day deployment of High Court judges is, however, a matter for the Lord Chief Justice, after considering the needs of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court, the divisional court and the Court of Appeal, criminal division. In deciding where judges are to be deployed there are different questions of priority to be decided. The Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice consider a reduction of waiting times in the latter two courts to be of high priority.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil 34
  servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  My hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury explained in a written answer on 16 December 1992 at column 285–86 that, as part of the ongoing programme for delegating to Departments and agencies greater responsibility for managing personnel management policies, Departments and agencies have been given the freedom to determine the conditions on which advances of salary to assists civil servants in the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel are made. Staff in the Lord Chancellor's Department, and in the Department's executive agencies, are eligible for a salary advance to assist with the purchase of a bicycle for home-to-office travel. The maximum advance is currently £100 repayable over a period of one year. Departments and agencies will shortly have discretion to set their own limit and rules for eligibility and repayment. No decisions have yet been reached on how this discretion might be applied within the Lord Chancellor's Department and its agencies.

  Court Listing
  Mr. Atkinson
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department on what basis his Department makes available court listing information in(a) manuscript and printed form and (b) machine readable form.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  Crown court centres usually distribute lists of cases to be heard, or likely to be heard, or the information they contain, to all interested parties as soon as they are available.

  Lists of cases with fixed hearing dates and cases likely to be heard within a particular period are distributed at least 10 days prior to the first hearing date. These lists are usually in printed form and are posted.

  A daily list is printed and published usually by 3 pm, showing the cases due to be heard on the next sitting day. However, some courts publish a provisional list earlier in the day. The information on this list is notified to parties either by the hand delivery of a copy, or by sending a copy by facsimile machine or, more commonly by means of a telephone call. The hon. Member is aware from my answer of 16 December 1992 at col. 239 that the central criminal court is distributing such lists in a machine readable form on an experimental basis.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Electricity Generation
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what steps he has taken to quantify the external costs of each form of electricity generation.

  Mr. Eggar
  Last December my Department published an independent report on environmental and other social costs of different methods of electricity generation.

  The report, commissioned by the former Department of Energy and entitled "The Social Costs of Fuel Cycles" is the work of a team from the Centre for Social and

  35
  Economic Research on the Global Environment (CSERGE), led by Professor David Pearce of University college London. I am arranging for copies to be placed in the Library of the House.

  My Department is also currently supporting the participation of the Energy Technology Support Unit in a joint European Community/USA study to develop a methodology for assessing the external costs of fuel cycles. Phase I of this study is nearing completion: phase II is expected to commence during 1993.

  Electricity Generation
  Mr. Nigel Jones
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what was the cost per tonne of British coal used in producing electricity in 1991; what estimates his Department has for the cost per tonne in 1995; and if he will make a statement.;

  (2) what was the cost per tonne of imported coal used in producing electricity in 1991; what estimates his Department has for the cost per tonne in 1995; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 13 January 1993]: The average cost of coal, both home produced and imported, used by the major generating companies in producing electricity in 1991 was £43·47 per tonne. The cost of British coal used in power stations is a commercial matter for the companies concerned. My Department has not produced forecasts of future energy costs since 1982.

  Mr. Nigel Jones
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what was the cost, in coal equivalent tonnes, of natural gas used to produce electricity in 1991; what estimates his Department has for the cost in 1995; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 13 January 1993]: The cost of natural gas used to produce electricity is a commercial matter for the two major generating companies concerned. My Department has not produced forecasts of future energy costs since 1982.

  Electricity Supply
  Mr. Spellar
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what assessment his Department has made of interruptions to electricity supply to consumers since 1990.

  Mr. Eggar
  The Office of Electricity Regulation—OFFER—includes an assessment of interruptions of electricity supply to consumers in their annual "Report on Distribution and Transmission System Performance". The latest edition of this report (for the year 1991–92), covers the last 10 years and is available from OFFER's library.

  Inward Investment
  Mr. Ronnie Campbell
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many inward investment projects in Northumberland and Blyth valley were begun in each year since 1990.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  In 1990, 13 overseas companies decided to invest in Northumberland with one of those investments being made in Blyth. The figures for 1991 are five and one respectively. Figures for 1992 are not yet available. These figures do not include relocations from other regions of the United Kingdom.
  36
  These figures are based on information provided by the companies at the time of the announcement of the decision to invest. There is no requirement to notify the Department and so the figures include only those projects where the Department's Invest In Britain Bureau and its regional partners were involved or, which have come to their notice. They take no account of subsequent developments.

  Betws Colliery
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what representations he has received from companies expressing an interest in taking over production of coal at the Betws colliery in Ammanford; when he received these representations; and if he will ensure that the pit is maintained whilst these representations are being considered.

  Mr. Eggar
  Since the announcement of the proposed closures in October 1992, my Department has received three representations from companies which may be interested in taking over the operation of Betws. British Coal has given assurances that the fabric of the pit will be maintained so that if, following the consultation process at present under way, it is decided to keep it open, that will be possible. We will need to consider the position again once the outcome of the consultations is known.

  Newspapers
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the exclusive arrangements for the supply and distribution of newspapers.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  The Director General of Fair Trading referred the supply of newspapers from publishers to wholesalers and wholesalers to retailers in England and Wales to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission on 19 August 1992. The commission was asked to report back to the President of the Board of Trade within 12 months.

  The terms of reference exclude Scotland and Northern Ireland primarily because their newspaper distribution arrangements are different. The Office of Fair Trading continues to keep the market for the supply of newspapers in Scotland and Northern Ireland under review.

  Offshore Exploration
  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make it his policy to impose on discharges from exploration rigs in the Celtic sea, the same standards that are applied by the United States of America, Holland and Norway; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  Offshore environmental standards are established on the basis of regional agreements. The standards imposed on discharges from exploration rigs in the Celtic sea are consistent with those agreed in the Paris Commission (PARCOM), which administers the Paris convention for the prevention of marine pollution. This covers the whole of the north east Atlantic area. In appropriate cases more stringent requirements can be imposed under licence conditions. The Netherlands and Norway are members of the Paris Commission and their standards similarly reflect those agreed in the Paris Commission.

  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what advice he received from the Joint Nature
  37
  Conservation Committee and the Countryside Council for Wales prior to the issuing of licences for exploration in blocks 103/2, 103/3, 103/6, 103/7, 106/25, 106/29, 107/21, 104/16, 104/17, 104/18, 104/19 and 104/21; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) what is the shortest distance in nautical miles between the eastern extremity of block 103/3 and Romsey Island;

  (3) what is the shortest distance in nautical miles between the eastern extremity of block 103/7 and Grassholm;

  (4) what is the shortest distance in nautical miles between the Pembrokeshire Coast national park and (a) the eastern extremity of block 106/29, (b) the southern and eastern extremities of block 107/21, (c) the northern extremity of block 103/19, (d) the northern extremity of block 103/20, (e) the northern extremity of block 104/16 and (f) the northern extremity of block 104/17;

  (5) what is the shortest distance in nautical miles between the Skomer marine nature reserve and (a) the eastern extremity of block 103/7 and (b) the northern extremity of block 103/19.

  Mr. Eggar
  The shortest distance in nautical miles—nm—between the eastern extremity of block 103/3 and Romsey Island is 5·4 nm and between the eastern extremity of block 103/7 and Grassholm is 6·1 nm. The shortest distance in nautical miles between the Pembrokeshire coastal national park and(a) the eastern extremity of block 106/29 is 3 nm, (b) the southern and eastern extremities of block 107/21 is 3·6 nm, (c) the northern extremity of block 103/19 is 8·6 nm, (d) the northern extremity of block 103/20 is 6·4 nm, (e) the northern extremity of block 104/16 is 5·7 nm and (f) the northern extremity of block 104/17 is 7·7 nm. The shortest distance in nautical miles between Skomer marine nature reserve and (a) the eastern extremity of block 103/7 is 10·0 nm and (b) the northern extremity of block 103/19 is 12·7 nm. These figures are accurate to within 0·1 nm.

  No licences have been issued for exploration in blocks 103/2, 103/3, 103/6, 103/7, 106/25, 106/29, 107/21, 104/16, 104/17, 104/18, 104/19 and 104/21.

  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make it his policy to order independent environmental impact assessments before any new drilling begins in the Celtic sea.

  Mr. Eggar
  Prior to offering blocks for licence the Department consults relevant environmental organisations. Where appropriate special conditions, which may include a requirement for an environmental impact assessment, are attached to licences which take into account the environmental sensitivity of each block. These conditions are agreed with the consultees.

  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what environmental monitoring on the impact of offshore drilling in the Celtic sea has been carried out by his Department or the Department of Energy since 1973.

  Mr. Eggar
  The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food carries out general monitoring of the coast of England and Wales to establish background levels of marine pollutants. At the completion of the latest well in the Celtic sea, the University of Bangor will be carrying out a survey to assess any effects of drilling on the marine environment.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Eggar
  DTI offers advances of salary for this pupose to all staff—including those in its agencies—other than casuals. Advances are subject to a £100 maxim um repayable over 12 months and to proof of purchase being made available. The conditions will be reviewed from time to time within overall rules established by HM Treasury.

  Chemical Weapons
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what arrangement his Department has made to ensure that the inspectors of the Organisation for Chemical Weapons, following the ratification of the chemical weapons convention, will be admitted to any site in the United Kingdom for which inspection has been requested;

  (2) what further United Kingdom legislation will be necessary to enable the inspectors and the national authority to carry out its duties following the ratification of the chemical weapons convention.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  Primary legislation will be required to provide the necessary powers to ensure that the United Kingdom fulfils its obligations under the chemical weapons convention.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what arrangement his Department has made to ensure that information will be made available to the public by the national authority, following the ratification of the chemical weapons convention, on the United Kingdom's compliance with the convention.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  No decision has been taken about the information to be made available to the public by the national authority. We will consult interested bodies. Information received by the national authority will be subject to the terms of the annex to the chemical weapons convention dealing with the protection of confidential information.

  Assisted Areas
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade when he intends to publish his review of the assisted areas map; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  Our intention is to announce the results of the assisted areas map review as early as possible, taking account of the outcome of the coal review and after the necessary clearance of the European Commission.

  Mr. David Porter
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade when he expects to announce the decision on the bid for assisted area status lodged by Waveney district council; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sainsbury
  Consideration is now being given to bids received, including that from Waveney district
  39
  council. Our intention is to announce the results of the assisted areas map review as early as possible, taking account of the outcome of the coal review and after the necessary clearance of the European Commission.

  Cashmere
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement outlining the steps that have been taken to prevent Chinese attempts to circumvent the quota of cashmere goods allowed into the Community under the existing bilateral agreement.

  Mr. Needham
  Following representations from the United Kingdom, the EC has introduced a separate tariff line exclusively for cashmere sweaters. As a result of the completion of the single market the quota for cashmere sweaters has now been established on an EC basis. Both of these measures, which took effect on 1 January 1993, will enable import levels to be monitored more effectively than in previous years.

NATIONAL HERITAGE

  European Cultural Festival
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what benefits accrued to the arts in Wales from the European cultural festival organised during the United Kingdom Presidency of the European Council; what proportion of the total financial allocation was dedicated to Wales; and how many permanent jobs were created.

  Mr. Brooke
  During the European arts festival some 70 events were held across the Principality in every art form—dance, theatre, classical music, jazz, opera, the visual arts and film. Approximately £320,000 was allocated to enable these events to take place. In addition, the festival planned and supported extensive education and community programmes involving some 100 schools in Wales. The festival has provided a good deal of additional short-term work for artists in Wales through the initiation of a wide range of new projects.

  Gambling
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what estimate he has of(a) the net level of gambling each week, (b) the proportion of national lottery stakes that might go to good causes or in taxation and (c) the level of spending on the national lottery that would be required to produce £20 million for good causes and taxation.

  Mr. Brooke
  Overall responsibility for gambling, excluding the national lottery, rests with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department. On question(a), I refer to the answer given to the hon. Member for Cunninghame, North (Mr. Wilson) on 9 November 1992 at cols. 632–33.

  (b) The proportion available for good causes will depend on the exact level of prizes considered appropriate, on the projected costs of operating the lottery, and on the level of tax. Taxation is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

  (c) The turnover required to produce any given amount for taxation and good causes will depend on (b).

  British Library (Yorkshire)
  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Natonal Heritage if he will make a statement on the plans of the British Library with regard to its buildings and services in Yorkshire.

  Mr. Key
  The British Library's policy is to provide a service to users from its sites in London and Boston Spa, Yorkshire. The document supply centre will continue to operate from Boston Spa. In addition, during the last two years, the Library has relocated to Yorkshire its acquisition processing and cataloguing, its bibliographic services, computing and telecommunications and a substantial part of its administration.

  The British Library Board will continue to review the needs of its users, including long-term requirements.

  Football Ground Safety
  Mr. Kilfoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what financial provision will be made for implementing the football ground safety measures proposed by the Taylor report following decreases in the funding by pools company revenue.

  Mr. Brooke
  In the 1990 Budget, pool betting duty was reduced from 42·5 per cent. to 40 per cent. for five years to help finance the implementation of the Taylor report and in particular the achievement of all-seating. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has since made clear the conditions under which he would be prepared to extend the reduction for a further five years: he would need to be satisfied that the football leagues and football clubs had gone ahead with planning for their own contribution to implementing the required ground improvements. I am not aware of any plans by the pools companies to reduce their funding of Taylor-related work at football grounds.

  Manchester Olympics Bid
  Mrs. Jane Kennedy
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage when he plans to meet the chairman of the North West tourist board to discuss Merseyside's share in the Manchester 2000 Olympics bid.

  Mr. Brooke
  I have no plans to do so.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Key
  The Department and its agency, the Historic Royal Palaces Agency, are able to provide advances of salary to assist staff with the purchase of bicycles for home to office travel. Advances currently up to a maximum of £100 are available to non-industrial staff who have served in the civil service for at least two months. Advances are not available to staff employed on a casual basis. The advances are interest-free and are repayable over one year. Immediate repayment is required should the member of staff cease to be a civil servant or dispose of the bicycle.
  41
  The Department has no plans to change eligibility or repayment rules, or to raise the maximum amount of loan.

  Indian Subcontinent
  Mr. Marlow
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage, pursuant to his answer of the 14 December 1992,Official Report, column 14, on flights to and from the Indian sub-continent, what assessment he has made of the reasons for (a) the difference between the number of arrivals and departures in each year and (b) the trend in the difference.

  Mr. Key
  Reliable conclusions cannot necessarily be drawn from the differences between the data on passengers arriving and departing on flights from or to the Indian sub-continent. This is because the data relate to all such passengers irrespective of where they joined or left the flights, and also because the data include passengers who changed flights in the United Kingdom without passing through immigration control.

  Information up to 1990 on international migration to and from the Indian sub-continent is given in the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys' annual reference volume "International Migration 1990". Information up to 1991 on citizens of Indian sub-continent countries who were accepted for settlement, that is, allowed to stay indefinitely in the United Kingdom, is given in the Home Office Command Paper "Control of Immigration: Statistics, United Kingdom, 1991". Both of these publications are available in the Library of the House.

  Television Licences
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage (1) if he will set out the reasons used by the National TV Licence Records Office for withdrawing a full concessionary TV licence entitlement from Richmond Row sheltered housing complex in Jedburgh; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) what recent representations he has received about the operation of the current rules governing eligibility for full concessionary TV licence schemes; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Brooke
  Under section 180 and schedule 18 of the Broadcasting Act 1990, responsibility for the administration of the television licensing system, including determining eligibility for concessionary licences in individual cases, passed to the BBC with effect from 1 April 1991. Any questions about specific schemes should therefore now be directed to the secretary of the BBC, and it would be inappropriate for me to comment on particular cases. Since the establishment of the Department of National Heritage in April last year, we have received 107 letters from hon. Members and 178 letters from members of the public about the operation of the concessionary licence scheme.

  Dulwich Picture Gallery
  Ms. Jowell
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what representations he has received on behalf of Dulwich picture gallery; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Key
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: I have received no representations on behalf of the Dulwich
  42
  picture gallery. However my right hon. Friend met representatives from the gallery and the arts community at Christie's on Thursday 7 January.

  Bletchley Park
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will make a statement on the future of Bletchley park as a museum dedicated to the cryptographers of world war two.

  Mr. Key
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: The Bletchley park site is owned by Property Holdings and British Telecom. I understand that the Government and British Telecom are planning to dispose of Bletchley park, and that a decision on its future is one for my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment to take.

NORTHERN IRELAND

  Expenditure Plans
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what are his spending plans for 1993–94 for Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Mates
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply which my right hon. and learned Friend gave to the hon. Member for Londonderry, East (Mr. Ross) on 8 December 1992 at column 601. That covered expenditure plans for the years 1993/94 — 1995/96. Further details will be given in the Northern Ireland report "Public Expenditure and Priorities 1993/94 — 1995/96" which will be published on 12 February, and the 1993–94 estimates which will be laid before the House in due course.

  Human Rights
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many recommendations have been made by the Standing Advisory Committee on Human Rights since it was set up; and how many of these have been accepted by Government and implemented.

  Sir Patrick Mayhew
  The Commission has made many valuable recommendations, for example on fair employment, education, race relations and other human rights issues, which the Government have been pleased to accept. To identify all the recommendations made by the Commission and accepted by the Government since it was created in 1973 could be done only at disproportionate cost. But all the Commission's reports are published, and the Government's response to each report is laid in the Library of the House at the same time.

  Ambulance Service
  Mr. McCartney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what was the percentage of ambulances in each service in Northern Ireland that responded within(a) eight minutes and (b) 14 to 20 minutes to emergency calls in 1991–92.

  Mr. Hanley
  The available information is as follows:
  43

  Ambulance Service

  Percentage responded within

  (a) eight minutes

  (b) twenty minutes

  Northern Health and Social Services Board

  54·87

  95·69

  Southern Health and Social Services Board

  55·97

  90·43

  Eastern Health and Social Services Board

  59·09

  92·87

  Western Health and Social Services Board

  51·73

  92·62

  Overall figure for Northern Ireland

  56·80

  93·15

  Separate figures on the percentage of calls responded to between 14 and 20 minutes are not available.

  Mr. McCartney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what was the number of ambulance staff in Northern Ireland employed by the NHS in 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991, using whole-time equivalents.

  Mr. Hanley
  The number of whole-time equivalent ambulance staff employed by the Northern Ireland health and personal social services was as follows:

  Number

  1987

  584·75

  1988

  573·50

  1989

  575·47

  1990

  581·52

  1991

  587·04

  Seamus McElwaine
  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a further statement on his discussions with the Government of the Republic of Ireland concerning the use of lethal force by the security forces in Northern Ireland, following the verdict of the jury in the inquest into the death of Seamus McElwaine.

  Mr. Mates
  A range of security-related issues, including the use of force by the security forces in Northern Ireland, is regularly discussed with the Irish Government at meetings of the intergovernmental conference.

  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what steps he is taking to deal with the issues raised by the verdict of the jury in the inquest into the death of Seamus McElwaine.

  Mr. Mates
  The Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland, who is the holder of an independent statutory office, has asked for a full report from the police in the light of the inquest jury's findings. It would therefore be inappropriate for me to comment further.

  St. Mary's College of Education
  Mr. Stott
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether the changes from 85 per cent. to 100 per cent. grant status for the maintained sector of education in Northern Ireland will apply to St. Mary's college of education.

  Mr. Hanley
  St. Mary's college is a teacher training establishment and therefore the new arrangements for grant for schools do not apply.

  Absent Parents
  Mr. Mallon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (1) in how many cases in each of the past five years court action has successfully resulted in an absent parent paying maintenance;

  (2) in how many cases in each of the past five years an absent parent has failed to pay maintenance.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  I have been asked to reply.

  I regret that this information could not be made available except at disproportionate cost.

DUCHY OF LANCASTER

  Ozone Depletion
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will implement a refrigerant recycling and reclaim policy covering all departmental equipment currently using chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons; if he will publish targets for departmental reuse and recycling; if he will implement an equipment conversion and replacement programme for all departmental uses of chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robert Jackson
  The Office of Public Service and Science is committed to the Government's policy for reducing the use of substances controlled under the Montreal protocol. The use of chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons within the department continues to be reduced, with the aim of total elimination within the time scale of the protocol. Due attention is paid to the proper disposal of ozone-depleting chemicals.

  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will introduce a leakage prevention programme for all refrigeration and air conditioning equipment owned and operated by his Department; if he will publish targets for reductions in leakages; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robert Jackson
  Air conditioning plant in use within the Office of Public Service and Science is regularly checked for leaks as part of the ongoing maintenance programme. A stipulation of any new installation of air conditioning equipment is the use of ozone-friendly refrigerants.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robert Jackson
  On 16 December, my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary announced that Departments and agencies had been given the freedom to determine the conditions on which advances of salary to assist civil servants in the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel are made. The Office of Public Service and Science and its agencies are considering how to proeed with this matter. I will write to the hon. Member in due course.

  Oil Spillages
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what analysis has been undertaken by the research councils of the nature and effect of chemical dispersants when used to treat large spillages of oil.

  Mr. Robert Jackson
  None, but I will draw their attention to the hon. Member's question.

EMPLOYMENT

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in her Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if she will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of her Department; what plans she has to change the conditions; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The conditions are as follows. Staff must be able to demonstrate an operational case justifying the advance or some other identifiable value-for-money improvement that can be achieved by the advance; applications for advances must be reasonable in relation to the amount of expenditure and the individual's grade; advances must be repaid over 12 months; and any outstanding balance must be repaid immediately if' the individual leaves the Department or sells or otherwise disposes of the bicycle. There are no plans to change these conditions.

  Unemployment Benefit
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if she will instruct the manager of the Cardiff adjudication sector to report the number of unemployment benefit disqualification decisions made by adjudicating officers in that sector under each paragraph of section 28(1) of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992, and the periods for which disqualification was imposed, in a convenient week before the end of January; and if she will place this information in the Library.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  Responsibility for the subject of the question has been delegated to the Employment Service Agency under its chief executive. I have asked him to arrange for a reply to be given.

  Letter from M. Fogden to Mr. Paul Flynn, dated 18 January 1993:
  As the Employment Service is an Executive Agency, the Secretary of State has asked me to write to you direct to respond to your Parliamentary Question to her about unemployment benefit disqualifications under Section 28(1) of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992. This is something which falls within the responsibilities she has delegated to me as the Chief Executive of the Agency.
  You may recall that, during my absence, Mr. Johnson wrote to you in June 1992 in response to a similar question. To assemble information about the length of the periods of disqualifications imposed by the adjudication officers at the Cardiff sector during a specific week we would need to identify and examine each case in which disqualification was imposed. As mentioned previously this could only be done at disproportionate cost to public funds.
  46
  We do not collect or publish the type of information you have requested because the period of disqualification is decided in the light of the circumstances of each individual case and, without knowledge of those circumstances, no meaningful interpretation could be placed on it. Quality assurance of the adjudication process includes scrutiny of the evidence taken into account by adjudication officers in exercising their discretion in setting disqualification periods. This is carried out by adjudication management at local level and by the Central Adjudication Service as part of their statutory function to report on the standard of adjudication on benefit claims.
  I am sorry that I cannot help you further in this matter.
  As decided by the Administration Committee of the House of Commons, Chief Executive replies to written Parliamentary Questions will now be published in the Official Report. I will also place a copy of this letter in the Library of the House.

  Unemployment
  Mr. Andrew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment, pursuant to her answer of 16 December,Official Report, columns 250–51, if she will list the numbers of people represented by the unemployment rates given.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  [holding answer 12 January 1993]: Only unemployment rates are published on a monthly basis and these were given in my answer to the hon. Member of 16 December, Official Report, columns 250–51. The corresponding numbers of unemployed represented by the rates given in my earlier answere are not available as such figures are only produced on the basis of annual averages. The latest annual data relates to 1991 and is as follows:

  Estimates of the number of unemployed—annual averages1

  Country

  1 Number of unemployed

  Belgium

  303,000

  Denmark

  259,000

  France

  2,308,000

  Germany2

  1,346,000

  Greece3

  303,000

  Ireland

  219,000

  Italy

  2,436,000

  Luxembourg

  3,000

  Netherlands

  485,000

  Portugal

  204,000

  Spain

  2,450,000

  United Kingdom

  2,627,000

  1 Published by the Statistical Office of the European Community (SOEC) and compiled according to internationally recognised International Labour Office (ILO) guidelines.

  2 Figures for the Federal Republic of Germany relate to the territory before 3rd October 1990.

  3 Figure refers to spring 1991.

DEFENCE

  British Aerospace Space Division
  Ms Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the effect on the United Kingdom defence procurement programme of the takeover of the BAe Space Division by Matra-Marconi.

  Mr. Aitken
  While I understand that there has been a dialogue between the two companies, I am advised that no current discussions are taking place. There are therefore no implications for defence procurement.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Staff in junior grades throughout the Ministry of Defence and its agencies are eligible to apply for an advance of salary of up to £100 to assist with the purchase of a bicycle for use in travelling between home and office, provided they have been in post for at least two months and are not employed in a casual capacity. The definition of "junior staff" is staff in grades which are entitled to class 3 rates of subsistence, ie. higher executive officer and below.

  My Department and its agencies are considering whether to alter the scheme in light of the recent changes notified by Treasury and announced by my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury on 16 December 1992, Official Report, cols. 285–86.

  Infantry Battalions
  Mr. Trotter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the annual running cost of each type of United Kingdom infantry battalion, including the further battalions based in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Nuclear Tests
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the National Radiological Protection Board study into British nuclear test participants will be concluded; and how many participants are projected to be living by this date.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  I understand that the National Radiological Protection Board study will be concluded as soon as is practically possible consistent with the maintenance of the highest standards of scientific rigour. It is not possible to predict how many participants will be alive at the time of publication of the report.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what compensation payments have been issued to foreign personnel as a result of British nuclear tests in the south Pacific.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  None.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will release details of radiation dosage levels to all living British nuclear test participants and, in the event of death, to the deceased participant's next of kin.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The recorded radiation exposure is provided on request to the individual test participant or, in the event of death, to the next of kin.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the maximum possible distance between locations on mainland Christmas island and the Grapple Y nuclear test.
  48
  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The mustering location at the greatest distance from the Grapple Y test was 43km away.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if all dosage levels for radiation contamination have been released to the National Radiological Protection Board for their study into possible illness in British nuclear test participants.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  All recorded radiation exposures of participants in the United Kingdom atmospheric nuclear weapons tests and experimental programmes were passed to the National Radiological Protection Board at the time of its first study.

  Pulheems Tests
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how Pulheems tests are carried out; and how such information is passed on to service personnel general practitioners.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Pulheems tests are used to assess and categorise medical fitness. They are carried out on a regular basis by qualified medical personnel in accordance with standard tri-service regulations. All service general practitioners have access to these regulations. Pulheems ratings for individual personnel are recorded on personal records.

  Air-to-surface Missile
  Mr. Wilkinson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his oral answer of 27 October 1992 to the hon. Member for Wyre (Mr. Mans),Official Report, columns 861–62, when he will be able to announce a choice of system to meet the United Kingdom's sub-strategic requirements for nuclear capability.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  I have nothing to add to the answer given by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State to the hon. Member for Wyre (Mr. Mans) on 27 October 1992,Official Report, column 862, that we expect to reach a decision early this year.

  Frigates (Pakistan)
  Sir Keith Speed
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions are taking place with the Pakistan Government about the sale or lease of frigates or other warships to Pakistan.

  Mr. Aitken
  Discussions with the Pakistan Navy, which has expressed interest in acquiring a range of Royal Navy and Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels when these ships leave service over the next year or so, are at an early stage.

  Medical Records
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will release all medical records for service men and women for the purposes of pensions appeals.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  Disability pensions are the responsibility of the Benefits Agency. Where ex-service personnel make application, medical records are passed to the agency and released to the claimants as necessary for the conduct of the case.

  Radioactive Contamination
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if every person with a blue book entry was subjected to some level of radioactive contamination; and what the term "gamma" refers to in such entries.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  No; the term "gamma" refers to external exposures to gamma radiation.

  Seamus McElwaine
  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of the soldiers involved in the incident leading to the death of Seamus McElwaine are still serving in the Army; whether any of these soldiers are still serving in Northern Ireland or have served there since the incident; and what disciplinary procedures the Army intends to initiate following the verdict of the jury.

  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  It is not our practice to comment on the deployment of individual soldiers. The Director of Public Prosecution for Northern Ireland has asked for a full report from the police in the light of the inquest jury's finding. It would therefore be inappropriate for me to comment further.

  Korea
  Mr. Mans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has for the future of United Kingdom forces stationed in Korea; and if he will make a statement.
  50
  Mr. Archie Hamilton
  The requirement for the continued deployment of a platoon of British troops for the UN honour guard in Korea has been reviewed in the light of the gradual withdrawal of the garrison from Hong Kong, "Options for Change", and the considerably changed global commitments which British armed forces now face in the 1990s. With these considerations in mind, and in view also of the progress which has been made in easing links between the Republic of Korea and North Korea, it has been decided that the British contingent of the UN honour guard, currently comprising one officer and 36 men, drawn from the Hong Kong garrison, will be withdrawn by 15 March 1993. The four British personnel who form part of the Commonwealth liaison mission in Seoul will follow within approximately two months.

  The United Kingdom has consistently supported efforts to bring about reconciliation on the Korean peninsula; we continue to do so and have welcomed the moves which both sides have made to this end since prime ministerial talks began in September 1991. Notwithstanding the withdrawal of these troops, our membership of the United Nations Command, and of the Military Armistice Commission in Korea remains unchanged. This move does not imply any lessening of our efforts to urge the government of North Korea to take further steps towards a peaceful reconciliaton with South Korea, including full co-operation with the International Atomic Energy Authority and the full implementation of a bilateral north-south inspection regime.

WALES

  Rate Support Allocations
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will meet a deputation of Clwyd county councillors and officials and hon. Members to discuss the rate support allocations.

  Mr. David Hunt
  No. The Welsh Consultative Council on Local Government Finance (WCCLGF) is the appropriate forum for discussion of the distribution of revenue resources between local authorities in Wales. I chaired a meeting of WCCLGF on 12 January at which the position for 1993–94 was discussed.

  Assisted Area Status
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement concerning the designation of assisted area status in Wales.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The representations received about the review of assisted areas are currently being considered. The Government hope to be able to make an announcement on the outcome of the review in the near future.

  Parenthood
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what steps he has taken to develop a post-school education strategy aimed at promoting socially responsible parenthood.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The Welsh Office is funding training and initial resource material costs to support district health authorities' introduction of the child development programme in Wales—a parent support programme of targeted health visiting which encourages parenting skills in all areas of early child development. So far the programme has been introduced by Pembrokeshire, South Glamorgan, West Glamorgan, Powys and Gwynedd health authorities.

  In addition, the Health Promotion Authority for Wales' "Health for All in Wales" strategy defines the major health promotional challenges facing Wales. Parenting is identified as one of the areas to be developed in pursuit of this strategy.

  Search and Rescue
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) what assessment has been made by his Department of the impact of a withdrawal of the search and rescue helicopter squadron from RAF Brawdy upon response times in dealing with coastal and offshore emergencies in and around the Ceredigion and Pembroke North constituency;

  (2) what has been the average response time taken by Sea-king helicopters from RAF Brawdy to reach the scene of a coastal or offshore emergency in and around the Ceredigion and Pembroke North constituency in each of the last three years; and if he will publish estimated response times for helicopters from (a) RAF Chivenor and (b) RAF Valley to reach future coastal or offshore emergencies in or near the constituency;
  52
  (3) what research has been conducted by his Department on the effect of withdrawing the search and rescue helicopter squadron from RAF Brawdy upon established contingency plans drawn up by the Dyfed fire brigade to deal with offshore emergencies;

  (4) what estimate he has made of how many lives have been saved in and around the Ceredigion and Pembroke North constituency in each of the last five years, due specifically to the swift response of the search and rescue helicopter squadron at RAF Brawdy.

  Mr. David Hunt
  This is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will meet representatives of the Dyfed county fire brigade to discuss the implications of withdrawing the search and rescue helicopter squadron from RAF Brawdy upon responses to coastal and offshore emergencies in and around the county.

  Mr. David Hunt
  Such discussions would be, in the first instance, for my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces.

  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what assessment has been made by his Department into the effect of withdrawing the search and rescue helicopter squadron from RAF Brawdy upon the training needs of local county firefighters in tackling offshore emergencies.

  Mr. David Hunt
  Such matters would be, in the first instance, for my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Minister of State for the Armed Forces.

  Assisted Areas
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what has been the amount of(a) Government grants and (b) European Community grants given to each of the assisted areas in Wales in each of the last five years.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The information is not readily available in the form requested and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Drugs and Alcohol
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the establishments in Wales which provide residential facilities for(a) those with alcohol problems and (b) those with drug problems; if he will show for each establishment (i) the capital grant and (ii) the total revenue grant provided by his Department in each of the last five years; and if he will provide estimated figures for 1992–93 and 1993–94.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The names of residential facilities in Wales for drug and alcohol misusers are not held centrally. Those which have received funding from the Department since 1987–88 and the amounts they have received are listed in the following table. With the exception of Dyfrig house, which provides facilities only for alcohol misusers, they cater for both drug and alcohol misusers. It is not possible at this stage to estimate figures for 1993–94.
  53

  Establishment

  1987–88 £

  1988–89 £

  1989–90 £

  1990–91 £

  1991–92 £

  11992–93 £

  Ty Plamyra, Newport

  —

  —

  —

  21,623

  38,300

  38,673

  Rhoserchan project, Aberystwyth

  —

  —

  26,286

  31,790

  29,901

  310,000

  317,000

  210,000

  Ty Glyn, Cardiff

  —

  —

  —

  38,383

  2974

  310,000

  Ty Rodyn, Bangor

  —

  37,500

  —

  37,500

  —

  —

  Dyfrig house, Cardiff

  —

  —

  —

  215,156

  29,170

  —

  1 Represents allocations made up to 31 December 1992.

  2 Capital funding.

  3 Revenue funding.

  Treatment Centres
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what reasons underlay the timing of the notification to health authorities of their allocation of places at the treatment centres.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  Since 1989–90 when the treatment centre initiative was launched there have been a number of changes to the arrangements under which the Department has allocated places at the centres to health authorities in order to ensure the best possible usage of the centres. The exact timing of the allocations was therefore affected by a variety of factors in each year.

  Hill Farmers
  Dr. Strang
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many producers are entitled to hill livestock compensatory allowances in Wales; and what proportion of those are located in(a) severely disadvantaged and (b) disadvantaged areas.

  (a) All farms

  (b) All farms which presently receive hill livestock compensatory allowance payments

  All dairy and livestock farms income

  Seriously disadvantaged area income

  Disadvantaged areas income

  Less favoured area income

  Current prices

  Real terms1

  Current prices

  Real terms1

  Current prices

  Real terms1

  Current prices

  Real terms1

  £

  £

  £

  £

  £

  £

  £

  £

  1985–86

  7,914

  11,145

  7,913

  11,145

  5,938

  8,363

  7,616

  10,727

  1986–87

  8,508

  11,655

  9,604

  13,156

  3,129

  4,286

  7,906

  10,830

  1987–88

  11,243

  14,793

  10,703

  14,083

  5,985

  7,875

  9,453

  12,438

  1988–89

  15,767

  19,709

  15,721

  19,651

  10,353

  12,941

  14,250

  17,813

  1989–90

  12,277

  14,111

  10,022

  11,520

  5,370

  6,172

  8,805

  10,121

  1990–91

  10,500

  11,053

  9,932

  10,455

  1,592

  1,676

  7,561

  7,959

  1991–92

  13,968

  13,968

  15,340

  15,340

  4,386

  4,386

  12,254

  12,254

  1 Deflated by the RPI 1991–92 = 100.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what are the number and proportion of farms, together with farms which presently receive hill livestock compensatory allowance payments in total and broken down by(a) disadvantaged areas, (b) severely disadvantaged areas and (c) less favoured areas.

  Mr. David Hunt
  In 1991 there were 6,594 main agricultural holdings in Wales with land in the disadvantaged areas but not in the severely disadvantaged areas, and a further 13,901 holdings with land in the severely disadvantaged areas making a total of 20,495 main holdings with land in the less favoured areas. These figures represent 22 per cent. 47 per cent. and 69 per cent. of all main holdings in Wales respectively.
  54
  Mr. David Hunt
  About 15,000 claimants currently receive hill livestock compensatory allowances in Wales. Of these some 11,000 (73 per cent.) are located in the severely disadvantaged areas and 4,000 (27 per cent.) in the disadvantaged areas.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what are the average incomes of(a) all farms and (b) farms which presently receive hill livestock compensatory allowance payments in (a) disadvantaged areas, (b) severely disadvantaged areas and (c) less-favoured areas in each year since 1979.

  Mr. David Hunt
  Separate incomes data is only available in this form since 1985–86 from when the information requested is given in the table:

  Four thousand claimants currently receive hill livestock compensatory allowances in the disadvantaged areas only and a further 11,000 in the severely disadvantaged areas making a total of 15,000 claimants in the less favoured areas. These figures represent 13 per cent. 37 per cent. and 50 per cent. of all main holdings in Wales respectively.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the hill livestock compensatory allowance rates in cash terms and real terms in each year since 1982.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The information requested is at table 17 of the statistical tables prepared in connection with last year's autumn review of hill livestock compensatory allowances. A copy is available in the Library of the House.
  55
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what hectarage of land in Wales is in(a) less-favoured areas, (b) severely disadvantaged areas and (c) disadvantaged areas; what proportion of land in Wales each figure represents; and how many farmers are involved.

  Mr. David Hunt
  There are estimated to be 1,644,000 hectares of land in Wales in the less favoured areas, of which 1,158,000 hectares are in the severely disadvantaged areas and 486,000 hectares in the disadvantaged areas. These figures represent 79 per cent., 56 per cent. and 23 per cent. of the total land area of Wales respectively. In 1991 there were 20,495 main agricultural holdings in Wales with land in the less favoured areas, of which 13,901 holdings had land in the severely disadvantaged areas and 10,357 holdings had land in the disadvantaged areas.

  NHS Staff
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the number of(a) nursing and midwifery staff, (b) managerial staff and (c) clerical and administrative staff in the NHS in each year since 1989.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The information, which relates to whole-time equivalents of staff employed by the NHS as at 30 September each year, is given in the following table:

  Nursing and midwifery staff

  1 Managerial staff

  Clerical and administrative staff

  1989

  28,037

  187

  7,378

  1990

  28,093

  416

  7,653

  1991

  27,991

  686

  8,047

  19922

  27,519

  848

  8,238

  1 General managers, senior managers and managers in the administrative and clerical stall group. The growth in the number of senior managers arises from the extension in 1989 of senior managers terms and conditions of service to second and third level managers.

  2 The implementation of the Project 2000 nursing education reforms in 1992 has led to the reclassification of some student nurses as students. Precise estimates of this effect are not readily available centrally. But overall in 1992 about 1,000 nurses have been reclassified. Those in the student intakes prior to 30 September 1992 have been excluded from the 1992 count.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  Advances of salary to assist staff with the purchase of bicycles for home to office travel are not currently available within my Department nor in its agency, Cadw.

  Ambulance Service
  Mr. McCartney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what was the percentage of ambulances in each service in Wales that responded within(a) eight minutes and (b) 14 to 20 minutes to emergency calls in 1991–92.
  56
  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The ambulance service classifications in Wales and their standard response times are:

  50 per cent. minutes

  95 per cent. minutes

  Urban areas

  7

  14

  Rural areas

  8

  18

  Sparsely populated areas

  8

  21

  The information for 1991–92 is shown in the following table:

  Percentage arriving within

  7 minutes

  14 minutes

  Urban

  South Glamorgan

  42

  84

  8 minutes

  18 minutes

  Rural

  Clwyd

  60

  97

  Gwent

  52

  93

  Mid Glamorgan

  53

  96

  West Glamorgan

  61

  96

  8 minutes

  21 minutes

  Sparsely populated

  East Dyfed

  55

  94

  Gwynedd

  55

  94

  Pembrokeshire

  36

  84

  Powys

  44

  83

  Mr. McCartney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what was the number of ambulance staff in Wales employed by the NHS in the years 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1991, using whole time equivalents.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The information, which relates to ambulancemen/women, ambulance officers and control assistants employed by the NHS as at 30 September each year, is shown in the following table:

  Ambulance staff (whole-time equivalents)

  Number

  1987

  1,589

  1988

  1,566

  1989

  1,579

  1990

  1,548

  1991

  1,564

  Newport Waferfab Company
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what is the total amount of public money committed, or promised under certain conditions, to the Newport Water Fab company or its parent company, in December 1992; and if he will publish details of any conditions attached.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The information requested is not available as it is commercial in confidence.

  Cardiff Bay Development Corporation
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he expects to announce the budget for the Cardiff Bay development corporation for the next financial year, both as to gross expenditure and net of receipts from land sales and other income.
  57
  Mr. David Hunt
  I expect to announce the grant-in-aid for Cardiff Bay development corporation shortly.

  Land Authority for Wales
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what targets he has set for gross expenditure and receipts from sales of land from the Land Authority for Wales in the year 1993–94.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  None, yet.

  Butetown Link Road
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what consultations he has had with the Cardiff Bay development corporation concerning its grant to South Glamorgan county council towards the cost of constructing the Butetown link road; how such a grant should be adjusted for inflation and design changes; what representations he has received from South Glamorgan county council; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The financing of the Butetown link is a matter for South Glamorgan county council and Cardiff Bay development corporation. I have received representations from the leader of South Glamorgan county council on this issue.

  EC Waste Water Directive
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what consultations he has had with the National Rivers Authority regarding the publication of a timetable and criteria for implementation of the European waste water directive in Wales; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  The timetable and criteria for implementation of the EC's urban waste water treatment directive are set by the directive itself. Regular meetings to discuss implementation issues are held between the National Rivers Authority and relevant Government Departments, including the Welsh Office.

  West Glamorgan Family Health Services Authority
  Mr. Hain
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the individuals he has appointed to the West Glamorgan family health services authority since September 1992, and list their qualifications and previous health service experience.

  Mr. David Hunt
  The following were appointed to serve from 1 December 1992:

  Mr. Robert John Davies BSc ACA ATII

  Mr. Douglas Stuart Williams ARICS

  Mrs. Carole Maureen Hyde

  In making appointments I aim to strike an appropriate balance between continuity and the introduction of new members. Both Mr. Davies and Mr. Williams have health service experience acquired since they were first appointed to the FHSA in 1990. Mrs. Hyde is a new member.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

  Telephone System
  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the Chairman of the Administration Committee (1) if he will conduct a survey to establish the proportion of outgoing calls through the 58
  House of Commons telephone system which connect; (2) what recent changes have been made in the operation of the House of Commons telephone system; and what assessment has been made of its present operation.

  Mr. Michael Martin
  In accordance with a resolution of the former Services Committee, and with he agreement of the other place, the Palace of Westminster telecommunications exchange was improved during the 1992 summer recess to provide additional abbreviated dialling facilities and a "least-cost-routing" package which enables outgoing calls to be directed automatically by the cheapest supplier. Some problems with routing have been identified, but have all been rectified. A survey is therefore not considered necessary. Anyone experiencing difficulty with an outgoing call should report the fact to extension 4444. An immediate investigation of the problem will be made and the result notified to the caller. Any Member with a query about the telecommunications system itself should contact the Serjeant at Arms, who has administrative responsibility for these matters.

SCOTLAND

  Special Advisers
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list the(a) names and (b) previous occupations of special advisers appointed to his Department in the current Parliament.

  Mr. Lang
  The special advisers appointed to my Department in the current Parliament are G. MacKay and A. Young, both of whom were previously special advisers.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  All permanent non-industrial staff in the Scottish Office with at least two months service are eligible to receive a salary advance of up to £100 to assist with the purchase of a bicycle for home-to-office travel. This provision also extends to staff in all the Scottish Office agencies. The arrangements are currently subject to review.

  Shetland (Oil Pollution)
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will provide details of the current estimate of wildlife lost due to oil pollution in the Shetland Isles as a result of the MV Braer incident.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Scottish Natural Heritage has reported the recovered losses of birds and mammals set out in the table, up to and including 13 January. The corresponding information on the recoveries of live creatures which have been affected by oil is also shown.
  59

  Recovered dead

  Recovered live

  Birds

  Fulmar

  2

  0

  Great northern diver

  11

  2

  Black throated diver

  1

  0

  Long-tailed duck

  92

  29

  Eider duck

  48

  49

  Shag

  442

  109

  Cormorant

  1

  0

  Great black-backed gull

  8

  0

  Herring gull

  2

  1

  Common gull

  1

  0

  Kittiwake

  8

  2

  Common guillemot

  7

  8

  Black guillemot

  103

  14

  Razorbill

  1

  0

  Puffin

  1

  0

  Little auk

  4

  2

  Rock dove

  1

  1

  Starling

  1

  0

  Rock pipit

  1

  0

  Purple sandpiper

  1

  0

  Totals

  736

  217

  Mammals

  Grey seal

  3

  4

  Common seal

  0

  1

  Otter

  3

  0

  Rabbit

  1

  0

  Totals

  7

  5

  Numbers of sea fish of a variety of species and marine invertebrates such as sea urchin, starfish and octopus were also found dead on the tide line.

  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will consider extending the joint Natural Environment Research Council—Scottish Office, Department of Agriculture and Fisheries study by Glasgow university into sandeel biology and breeding seabirds in the Shetland Isles to investigate the effects on both of the recent oil spill.

  Sir Hector Monro
  The research project referred to by the hon. Member is in fact two separate research projects, funded from different sources. The research study carried out by Glasgow university into seabird breeding success in the Shetland Isles is funded principally by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC).

  The second project, into the biology of sandeels in the vicinity of seabird colonies in Shetland has been running parallel to the University of Glasgow study and is funded jointly by The Scottish Office Agriculture and Fisheries Department, Department of the Environment, Scottish National Heritage, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Worldwide Fund for Nature, and Cadbury Ltd. While this project is due to come to an end in March we are currently considering possible extension in the light of the recent developments. We are anxious to ensure that any extension is consistent with the strategy for future studies into the Shetland environment which will be developed by the ecological steering group, the establishment of which was announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on 11 January.

  Press Office
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many staff were employed by his Department's press office in each year since 1979.

  Mr. Lang
  The number of staff in the information officer grades employed in the Scottish Office information directorate as at 1 April each year from 1979 to 1992 is set out in the table:

  Number of staff

  1979

  22

  1980

  24

  1981

  20

  1982

  22

  1983

  20

  1984

  20

  1985

  19

  1986

  20

  1987

  22

  1988

  23

  1989

  28

  1990

  31½

  1991

  33½

  1992

  29½

  Data Protection
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many certificates he has signed under section 27 of the Data Protection Act 1984; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: No certificates have been signed under section 27 of the Data Protection Act 1984.

  Seed Potatoes
  Mr. Bill Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the importance for Scotland of light grade regions for seed potatoes in the European Community.

  Sir Hector Monro
  I very much welcome the successful conclusion of negotiations in Brussels with agreement that high grade seed regions should be established in the European Community. The protection provided by this agreement is of great significance to the Scottish seed potato industry and will help to maintain its worldwide reputation for the protection of high quality potatoes.

  It is proposed to give effect to the measures around the middle of the year. This means current arrangements for planting and entry of crops to the seed potato classification scheme will be unchanged for the start of the 1993 season. To comply with the measures some legislative and procedural changes will be necessary later in the year in preparation for the marketing stage of the 1993 crop. The Scottish Office Agriculture and Fisheries Department will provide further details and consult the industry about these changes in due course.

  Lockerbie Air Crash
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has had from Dr. Jim Swire of the Lockerbie relatives about the need for baggage reconciliation rules among airlines.
  61
  Mr. Norris
  I have been asked to reply.

  Records show that my Department has received 25 letters from Dr. Swire since the Lockerbie tragedy. In the last two years, nine of these letters related to baggage reconciliation.

TRANSPORT

  Motorways
  Mr. Simon Coombs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many miles of motorway in England are currently(a) open, (b) under construction and (c) planned.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  There are 1,664 miles of trunk road motorway and a further 28 miles of non-trunk motorway controlled by local authorities.

  Two motorway schemes are under construction—M3 Bar End to Compton and the M4 second Severn crossing. They will add seven miles to the network.

  A further 250 miles of motorway are planned, including the upgrading to motorway of the A1 from London to Newcastle.

  Car Bumpers
  Mr. Stern
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has to bring forward regulations to standardise the height of car bumpers.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  Current car designs with deep plastic bumpers allow compatibility over a wide range of heights. We have no intention to regulate for a specific height as this would be unnecessarily design restrictive. However, the International Standard Organisation recommends in IS02598 that the height for car bumper tests be 445 mm, and we are working with our European partners to ensure that truck bumpers are of a compatible height compared with car bumpers, and that car bumpers are pedestrian friendly.

  A19
  Mr. Cummings
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he intends to authorise the funding for the installation of lighting along the A19 through Peterlee; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  There are no current plans to install lighting on the Al9 through Peterlee.

  Road Accidents, Greenwich
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his answer of 9 June 1992,Official Report, columns 113–14 on road traffic accidents in Greenwich, if he will now make available comparable accident and injury statistics for 1991 and 1992.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  The table shows the number of injury accidents in Greenwich town centre in 1991, and the resulting number of casualties. Data for 1992 are not yet available.

  Year

  Injury Accidents

  Casualties

  Vehicle users

  Pedestrians

  Killed

  Injured

  Killed

  Injured

  1991

  22

  0

  16

  0

  8

  62
  Greenwich town centre is defined as the one-way system where Creek road, Romney road and Greenwich High road meet, together with the adjacent section of Greenwich High road.

  Drink Driving
  Mr. George
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what was the number of(a) deaths and (b) pedestrian injuries caused by drivers under the influence of drink in (i) the west midlands and (ii) Walsall in 1990–91 and 1991–92.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  The most recent available information relates to 1990 and is shown in the following table.

  Casualties in accidents where at least one driver is over the legal blood or breach alchohol limit

  Total deaths 1990

  Pedestrian deaths 1990

  Pedestrian injuries 1990

  West Midlands

  33

  8

  67

  Walsall

  3

  0

  8

  1 Accidents where a driver was positively breath tested or where coroners reports showed a blood alcohol level over the limit. No assumption is made of the cause of the accident.

  Salvage Industry
  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will consider measures to revive the British salvage industry; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Norris
  The salvage industry depends on the amount of salvage work available (which varies with the level of world shipping and the number of casualties requiring salvage assistance). The industry also depends on the level of the awards paid after salvage has taken place. Both of these commercial realities are largely beyond the Government's control and influence. However, by negotiating the terms of the 1989 salvage convention, which are already applied through Lloyd's open forum 1990, we have sought to allow increased awards when salvors' efforts have prevented or mitigated a major marine pollution incident.

  Aircraft Incidents
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the Civil Aviation Authority's investigations into the incidents on 7 December 1992 when a carbon aerial from an aircraft crashed into a house at Watchfield, Oxfordshire; and what compensation is available to the property owner.

  Mr. Norris
  There was no such incident on 7 December. However, at approximately 11.30 am on 25 November 1992 an object, later identified as a static wick, which discharges static electricity from the wings of aircraft, fell through the bathroom roof of a property in Watchfield, Oxfordshire. Although it caused a two inch hole in the roof no one was injured.

  On being informed, the Civil Aviation Authority initiated an investigation into the incident. Despite a thorough investigation, they were unable to identify the aircraft from which the object had fallen. Stringent design and maintenance requirements for United Kingdom aircraft ensure that incidents such as this are rare.

  63
  However, when they do occur the Civil Aviation Act 1982 clearly places the legal liability upon the aircraft operator to indemnify the third party who suffers a material loss or damage. As it has not proven possible to indentify the aircraft operator involved, the CAA cannot take the matter any further.

  Rail Timetables
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will initiate and publish a study of the procedures that would be necessary after privatisation, prior to the publication of a comprehensive all-line timetable for a future Christmas or new year holiday period, that would provide equivalent information to that contained in the supplementary timetable published by the British Railways Board.

  Mr. Freeman
  Such a study would be inappropriate. At present it is for British Rail to determine and publish timetables for the services it runs. After privatisation, RailTrack will be responsible for drawing up the timetable, and we are confident that the private sector will see a commercial opportunity in publishing it.

  Traffic Congestion
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment his Department has made of methods used in North American cities to reduce traffic congestion in urban areas.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  My Department keeps in touch with the methods used overseas, both in North America and elsewhere. Conditions overseas are not necessarily the same as in this country, and techniques—for example, the width and layout of roads—may need to be modified considerably before they can be used here.

  Ships (Safety)
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if Her Majesty's Government will now make an additional response to the second report 1991–92 from the Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology, on safety aspects of ship design and technology (HL 30–1).

  Mr. Norris
  No.

  Public Transport (Disabled Access)
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what progress he achieved during the United Kingdom presidency of the EC to make public transport accessible to disabled people across Europe; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  In December 1991 the Transport Council asked the Commission to draw up an action programme on the accessibility of transport to people with reduced mobility. This action plan was expected to be ready during the United Kingdom presidency. The Council is still awaiting this document which it will wish to consider carefully before taking further action.

  This is an area where much can and is being achieved at national and local level and my Department continues to work towards improving access to public transport for people with disabilities. A significant number of low floor, fully accessible buses will be introduced in London as a
  64
  demonstration project shortly. This will be followed later this year with a similar trial outside London with funding support from my Department.

  Helicopter Coverage Group
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make it his policy to amend the helicopter coverage group criteria to secure a speedier recommended response time to emergencies at night and in bad weather.

  Mr. Norris
  My Department has no plans to amend the existing all weather-night response time established under the helicopter coverage criteria, which continue to prove operationally acceptable, nor will they be amended under the MOD's future provision of military helicopters for search and rescue. However, under these provisions, all weather-night coverage in the west will be improved in the first half of 1996 by the re-equipping of RAF Valley with Sea King aircraft.

  Motorways
  Mr. William O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) how many schemes, including dual 14 to 16-lane motorways, are planned in(a) Yorkshire and Humberside and (b) in England;

  (2) if he will list the conurbations in England where 14 to 16-lane motorways travel through or near residential and school properties; and if he will make a statement;

  (3) how many miles of dual motorways creating a 14 to 16-lane system of traffic there are in (a) Yorkshire and Humberside and (b) in England.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  None.

  Heathrow Rail Link
  Mr. Darling
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) if he will set out the reasons for the delay in constructing the proposed rail service between Heathrow and Paddington; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) if he will make it his policy to ensure that a fast main line is built between Heathrow airport and London city centre as soon as possible.

  Mr. Freeman
  Discussions between BAA plc and British Rail about the funding of the Heathrow express project are continuing. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I met Sir John Egan and Sir Bob Reid on 10 December to review progress. I am hopeful that agreement on terms for funding the railway will be reached soon.

  Heathrow Underground Link
  Mr. Darling
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he has made an official visit on the Piccadilly line to Heathrow since April 1992.

  Mr. Norris
  No. However, I am kept fully informed of service performance on all underground lines, and I am pleased to say that the Piccadilly line has been one of the Underground's most consistently reliable lines since April 1992.

  West Coast Main Line
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what effect his plans to commercialise British Rail will have on the future development of rail services on the west coast main line; and if he will make a statement.
  65
  Mr. Freeman
  We believe that our proposals for privatising British Rail, with the operation of passenger services by private sector franchisees, will lead to an improvement of services on the west coast main line, since private sector operators should be more efficient and more responsive to passengers' wishes.

  Nuclear Fuel (Transport)
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what approaches he has had from the International Maritime Organisation in regard to stricter regulations for the carriage of irradiated nuclear fuel.

  Mr. Norris
  None. The IMO provides the machinery through which member states can develop international regulations and codes relating to maritime matters including those for the safety of life at sea and the prevention of marine pollution. These regulations are then implemented nationally by parties to the convention.

  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on his role in relation to transport of nuclear fuel by BNFL transport division and the Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation of Japan.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  The Department of Transport has to be satisfied that containers carrying such material comply with International Atomic Energy Agency standards, and that they are transported in ships complying with the Merchant Shipping (Dangerous Goods and Marine Pollutants) Regulations 1990 and international coventions and codes for safety and pollution prevention.

  Railway Crossings
  Mr. David Porter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make it his policy to examine(a) the criteria and (b) the specific railway crossings where incidents show the effectiveness of the hazard warning lights to be reduced by fog; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  A review of the safety of automatic open level crossings was carried out in 1986 by Professor P. F. Stott. His report recommended a number of improvements including revisions to the advance warning signs to reduce sign clutter, and to the backing boards of the "STOP" traffic signs to increase their conspicuity. British Rail has adopted these recommendations and is implementing them.

  Advice on driving in fog is contained in the highway code. Drivers should be driving at a speed which enables them to stop within the limits of their vision.

  Transport Organisations
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list each organisation with transportation responsibilities in London; and which of them have formal liaison arrangements with his Department.

  Mr. Norris
  The main organisations with transport responsibilities in the transport field in London are:

  British Rail

  British Waterways Board

  66

  City of London Police

  Civil Aviation Authority

  Corporation of London

  London Boroughs and their respective associations

  London Boroughs Transport Committee

  London Docklands Development Corporation

  London Planning Advisory Committee

  London Regional Passengers Committee

  London Transport

  Metropolitan Police

  Parking Committee for London

  Port of London Authority

  Traffic Commissioner for the South East and London

  Traffic Director for London

  The Department has formal liaison arrangements with all of these. It also maintains close contact with consumer groups, private sector transport operators (either directly or through their representative bodies), and with the other organisations concerned with transport in London including the south east regional planning conference, the London tourist board and the motoring organisations.

  Cars
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what range of forecasts have been made by his Department on the number of cars normally kept in Greater London in(a) 1995, (b) 2000 and (c)

  Mr. Norris
  The Department's current forecasts of the number of cars normally kept in Greater London are as follows:

  (a) in 1995, 2·57 to 2·66 million cars.

  (b) in 2000, 2·78 to 2·99 million cars.

  (c) National forecasts are produced for years up to 2025, but the local projections produced are more short-term and only cover years to 2011. The forecast for 2011 is 3.20 to 3.61 million cars.

  These are based on an estimate of 2·38 million cars in 1991.

  Road Works, London
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list each organisation which has a statutory right to carry out works on London roads.

  Mr. Norris
  No list of all such organisations is held centrally, but it would be very extensive. The main organisations with rights to carry out work on highways are the highway authorities and the utilities, such as gas, water, electricity and cable TV.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  Until recently the authority for Departments to make advances for these purposes was subject to justifying them on value for money or operational grounds.

  Three agencies of my Department—the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, the Transport Research

  67
  Laboratory and the Vehicle Certification Agency—have been prepared to consider requests. No applications have been made to date.

  Advances have not been available to staff in the remaining agencies or elsewhere in the Department.

  As a result of recent changes in the scope of the delegation my Department will be looking again at the case for making such advances.

  Abandoned Vehicles
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will allow local authorities to have direct access to computer records at the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency offices in connection with the removal of abandoned vehicles.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  Direct access to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency's computer records raised important questions of data protection and security of personal information, as well as cost. There are no plans at present to offer this service to local authorities.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is the average time taken at the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency office in Swansea to process VQ4 requests from local authorities for details of abandoned vehicles; and what is the current number of outstanding VQ4 requests.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  The average time taken by DVLA to process postal VQ4 inquiries is eight working days. Enquiries received on magnetic tape are replied to within four days. There is currently no backlog.

  Hoskins Data Services
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what level of co-operation exists between the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency offices and Hoskins Data Services.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  Hoskyns Group plc provides an agency service for a number of local authorities for enquiries to DVLA on magnetic tape. DVLA co-operates closely with Hoskyns on this service.

  Pedestrian Deaths
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what proportion of pedestrians who were killed in road crashes were above the age of 60 years in the most recent available year.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  Data for the most recent available year (1991) show that there were 1,496 pedestrian fatalities in road crashes of which 736, or 49.2 per cent., were over the age of 60.

  Transport Services, London
  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport to what extent the £270 million public spending on transport, detailed in the Chancellor of the Exchequer's autumn statement will be spent on transport services in London.

  Mr. Norris
  In his autumn statement, the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced that the Department of 68
  Transport would be spending £6.4 billion next year. Of this, £1 billion will go to London Transport. As many projects relate both to inside and outside London, it is not possible to identify exactly how much of the remaining £5·4 billion will be spent on transport services in London.

  Moss Roads
  Mr. Pickthall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will introduce an investigation into the means of correcting the deteriorating condition of moss roads in Lancashire and in other areas.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: This is a matter for the local highway authority.

  Bridge Closures, London
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he was consulted on the closures of Waterloo, Hammersmith and Battersea bridges; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Norris
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: These bridges are all on roads which have been designated under paragraph 5, schedule 5 of the Local Government Act 1985. London boroughs are required to give notice of proposals to exercise, on designated roads, certain powers under the Highways Act 1980 or the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The circumstances requiring notification are described in the 1985 Act. On 1 September 1992, the traffic director for London became responsible for dealing with designated road notifications.

  My Department received notifications relating to the closure of Battersea bridge. I understand that the traffic director for London was consulted about the proposal to close Waterloo bridge. The work on Hammersmith bridge does not require notification.

  MV Braer
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the dispersants currently stockpiled in Shetland which are available to the marine pollution control unit, but have not yet been used to disperse oil from M V Braer.

  Mr. Norris
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: The dispersants currently stockpiled by and available to the marine pollution control unit in Shetland are:

  370 tonnes Dasic LTSW

  135 tonnes Finasol

  26 tonnes Dispolene 34S

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the dispersants that have been used to date to disperse oil from the MV Braer, the quantity of each dispersant which has been used, and the date on which it was used.

  Mr. Norris
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: The dispersants used to disperse oil from the MV Braer were:

  6 January

  75 tonnes Dasic LTSW

  10 tonnes BP Encrsperse 1037

  15 tonnes Dispolene 34S

  7 January
  1 tonne Dasic LTSW

  9 January
  20 tonnes Dasic LTSW

  Salvage Tugs
  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will consider measures to encourage the building and/or provision of high-powered ocean-going salvage tugs to be on station around the coasts of the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Norris
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: The EC Commission is undertaking a comprehensive study of the availability of salvage facilities (tugs) in the North sea. We have made our contribution to that work.

  Mr. William O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what are the targets set by his Department for roadside tests of vehicles for 1992–93 and 1993–94; and if he will list the number and category of vehicles tested.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: Targets for roadworthiness checks at the roadside during 1992–93 are as follows:

  Number

  Public Service Vehicles

  23,900

  Goods Vehicles exceeding 3,500 kg design gross weight

  130,000

  Cars and Goods Vehicles not exceeding 3,500 kg design in gross weight

  72,000

  Total

  225,900

  No targets have yet been set for 1993–94, but the inspectorate is planning on the basis that enforcement levels will be similar to 1992–93 for the first two categories.

  March 1989

  March 1990

  March 1991

  March 1992

  October 1992

  Tester

  391

  370

  306

  271

  263

  Assistant Vehicle Examiner

  0

  0

  62

  86

  91

  Professional and Technical Officer1

  480

  474

  477

  465

  449

  Senior Traffic Examiner2

  —

  —

  —

  38

  31

  Traffic Examiner2

  —

  —

  —

  175

  172

  1 A limited amount of Inspection work is done by more senior management staff.

  2 Traffic Examiner grades were not part of the Vehicle Inspectorate until April 1991.

  Mr. William O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much capital has been invested in the Vehicle Inspectorate Agency in each of the past five years.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: The following capital expenditure has been invested in the Vehicle Inspectorate in fixed assets in each of the past five years.

  £000's cash

  Capital Spend

  1988–89

  2,443

  1989–90

  2,258

  1990–91

  3,476

  1992–931

  3,276

  1 Forecaste.

  Roadside Tests
  Mr. William O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many vehicles and what types have been prohibited after a roadside test in each of the last two years.
  70
  The 1992–93 target for cars and light goods vehicles was exceptionally high because of the additional work monitoring and change in testing regime for vehicles between 3,000 and 3,500 kg. So the inspectorate is planning only 55,972 checks in 1993–94. Further information on 1992–93 can be found in the inspectorate's business plan.

  Cargo Transfers
  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the current arrangements for the storage and maintenance of specialist equipment needed for the ship-to-ship transfer of cargo from vessels in distress; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Norris
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: The Department of Transport's ship-to-ship transfer equipment is currently stored by contractors at Milford Haven and is subject to regular maintenance, exercise and review. I am satisfied with these arrangements.

  Vehicle Inspectorate
  Mr. William O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many inspectors and examiners were on the payroll of the Vehicle Inspectorate Agency in each of the past five years.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: The staff numbers and grades directly involved in vehicle inspection and enforcement are as follows:

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: The numbers of vehicles prohibited by the vehicle inspectorate following roadworthiness checks at the roadside during 1990–91 and 1991–92 are as follows:

  1990–91

  1991–92

  Public Service Vehicles

  1,955

  1,744

  Goods Vehicle exceeding 3,500 kg design gross weight

  7,363

  7,628

  Goods Vehicles not exceeding 3,500 kg design gross weight

  1,141

  4,680

  Total

  10,459

  14,052

  Departmental Employees
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many employees of his Department are based in offices in Wales; which agencies or other parts of his Department they work for; and what plans he has for their continuing employment in Wales.

  Mr. Kenneth Carlisle
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: There are 4,268 employees of my Department

  71
  based in offices in Wales. Of these, 163 belong to the central Department and work in the Marine Directorate, the general register and records office of shipping and seamen, the south Wales traffic area office, internal audit and personnel management. A total of 3,312 work for the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, 102 for the Driving Standards Agency, 224 for the Vehicle Inspectorate Executive Agency and 467 for the DVOIT Agency. The level of employment in these activities depends on demand for the services concerned, and on the consequences of any privatisation, market testing or contracting out of services currently provided directly by the Department and its agencies.

  Oil Pollution
  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what emergency response plans exist in respect of possible oil pollution around the south coast of England.

  Mr. Norris
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: The Department of Transport maintains the Government's national contingency plan through the marine pollution control unit. This plan is complemented by the appropriate local authority contingency plans and port plans.

  Salvage Personnel
  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the numbers of fully trained and experienced salvage personnel in the United Kingdom to deal with future pollution incidents caused by maritime casualties.

  Mr. Norris
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: The Department of Transport maintains, under contract, response teams with specific responsibility for deploying equipment for dealing with chemical and oil tanker incidents. In addition, liaison is maintained with leading salvors and their capability. I am satisfied with these arrangements.

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

  Fisheries Inspectors
  Mr. Robathan
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many fisheries inspectors are employed by his Department.

  Mr. Curry
  The current total number of land-based British sea fisheries officers employed by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is 79, of which 68 are based in the coastal district offices and 11 in the London headquarters. A further 14 officers carry out fisheries protection duties under contract through aerial and surface surveillance operations.

  Dairy Inspection Charges
  Mr. John Marshall
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether dairy inspection charges are the same across the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Curry
  Dairy inspections are charged at the same rates in England and Wales. In Scotland and Northern Ireland, however, the enforcement regime is different and there is no charge for inspection visits.

  Horticulture
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on his promotion of the British horticultural industry during the United Kingdom Presidency of the EC.

  Mr. Curry
  We promoted our horticultural industry during the United Kingdom presidency as vigorously as ever, especially during the informal agricultural council in Cambridge. The British horticulture industry will also directly benefit from Community measures adopted under the United Kingdom presidency including the single market arrangements for plant health, bee health and the fruit and vegetable regime and the extension of the hops conversion aid scheme. In addition, the sector will have the advantage of the whole range of measures on the single market adopted during the United Kingdom presidency.

  Fishing Vessels
  Mr. Ronnie Campbell
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many men are employed on vessels of 12 m length and under; and what percentage of total employment in the fishing industry this represents.

  Mr. Curry
  This information is not available.

  EC Land (Expenditure)
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will publish expenditure figures in ecus paid by EC member states on agriculture per hectare of land in agricultural use over the past five years for which figures are available.

  Mr. Curry
  The table shows expenditure on CAP market support measures from the guarantee section of the European agricultural guidance and guarantee fund by member state.

  EAGGF guarantee expenditure per hectare by member state 1987

  1 Expenditure million ecu

  2 UAA million hectare

  3 Average ecu/per HA (1 ÷ 2)

  Belgium

  821·5

  1·406

  584·28

  Denmark

  1,058·8

  2·818

  375·73

  Germany

  3,993·0

  12·000

  332·75

  Greece

  1,341·2

  5·741

  233·62

  Spain

  604·1

  27·121

  22·27

  France

  5,662·1

  31·401

  180·31

  Ireland

  956·3

  5·676

  168·48

  Italy

  3,903·5

  17·404

  224·29

  Luxembourg

  1·5

  0·127

  11·81

  Netherlands

  2,727·8

  2·204

  1,237·66

  Portugal

  147·2

  4·532

  32·48

  United Kingdom

  1,748·8

  18·505

  94·50

  1988

  1 Expenditure million ecu

  2 UAA million hectare

  3 Average ecu/per HA (1 ÷ 2)

  Belgium

  721·5

  1·395

  517·20

  Denmark

  1,212·4

  2·815

  430·69

  Germany

  4,904·4

  11·915

  411·62

  73

  1 Expenditure million ecu

  2 UAA million hectare

  3 Average ecu/per HA (1 ÷ 2)

  Greece

  1,318·8

  5·741

  229·72

  Spain

  1,887·2

  27·110

  69·61

  France

  6,209·7

  31·354

  198·05

  Ireland

  1,081·3

  5·701

  189·67

  Italy

  4,349·7

  17·404

  249·93

  Luxembourg

  3·0

  0·127

  23·62

  Netherlands

  3,831·5

  2·019

  1,897·72

  Portugal

  157·2

  4·532

  34·69

  United Kingdom

  1,992·8

  18·510

  107·66

  1989

  1 Expenditure million ecu

  2 UAA million hectare

  3 Average ecu/per HA (1 ÷ 2)

  Belgium

  585·8

  1·395

  419·93

  Denmark

  1,015·1

  2·809

  361·37

  Germany

  4,191·7

  11·885

  352·69

  Greece

  1,650·9

  5·741

  287·56

  Spain

  1,903·2

  27·110

  70·20

  France

  4,810·5

  30·710

  156·64

  Ireland

  1,241·3

  5·697

  217·89

  Italy

  4,621·8

  17·297

  267·20

  Luxembourg

  1·8

  0·126

  14·29

  Netherlands

  3,749·9

  2·019

  1,857·31

  Portugal

  174·4

  4·532

  38·48

  United Kingdom

  1,917·0

  18·031

  106·32

  1990

  1 Expenditure million ecu

  2 UAA million hectare

  3 Average ecu/per HA (1 ÷ 2)

  Belgium

  873·7

  1·363

  641·01

  Denmark

  1,113·7

  2·809

  396·48

  Germany

  4,365·6

  11·868

  367·85

  Greece

  1,949·7

  5·741

  339·61

  Spain

  2,120·8

  27·110

  78·23

  France

  5,142·6

  30·581

  168·16

  Ireland

  1,668·5

  5·697

  292·87

  Italy

  4,157·1

  17·215

  241·48

  Luxembourg

  5·2

  0·127

  40·94

  Netherlands

  2,869·0

  2·019

  1,421·00

  Portugal

  214·2

  4·532

  47·26

  United Kingdom

  1,979·0

  18·447

  107·28

  1991

  1 Expenditure million ecu

  2 UAA million hectare

  3 Average ecu/per HA (1 ÷ 2)

  Belgium

  1,434·2

  —

  1,052·24

  Denmark

  1,200·5

  —

  427·38

  Germany

  5,201·9

  —

  438·31

  Greece

  2,178·3

  —

  379·43

  Spain

  3,269·8

  —

  120·61

  France

  6,318·3

  —

  206·61

  Ireland

  1,716·8

  —

  301·35

  Italy

  5,152·7

  —

  299·31

  Luxembourg

  2·8

  —

  22·05

  Netherlands

  2,638·5

  —

  1,306·83

  Portugal

  314·6

  —

  69·42

  United Kingdom

  2,396·3

  —

  129·90

  Sources: (1) EAGGF Guarantee Reports 1987–91.

  (2) The agricultural situation in the Community Reports
  74
  1988–91. UAA statistics not available for 1991. Average expenditure/hectare was calculated using the 1990 area.

  Note: UAA = Utilised agricultural area.

  Folic Acid
  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) what steps he is taking to ensure that daily dietary supplements of folic acid remain available under the terms of the forthcoming European directive on dietary supplements to those women who are at risk of bearing children with neural tube defects;

  (2) what assessment he has made of the impact of the forthcoming European directive on dietary supplements on the availability of those folic acid supplements which the chief medical officer's expert advisory group has recommended should be taken daily by women at risk of bearing children with neural tube defects.

  Mr. Soames
  No proposals for a directive on dietary supplements have yet been made by the Commission. However, our policy is to ensure the continued availability of safe and properly labelled products, including folic acid supplements.

  Pig Disease
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what contingency plans he has made to compensate farmers for any outbreak of Aujeszky's disease coming from free movement of pigs within the single market; and what funds he has available for this purpose.

  Mr. Soames
  Stringent safeguard controls relating to the import of pigs have been negotiated. If, in spite of these, there is an outbreak of Aujeszky's disease, legislative powers remain to reactivate the levy.

  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he expects the directors of the Pig Disease Eradication Fund Ltd. to comply with his request to make available to his Ministry remaining funds in its account; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Soames
  Our officials are discussing this matter with industry representatives.

  Rabbits
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received from organisations representing rabbit breeders on myxomatosis vaccine.

  Mr. Soames
  A number of representations have been received from organisations representing rabbit breeders, and from individuals owning rabbits, expressing concern that no myxomatosis vaccine is currently available in the United Kingdom. I share this concern and can confirm that applications to licence such vaccines, including one received recently, will be assessed as rapidly as possible.

  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether suitable vaccines can be imported for myxomatosis and viral haemorrhagic disease in rabbits; and what steps his Department has taken to assist in making such vaccines available to vets.
  75
  Mr. Soames
  No veterinary vaccine may be imported into or marketed in the United Kingdom without a product licence. The veterinary medicines directorate will assess any applications for such licences for myxomatosis or viral haemorrhagic disease vaccines as rapidly as possible.

  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will establish a fund to compensate owners for loss or damage to domestic and show rabbits as a consequence of myxomatosis.

  Mr. Soames
  It is not Government policy to offer compensation in such circumstances.

  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Faversham (Sir R. Moate) of 8 June 1992,Official Report, column 15, if he will make a statement on the current position on myxomatosis vaccine.

  Mr. Soames
  No myxomatosis vaccine is currently licensed in the United Kingdom. However, the veterinary medicines directorate has recently received from Intervet (UK) Ltd. an application to licence such a vaccine. The data supporting the applications are being assessed as rapidly as possible against the standard Medicines Act criteria of safety, quality and efficacy.

  Badgers
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will ensure that no licence is given to allow hunts to enter dogs into badger setts during the breeding period of December to June.

  Mr. Soames
  The badgers' breeding season is one of the factors which will be taken into account when considering an application to interfere with a badger sett. However, each application will be considered on its merits.

  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is his proposed budget for badger culling and live tests in 1993–94.

  Mr. Soames
  The adoption of the live test as part of this Department's badger control strategy is currently under consideration. However, provisional estimates indicate that the direct running costs of a pre-emptive strategy based on such a test could be approximately £900,000 in 1993–94.

  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to ensure lactating badgers are not kept from their cubs when caught in live traps for the proposed bovine TB brocktest.

  Mr. Soames
  Written instructions are provided to field staff on the operation of the current badger control strategy. Staff must visit traps as early as possible in the day following the night of capture and sows showing signs of being recently suckled must be marked and released.

  No decision has yet been made about the introducing of a new strategy based on a live test.

  Hens
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the most recent report his Department has produced on the efficiency of methods 76
  used for the automated slaughter of hens; and whether each method meets the standards laid down by the Farm Animal Welfare Council.

  Mr. Soames
  There is no specific report on the efficiency of methods used for the automated slaughter of hens, but the Ministry's veterinary officers regularly monitor the welfare conditions of poultry at slaughter, including the methods used for the automated slaughter of hens. Automated slaughtering methods appear to be working effectively and any problems detected are dealt with speedily. The welfare of poultry at slaughter is covered by primary and secondary legislation and a statutory code of practice. A list of these, and details of implementation of the Farm Animal Welfare Council's recommendations on the subject, is in the Library of the House.

  Bovine Tuberculosis
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many cattle were infected with bovine tuberculosis for the last five years in each affected county.

  Mr. Soames
  The numbers of confirmed cattle tuberculosis breakdowns in each affected county in England and Wales for the years 1988–91 were as follows:

  Year(s) in which cases occurred

  Number of herds

  Number of confirmed reactors

  England

  Avon

  1988

  8

  42

  1989

  10

  49

  1990

  9

  10

  1991

  17

  23

  Bedfordshire

  1988

  1

  1

  1990

  1

  1

  Cheshire

  1991

  1

  2

  Cornwall

  1988

  18

  42

  1989

  45

  110

  1990

  33

  50

  1991

  47

  107

  Derbyshire

  1988

  6

  7

  1989

  2

  3

  Devon

  1988

  17

  33

  1989

  12

  22

  1990

  19

  35

  1991

  10

  19

  Dorset

  1988

  6

  8

  1989

  5

  5

  1990

  4

  6

  1991

  4

  10

  Gloucestershire

  1988

  11

  33

  1989

  13

  31

  1990

  15

  22

  1991

  36

  47

  Hampshire

  1989

  1

  1

  1991

  1

  1

  Lancashire

  1990

  1

  1

  Leicestershire

  1989

  1

  1

  Lincolnshire

  1989

  1

  2

  Northamptonshire

  1990

  1

  1

  77

  Year(s) in which cases occurred

  Number of herds

  Number of confirmed reactors

  Northumberland

  1988

  1

  1

  1989

  1

  1

  1990

  2

  2

  Nottinghamshire

  1988

  1

  1

  Shropshire

  1990

  1

  1

  1991

  1

  1

  Somerset

  1988

  2

  2

  Suffolk

  1989

  1

  3

  Surrey

  1991

  1

  1

  Sussex East

  1989

  1

  5

  1991

  2

  2

  Sussex West

  1989

  1

  12

  1991

  1

  1

  Warwickshire

  1991

  1

  1

  Wiltshire

  1988

  7

  8

  1989

  4

  4

  1990

  5

  5

  1991

  3

  7

  Yorkshire North

  1991

  2

  2

  Yorkshire South

  1989

  1

  1

  1991

  1

  1

  Year(s) in which cases occurred

  Number of herds

  Number of confirmed reactors

  Wales:

  Clwyd

  1989

  1

  1

  Dyfed

  1988

  12

  16

  1989

  5

  9

  1990

  8

  21

  1991

  3

  4

  West Glamorgan

  1988

  1

  1

  Gwent

  1989

  1

  4

  Powys

  1989

  1

  1

  The total numbers of confirmed cattle tuberculosis breakdowns in each affected county in Scotland in the years 1988 to 1991 were as follows:

  Number of herds

  Number of confirmed reactors

  Scotland:

  Aberdecnshire

  7

  12

  Argyll

  1

  1

  Ayrshire

  7

  9

  Berwickshire

  1

  1

  Inverness-shire

  1

  1

  Kircudbright

  3

  4

  Midlothian

  1

  1

  Wigtown

  4

  5

  Roxburgh

  1

  1

  Shetland

  1

  1

  78
  Complete figures for 1992 in the form requested are not yet available. However, the numbers of confirmed cattle tuberculosis breakdowns in the first nine months of 1992 in each administrative region were as follows:

  Number of herds

  Number of confirmed reactors

  South Eastern

  0

  0

  Eastern

  0

  0

  Northern

  6

  6

  South Western

  104

  364

  Midlands and West

  3

  5

  Wales

  10

  39

  Scotland

  2

  3

  Genetically Modified Organisms
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many and what forms of genetically modified organisms have currently been(a) approved for use in the United Kingdom and (b) pending approval for use in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Soames
  All genetically modified organisms are subject, in addition to general controls on genetic modification, to any specific legislation controlling the uses for which they are intended. My Department is responsible for giving approval—whether statutory or not—for the use of a number of commodities, which may contain or consist of genetically modified organisms, notably:

  veterinary medicines

  agricultural pesticides

  novel foods

  crop varieties.

  Statutory approval has been given for seven vaccines for use in treating pigs, and non-statutory clearance for the food use of a genetically modified yeast. Approval has been sought for marketing, throughout the EC, four genetically modified chrysanthemum varieties, and an application for non-statutory clearance for the use in this country of a further yeast has also been received.

  In addition, one experimental permit for a genetically modified pesticidal virus has been issued and a further permit has been applied for.

  Until 1 February, general control over the use of genetically modified organisms lies with my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Employment.

  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will set up an ethical committee to examine proposals for genetically modified animals with the power to examine proposals before they are submitted for patent, and to control the importation and use of any such animal, or product derived for any such animal developed outside the United Kingdom and the EC; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Soames
  I refer the hon. Member to my answer to him on 11 January at column 622. I do not propose to anticipate any advice that we may receive from that ethical committee, whose work will cover genetically modified animals as well as other animals bred by advanced techniques.

  Habitats
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what preparations his Department is making in terms of the impact of the EC habitats directive and its effect on agriculture in this country; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Soames
  While the implementation of the EC habitats directive is primarily a matter for the Secretary of State for the Environment, the consultations between our Departments will ensure that the implications for agriculture are taken into account. There will be full public consultation on the Government's proposals.

  Hill Livestock Compensatory Allowances
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the hill livestock compensatory allowance rates in cash terms and real terms in each year since 1982.

  Mr. Curry
  The information requested is contained at tables 16 and 17 of the statistical data prepared for the 1992 "Autumn Review of the Economic Conditions in the Hills and Uplands", a copy of which is in the Library of the House.

  Dr. Strang
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many producers are entitled to

  Hectares (million)

  Percentage of English land area

  1 Number of farms in less favoured areas

  All less favoured areas

  1·805

  14

  21,300

  Of which:

  Severely disadvantage

  1·405

  11

  14,500

  Disadvantaged

  0·401

  3

  6,800

  1 In whole or in part (main holdings June 1991).

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in his Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if he will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of his Department; what plans he has to change the conditions; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Curry
  The Department and agencies offer advances of salary of £50-£100 to permanent, non-industrial staff in executive officer or equivalent grades and below, for the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel. One application is permitted every five years.

  Potatoes
  Dr. Strang
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he considered comments made to him in response to the consultation letter from his Department of 26 November 1992 on potatoes which arrived at his Department after the deadline of 7 December 1992.

  Mr. Gummer
  Yes. We are considering all replies received to date.
  80
  hill livestock compensatory allowances in England; and what proportion of those are located in (a) severely disadvantaged and (b) disadvantaged areas.

  Mr. Gummer
  Some 15,000 producers in England are currently entitled to claim hill livestock compensatory allowances; of these about 11,000 are in the severely disadvantaged area and 4,000 in the disadvantaged area.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the number and proportion of farmers in England who receive hill livestock compensatory allowance payments.

  Mr. Curry
  Around 15,000 farmers in England receive payments under the hill livestock compensatory allowances scheme representing about 11 per cent. of the total number of farmers in England.

  Farm Land
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what hectarage of land in England is in(a) less favoured areas, (b) severely disadvantaged areas and (c) disadvantaged areas; what proportion of land in England each figure represents; and how many farmers are involved.

  Mr. Curry
  The figures requested are as follows:

  Dr. Strang
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many of the responses to the consultation letter of 26 November 1992 concerning an EC potato regime were supportive of the principle behind the present potato marketing scheme establishing both high quality standards and a stable market for potatoes as being more appropriate than the proposals set out in Com(92) 185 final.

  Mr. Gummer
  Eight.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received from interested parties about the proposed changes in the Potato Marketing Board aid scheme; and how many have supported the proposals to abolish the Potato Marketing Board aid scheme.

  Mr. Curry
  Since the publication of the proposals for an EC potato regime which as drafted do not make provision for the area (quota) controls and support buying arrangements of our potato marketing scheme, we have received a number of representations, mainly from growers or their representatives, the majority of which are in support of the continuation of the scheme.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list those outstanding recommendations contained in any of the reviews of the
  81
  Potato Marketing Board aid scheme conducted by Government over the past 10 years which have yet to be fully implemented.

  Mr. Curry
  Following the 1988 review of the potato marketing scheme the Government announced their intention to abolish the guarantee arrangements as soon as parliamentary time permitted. The Agriculture Bill currently in another place contains the necessary provisions. All other recommendations have already been implemented.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to ensure that potato producers in the United Kingdom will be competing fairly with EC competitors in other member states under the regulations provided for in the proposed draft EC potato scheme; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Curry
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 12 January 1993 to the hon. Member for Lancashire, West (Mr. Pickthall) at column 721.

  Fish Merchants
  Mr. David Porter
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to assist with grants those small business fish merchants who are now required to pay just below £30,000 to bring handling facilities up to the hygiene standards now demanded; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Curry
  EC grants were, until recently, available under regulation 4042/89 to investments involving the marketing and processing of fisheries and aquaculture produce. This scheme was aimed at fish processors and projects involving the upgrading of hygiene standards were eligible. However, the limited EC funding available to it meant that competition for grants was intense and not all eligible projects could be warded aid. The scheme closed to applications in the United Kingdom on 31 December 1992. Proposals to replace it are to be considered by the EC as part of the general review of its structural funds this year.

  Sales through MMB schemes in the United Kingdom (million litres):

  Consumption (million litres, product volume)2

  for liquid consumption

  for manufacture

  Total1

  Whole Milk

  Semi Skimmed Milk

  Skimmed Milk

  1974

  7,698

  5,399

  13,098

  —

  —

  —

  1975

  7,862

  5,270

  13,133

  —

  —

  —

  1976

  7,760

  5,858

  13,618

  —

  —

  —

  1977

  7,484

  6,921

  14,406

  —

  —

  —

  1978

  7,381

  7,713

  15,094

  —

  —

  —

  1979

  7,305

  7,811

  15,116

  —

  —

  —

  1980

  7,196

  7,986

  15,182

  —

  —

  —

  1981

  7,093

  7,982

  15,084

  —

  —

  —

  1982

  7,001

  8,928

  15,942

  6,815

  102

  74

  1983

  6,977

  9,450

  16,442

  6,689

  149

  123

  1984

  6,958

  8,473

  15,446

  6,395

  366

  151

  1985

  6,898

  8,350

  15,263

  6,135

  500

  206

  1986

  6,851

  8,597

  15,460

  5,598

  747

  412

  1987

  6,816

  7,800

  14,630

  5,371

  900

  436

  1988

  6,792

  7,426

  14,231

  5,131

  989

  547

  1989

  6,793

  7,146

  13,951

  4,804

  1,250

  603

  1990

  6,780

  7,403

  14,194

  4,481

  1,524

  644

  1991

  6,745

  6,901

  13,655

  4,127

  1,802

  709

  1992(p)

  6,736

  6,797

  13,543

  n.a.

  n.a.

  n.a.

  Wool
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will consider introducing a fall-back system of support available to low volume producers to enable higher returns than farmgate prices to be paid for wool to ensure the national flock is clipped annually.

  Mr. Curry
  No.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what recent representations he has received from integrated parties about the proposal to terminate the guaranteed price for wool; and how many supported the proposed change.

  Mr. Curry
  I have received a small number of representations to the effect that the wool guarantee should be retained.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will estimate the cost to United Kingdom sheep producers of the proposal to terminate the guaranteed price for wool; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Curry
  The wool guarantee is intended to operate as a means of price stabilisation, not continuous support. However, there will be some short term impact on producers' returns, of the order of £26 million in relation to the 1993 clip. Total direct subsidies payable to sheep farmers in respect of 1992 are estimated to amount to about £480 million.

  Milk
  Dr. Strang
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will publish figures for the annual consumption of whole and low fat liquid milks since 1974, and figures for the total quantity of milk going for liquid sales and manufacture in each year.

  Mr. Gummer
  The following table gives the annual volume of sales for liquid consumption and for manufacture through MMB schemes in the United Kingdom since 1974. The sales for liquid consumption of whole milk, semi skimmed milk and skimmed milk are then combined with the net volume of trade in each to provide estimates of consumption. Consumption estimates on a comparable basis are not readily available for the years 1974 to 1981.
  83
  Note: 1 The total sales figures for years from 1981 do not equal the sum of sales for liquid consumption and for manufacture as the measurement of sales is adjusted for waste in transit.

  2 Data not readily available for years 1974–1981.

  (p) = Provisional.

  n.a.= not available.

  Farm Incomes
  Dr. Strang
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will publish figures of average farm incomes for all farms and mostly sheep farms, distinguishing between severely disadvantaged and disadvantaged areas, for the most recent available year.

  Mr. Gummer
  Details of farm incomes in 1990–91 for all types of farm are contained at table 4.2 in "Farm Incomes in the United Kingdom" (1992 edition). Details of incomes for sheep farms during 1990–91 and the two subsequent years in the less favoured areas are contained in table 21 of the statistical data prepared for the 1992 autumn review of the economic conditions in the hills and uplands. Copies of both the sources referred to are in the Library of the House.

HEALTH

  Management Consultants
  Mr. George
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much has been spent by the West Midlands regional health authority on the services of management consultants in 1990, 1991 and 1992, respectively.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Decisions to employ management consultants are matters for individual health authorities and details of any expenditure incurred are not separately identifiable in their annual accounts or otherwise collected centrally.

  Hospital Admissions
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment has been made of(a) the number of hospital admissions postponed or denied by the yellow warning issued by the London emergency bed service at 3 pm on 7 January and (b) the extent of the related increased demand for emergency admissions.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the reasons why hospitals in various health districts in the North East Thames region were unable to cope with demand for treatment at the beginning of the year and so issued a yellow warning; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  The yellow alert issued recently by the London emergency bed service was occasioned by an unexpectedly sharp rise in demand for emergency admissions to hospitals in north and east London and in west Essex. The yellow alert affected 11 hospitals which were thereby encouraged to take appropriate action on elective admissions to make room for the increased emergency admissions that were mostly occurring outside London. No patient requiring urgent treatment has had that treatment cancelled. Careful and flexible bed management and proper planning of elective workload levels helps hospitals to manage unexpected demands for their services while minimising disruption of elective work.
  84
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the statistical basis she is using to evaluate the impact of the implementation of the proposals of the Tomlinson report on the mechanism of the London emergency bed service, stating the current proportion of beds within the area of the service kept vacant for emergency admissions.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The emergency bed service and its status reports on the availability of emergency beds are for use when there are unexpected demands. The Tomlinson report does not recommend any change in this system.

  Nicotine Patches
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment has been made by her Department of the safety of nicotine patches; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The Licensing Authority and its advisory body the Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM), in assessing applications for product licences for nicotine patches, considered all the available evidence which included clinical trials; data from usage in other countries published or unpublished, whether or not favourable to the drug. The CSM has to be satisfied that the drug is safe and efficacious for the indication proposed, in this case treatment of nicotine withdrawal symptoms associated with smoking cessation in nicotine dependant persons, and that it is of good quality. These are the only criteria which can be considered under the Medicines Act.

  Ritodrine
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment her Department has made of the drug ritodrine; what guidance she has issued on its use; and what plans she has to review its usage.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The Committee on Safety of Medicines has recently conducted a full investigation into the safety and efficacy of ritodrine. This review was prompted by a publication in the medical literature which expressed concern about the risks and benefits of ritodrine and by two recent deaths in the United Kingdom following treatment with the drug. The committee concluded that the drug was effective and safe when administered correctly. They recommended a number of changes to the prescribing information which are currently being implemented. The manufacturer of ritodrine has written to all doctors emphasising the measures which should be adopted to ensure that the drug is administered safely. As with all medicines licensed for use in the United Kingdom, the safety of ritodrine is being kept under constant review by the Medicines Control Agency.

  Intensive Therapy Units
  Sir Patrick McNair-Wilson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the number and location of the intensive therapy units in England and Wales; and how many organ donors have arisen in each during the past 12 months.
  85
  Mr. Sackville
  Not all intensive therapy units in England and Wales can be identified from information collected centrally. According to information provided by the United Kingdom Transplant Support Service Authority (UKTSSA) organs were retrieved from 732 donors in 216 units in England and Wales in 1992. The table gives the regional distribution:

  Region

  Number of Units

  Number of Donors

  Northern

  15

  51

  Yorkshire

  9

  59

  Trent

  16

  67

  East Anglian

  10

  33

  North West Thames

  13

  32

  North East Thames

  20

  55

  South East and South West Thames

  34

  110

  Wessex

  10

  34

  Oxford

  10

  38

  South Western

  12

  48

  West Midlands

  22

  70

  Mersey

  14

  37

  North Western

  18

  61

  Wales

  13

  37

  Reports from UKTSSA showing the names of all these units, the number of donors in each of them and the names of all hospitals that have retrieved organs during the past ten years have been placed in the Library.

  West Midlands Regional Health Authority
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the findings of Sir Roy Griffiths in relation to the operation of the West Midlands regional health authority.

  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make public the reports she has received from Sir Roy Griffiths in respect of the West Midlands regional health authority.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Sir Roy Griffiths was asked to work with West Midlands regional health authority in looking at its management systems to enable the authority to discharge its functions more effectively in the future. Sir Roy has been keeping the Department and region in touch with progress and a number of changes have now been made. As indicated at the outset there are no plans for a formal report on his work to be published.

  Mr. Purchase
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the actions of Sir James Ackers, former chair of the West Midlands regional health authority, in respect of financial losses to the health services in the west midlands; and when she proposes to make good these losses.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Sir James Ackers was chairman of West Midlands regional health authority for over 10 years, during which time many excellent developments in health care took place. Recently, the region has faced a number of difficulties arising from management of its regionally managed services. When Sir James became aware of the problems he instigated remedial action, including changes in managerial structures, lines of accountability, the limits of authority and the standing and financial orders together with a number of senior management changes. Management of the West Midlands regional health authority and the provision of health services for the 86
  people of the west midlands is the responsibility of the regional health authority. Allocation and use of resources to meet these objectives are therefore matters for them.

  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will order the publication of the report by the district auditor into the West Midlands regional health authority currently in the hands of senior management of that authority.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The district auditor's report on the West Midlands supplies division was published on 10 September 1992. No other reports are currently complete.

  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what financial settlement was made in respect of the resignation of Sir James Ackers as chair of the West Midlands regional health authority.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  No decision has been made.

  Family Health Service Authorities
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has for reorganising the family health service authorities; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Circular EL(92)47, priorities and planning guidance 1993/94, copies of which are available in the Library, sets out the Government's position on the organisation of family health service authorities. It stales that"the full benefits of current arrangements have yet to be realised".
  We believe that FHSAs have a major role to play in the further development of primary care.

  Doncaster Health Services
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will dismiss those of her appointees to the Doncaster healthcare trust who neither reside nor work in south Yorkshire.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  No.

  Health Authority Appointments
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health who is consulted when candidates for appointment as chairman or non-executive directors of health authorities are selected; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Mawhinney
  Nominations for appointment as chairmen of district health authorities are made by regional health authority chairmen, and I make the appointments on behalf of the Secretary of State. The appointment of non-executive members of district health authorities is the responsibility of the regional health authority chairmen. There is no requirement to consult anyone in making such appointments. However, in making these public appointments I take into account local views, including those of hon. Members.

  European Year of the Elderly
  Mrs. Gorman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what measures she is taking in connection with the European year of the elderly.

  Mr. Yeo
  The Department, in co-operation with the Department of Social Security, has overall co-ordinating
  87
  responsibility for the European Year of Older People and Solidarity between Generations in the United Kingdom and we are now well advanced with our plans. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health launched the Year in the United Kingdom at the age resource awards, which were presented in London on 17 December 1992 by HRH The Prince of Wales.

  Following consultation with a wide range of national voluntary and professional bodies, statutory authorities and other relevant Government Departments, we have set up a group to advise on the conduct, promotion and evaluation of the programme of events to celebrate the year. The group involves representatives of organisations reflecting the interests of older people, including the National Pensioners' Convention, and will take direct account wherever possible of the views and preferences of older people themselves. The programme in the United Kingdom will focus on four major themes:
  Combating "ageism" and promoting positive images of ageing;
  Volunteering;
  Health promotion and active leisure, including remaining mentally active;
  Social integration, including problems of isolation and loneliness, information needs, housing, transport and community care issues.

  Four task groups have also been set up to examine each of these themes and put forward specific proposals.

  There will he two elements to the year in the United Kingdom: a core programme involving national events focusing on the four themes, including cultural and sporting events, exhibitions and conferences; and a general programme, consisting of activities organised by individual groups and voluntary bodies.

  The Department has committed £81,000 in the current financial year for the costs of a secretariat—based at Age Concern England headquarters—to co-ordinate the core programme and to disseminate news and information.

  Midwives
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what plans she has to review the current clinical grading system for midwives; and if she will make a statement;

  (2) if she will establish an expert committee to review the pay conditions and grading structures for midwives in the NHS; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  We have no plans to review the current clinical grading system for midwives. These are matters for the Nursing and Midwifery Staffs Negotiating Council.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations she has had recently regarding the pay and conditions of midwives working within the NHS.

  Mr. Sackville
  We receive representations periodically about pay and conditions from a variety of sources including midwives and their representative organisations.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what response the Government made to the recommendations by the House of Commons Select Committee on the changes needed in the clinical grading and pay structure for midwives.

  Mr. Sackville
  The Health Committee did not make any specific recommendations about clinical grading and the pay structure of midwives.

  Alcohol and Drugs
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list the establishments in England which provide residential facilities for(a) those with alcohol problems and (b) those with drug problems; if he will show for each establishment (i) the capital grant and (ii) the total revenue grant provided by his Department in each of the last five years; and if he will provide estimated figures for 1992–93 and 1993–94.

  Mr. Yeo
  Information on residential and non residential facilities for drug misusers is available in the SCODA directory and for alcohol misusers in the Alcohol Concern directory, copies of which are in the Library. Funding for drug and alcohol projects are provided directly and indirectly by the Department from a number of sources. In part grants are from small centrally administered budgets such as the specific grant for alcohol and drug misusers. Other funds are provided locally by health authorities, either from money specifically allocated to them for drug misuse services, which totals £20 million in 1992–93, or from their general allocations. Details of projects funded from all these sources could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Killingbeck Hospital
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if she will make a statement on the discussions between her Department and Yorkshire regional health authority about the decision to transfer the management of Killingbeck hospital to the United Leeds Teaching hospital trust;

  (2) what assessment she made of the process of consultation between the Yorkshire regional health authority and (a) Leeds community health council, (b) employees of Killingbeck hospital and (c) local hon. Members before the decision was announced to transfer the management of Killingbeck hospital to the United Leeds Teaching hospital trust; and if she will make a statement;

  (3) if she will make a statement on the future management of Killingbeck hospital in Leeds.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  I will write to the hon. Member with full details.

  Interleukin-6
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) whether she will set out the cost to the United Leeds Teaching Hospital Trust of the further investigation currently being undertaken by Coopers and Lybrand into the Interleukin—6 research project; and if she will make a statement.

  (2) whether her Department will instruct the United Leeds Teaching Hospital Trust to publish the Coopers and Lybrand report on the cost of the Interleukin-6 research project; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  I understand that the investigations by Coopers and Lybrand into the Interleukin-6 research project on behalf of the United Leeds teaching hospitals national health service trust are not yet complete. The costs of any investigation and decisions about publication of any report will be matters for the trust.

  Civil Servants (Bicycles)
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement on the current conditions on which civil servants in her Department are granted salary advances to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel; if she will make a statement on the current conditions in each agency of her Department; what plans she has to change the conditions; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  All permanent staff with at least two months' service in the Department of Health and its agencies are able to apply for an advance of salary to enable the purchase of bicycles for home-to-office travel. The maximum advance for purchase of a bicycle is £100. This provision was introduced in the Department in June 1992. We have no immediate plans to change these conditions.

  Birth Defects
  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health, (1) pursuant to her answer of 17 December 1992,Official Report, column 420, what steps she is taking to ensure that women at risk of bearing children with neural tube defects are aware of the benefits which would accrue from taking a daily dietary supplement of folic acid;

  (2) when the potential benefits of dietary supplementation with folic acid by women at risk of bearing children with neural tube defects were first drawn to her or her predecessor's attention.

  Mr. Sackville
  It was not until July 1991, when the first results of a Medical Research Council study were published, that it was concluded that a daily dietary supplement of folic acid could significantly reduce the risk of recurrence of neural tube defects.

  Guidance was issued at once to doctors, senior nurses, midwives and health visitors. The subsequent 1992 report of the Chief Medical Officer's Expert Advisory Group endorsed the earlier guidance and extended it to include also women with no history of neural tube defects. There has been widespread publicity and action is in hand to ensure the public are fully aware of this important advice.

  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to her answer of 17 December 1992,Official Report, column 420, whether she will consider claims for ex gratia payments from those women who may have delivered or who have had aborted babies suffering from neural tube defects, and who had been given placebos in earlier studies involving folic acid supplementation.

  Mr. Sackville
  We do not consider that it would be appropriate to make payments to women for not being given a treatment which at the time was unproven.

  Abortion
  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information she has concerning the average cost of a national health service abortion performed(a) in a national health service hospital and (b) in a private clinic under agency arrangements.

  Mr. Sackville
  The estimated average cost of a surgical abortion in a national health service hospital is £270 for a90
  straightforward in-patient case and 140 for a day case (at 1990–91 figures). Some two thirds of abortions performed in national health service hospitals are carried out on a day case basis (i.e. the patient does not stay overnight). No information is held centrally about the cost of abortions performed in the private sector under agency arrangements.

  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what has been the total number of abortions performed under the terms of the Abortion Act 1967; how many of these were performed in national health service hospitals; and what was the total estimated cost at current prices;

  (2) how many of the total number of abortions so far performed under the Abortion Act 1967 were performed in private clinics under national health service agency arrangements; and what was the total cost of those abortions at current prices.

  Mr. Sackville
  Of the 3,546,681 abortions performed in England and Wales since the Abortion Act 1967 came into effect, and up to 31 December 1991, 1,387,829 were performed in national health service hospitals. Since 1981, when information was first collected about agency arrangements between NHS authorities and the private sector, a total of 74,680 abortions have been so provided. The total cost of these is not known centrally. Information is not available centrally to enable the total cost of all abortions to be estimated.

  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information she has concerning the average cost to patients of abortions performed in private abortion clinics; and how many such abortions in total have now been performed under the provisions of the Abortion Act 1967.

  Mr. Sackville
  The total number of abortions performed in private abortion clinics and hospitals under the Abortion Act 1967 since it came into effect, and up to 31 December 1991, is 2,158,852. We do not collect centrally information about fees charged by all private clinics.

  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will indicate, without revealing the names of the doctors concerned, how many and what percentage of all abortions on babies of 18 or more weeks gestation in the latest year for which figures are available were carried out by each of the 10 doctors who have performed the greatest number of such abortions.

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is available only from the abortion notification forms submitted to the Chief Medical Officer under regulation 4 of the Abortion Regulations 1991, and cannot be disclosed because of restrictions set out in regulation 5.

  Hospitals, Birmingham
  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health on what dates in the last six months she visited hospitals in Birmingham; and if she will give details of her visits.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has not visited any hospitals in Birmingham in the last six months. However, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State—my hon. Friend the Member for
  91
  Bolton, West (Mr. Sackville)—and I have visited hospitals in and around Birmingham on a number of occasions since July.

  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she expects to make a decision regarding the proposal from the West Midlands regional health authority to close the accident and royal orthopaedic hospitals in Birmingham.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  My right hon. Friend has received proposals from the regional health authority to close the Accident and Royal Orthopaedic hospitals and transfer the services to the Birmingham general hospital. An announcement will be made once the consideration of the proposal is complete.

  Philip Lyndon
  Mrs. Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what has been the total cost so far to the Yorkshire health authority of the Philip Lyndon inquiry including the costs of his suspension.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  This information is not available centrally. The hon. Member may wish to contact Sir Bryan Askew, the chairman of Yorkshire regional health authority for details.

  Medical Treatment Abroad
  Mrs. Jane Kennedy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assistance is available for parents whose children contract a medical condition, treatment for which cannot be obtained in the United Kingdom, to receive treatment in(a) another EC country, (b) the United States of America, (c) Japan and (d) any other country.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  There are no general powers under national health service legislation allowing purchase of treatment outside the EC for patients resident in England. There are powers under EC legislation for individual patients to be referred elsewhere in the Community for treatment with the prior authorisation of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.

  Capital Programmes
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether, in granting approvals in to the capital programmes of NHS trusts, it is her policy to act in accordance with the previous outline capital programmes of regional health authorities or any undertakings regional health authorities may have given relating thereto.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  With the introduction of capital charges all capital developments, whether in trusts or directly managed units, have revenue consequences for purchasers. The national health service management executive requires all new capital developments to be supported by a business case which demonstrates that the scheme meets purchaser requirements, has their support, and can be afforded by them. Schemes in regional health authorities previous outline programmes are subject to these criteria in the same way that any new proposals are. The NHS management executive's outposts are responsible for recommending major capital schemes for inclusion in trust capital programmes and work closely with regional health authorities in drawing up their proposals.

  Merseyside Regional Health Authority
  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will establish an independent inquiry into the Merseyside regional health authority.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  We have no plans to do so.

  Ambulance Service
  Mr. McCartney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what was the percentage of ambulances in each service in England that responded within(a) eight minutes and (b) 14 to 20 minutes to emergency calls in 1991–92.

  Mr. Sackville
  The available information is in the table. In 1991–92 ambulance authorities had the option to return information on either the basis of emergency telephone calls received or of emergency patient journeys, with consequent variation in the basis of calculation. It is not considered that this has any significant impact on comparisons. The data are provisional.

  Emergency calls: Non-metropolitan authorities 1991–92

  Ambulance authority

  Response within 8 minutes per cent.

  Response within 19 minutes per cent.

  Cleveland1

  70

  94

  Cumbria1

  53

  87

  Durham

  254

  396

  Humberside1

  73

  99

  North Yorkshire1

  61

  96

  Derbyshire

  50

  397

  Leicestershire1

  52

  96

  Lincolnshire NHS Trust

  65

  396

  Nottinghamshire

  258

  397

  Cambridgeshire1

  38

  84

  Norfolk NHS Trust

  55

  91

  Suffolk

  253

  391

  Bedfordshire1

  57

  95

  Hertfordshire1

  62

  96

  Essex

  55

  96

  East Sussex1

  67

  98

  Kent1

  59

  96

  Surrey

  250

  391

  West Sussex1

  64

  97

  Dorset1

  61

  97

  Hampshire1

  55

  97

  Wiltshire1

  62

  96

  Isle of Wight1

  58

  99

  Berkshire1

  51

  93

  Buckinghamshire

  258

  396

  Northamptonshire

  267

  398

  Oxfordshire

  251

  392

  Avon1

  59

  99

  Cornwall NHS Trust

  244

  392

  Devon1

  57

  94

  Gloucestershire1

  55

  94

  Somerset1

  55

  91

  Hereford and Worcester1

  56

  97

  Shropshire

  49

  393

  Staffordshire

  257

  399

  Warwickshire1

  54

  94

  Cheshire1

  57

  90

  Lancashire

  67

  399

  1 Return based on number of emergency patient journeys.

  2 Response within 7 minutes.

  3 Response within 20 minutes.

  93

  Emergency calls: Metropolitan authorities 1991–92

  Ambulance authority

  Response within eight minutes Percentage

  Response within 14 minutes Percentage

  Northumbria Metropolitan NHS trust1

  59

  97

  West Yorkshire Metropolitan

  34

  83

  South Yorkshire Metropolitan1

  229

  76

  London Ambulance Service1

  15

  64

  West Midlands Metropolitan1

  72

  92

  Mersey Metropolitan1

  66

  94

  Greater Manchester Metropolitan

  259

  97

  1 Return based on number of emergency patient journeys.

  2 Response within seven minutes.

  Mr. McCartney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what was the number of ambulance staff in England employed by the NHS in 991, using whole-time equivalents.

  Mr. Sackville
  As at 30 September 1991, there were some 18,190 whole-time equivalent ambulance staff employed by the national health service (including those in NHS trusts).

  Engagements
  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list her engagements for 4, 5 and 6 December 1992.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  My official engagements were as follows:Friday 4 December: Meeting with Departmental officials and attendance at the Service for the Citizen Conference at the QEII conference centre.
  Saturday 5 December: Meeting with the Guildford and Godalming Branch of National Asthma Campaign.

  Domiciliary Services
  Mr. Terry Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many health visitors and district nurses providing domiciliary services to elderly people were employed in England on the most recent date for which this information is available.

  Mr. Sackville
  The Department collects information about the numbers of health visitors and district nurses, but data on their type of work (e.g. domiciliary services to elderly people) is not separately identifiable.

  Community Care
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what arrangements are being made to monitor the community care policy from April.

  Mr. Yeo
  We are currently considering how best to do this.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the assessment of the community care needs of London boroughs in 1993–94.

  Mr. Yeo
  Standard spending assessments provide the Government's view of appropriate expenditure. Within each SSA there are components for adult social services. Authorities also have available the special transitional grant for community care and other relevant specific 94
  grants. However, it is for each authority to decide within its available resources how much it is appropriate to spend in the light of their own judgments.

  Varicose Veins
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many varicose veni surgical operations are undertaken by the national health service annually for males under 40 years of age.

  Mr. Sackville
  The number of hospital episodes in England 1989–90, the latest year for which figures are available, involving surgical operations under the national health service for varicose veins on males under 40 years of age, are estimated to be 4,200.

  Residential Care
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what action is being taken to improve the provision of residential care places in the London area.

  Mr. Yeo
  It is for each local authority to determine how best to meet the need for social services, including residential care, in their area. The local authorities in London are, like all social services authorities throughout the country, currently considering this in working towards the introduction of the new community care arrangements in April.

  Unwanted Pregnancies
  Mr. Pickthall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the impact on the number of unwanted pregnancies and the cost of associated social problems of the changes to the selected list.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Changes to the range of contraceptives available on national health service prescription will be made only on the recommendation of the Advisory Committee on NHS Drugs. The committee will ensure that all the real clinical needs of patients continue to be met.

  Special Hospitals
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what is(a) the normal capacity and (b) maximum capacity of each of the special hospitals in England and Wales;

  (2) what was the population for each of the three special hospitals in England and Wales for the latest date available.

  Mr. Yeo
  The available information is in the table.

  Hospital

  Current number of beds

  Number of patients 31 December 1992

  Ashworth

  658

  624

  Broadmoor

  495

  493

  Rampton

  600

  540

  TOTAL

  1,753

  1,532

  Total patient numbers include 123 on trial leave.

  Neo-natal Units
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will publish a table showing NHS expenditure on neo-natal units in cash and real terms in each year since 1979–80; and if she will make a statement.
  95
  Mr. Sackville
  The information requested is not collected centrally.

  Managerial Staff
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what consultations she has had with the NHS Trusts Association concerning the application of the Government's pay guidelines for the public sector to the pay of chief executives and other senior staff of new NHS trusts coming into being on 1 April; and where those chief executives and senior staff are presently in post in analogous jobs.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State met the National Health Service Trust Federation on 10 December 1992 and discussed with them the application of public sector pay restraint. My right hon. Friend emphasised that the need for restraint applied to the salaries of chief executives as well as other NHS staff.

  Dentistry
  Mr. Nigel Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she has received the Bloomfield report; and if she will make a statement.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  I am pleased to announce that Sir Kenneth Bloomfield has now submitted his report reviewing the current dental remuneration system and identifying options for change. I am today publishing his report and beginning a period of consultation on it to identify how we might improve the system. Copies have been placed in the Library.

  I should like to record my thanks to Sir Kenneth for a comprehensive and valuable report. The next step is to consider the views of all the interests—profession, public, national health service—to develop a better system. I know the Health Select Committee has an enquiry into this subject. Many dentists have made clear their concern about the current remuneration system which has remained largely unchanged since 1948. Now is the time to work with us to improve it.

  The Government will consider carefully all views expressed over the coming months.

  Mr. Wareing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she expects the Bloomfield report on dental remuneration to be made public.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Today.

  Hospitals, Wolverhampton
  Mr. Purchase
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many times Wolverhampton hospitals have been closed for admissions during the 12-month period ended 31 December 1992; and how many patients have been affected by the closures.

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not held centrally. The hon. Member may wish to contact to Sir Donald Wilson, chairman of West Midlands regional health authority.

  NHS Charges
  Mr. Alan Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health in which cases a loan is treated as reckonable income in determining eligibility for NHS charges.
  96
  Dr. Mawhinney
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave the hon. Member for Morley and Leeds, South (Mr. Gunnell) on Friday 23 October 1992 at column 395.

  Voluntary Organisations
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list the awards given to voluntary organisations under the section 64 procedure for the financial year 1991–92; what awards he plans to make in the financial year 1992–93; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: Grants totalling over £15–8 million were awarded to voluntary organisations in England during 1991–92 under the section 64 general scheme. Details have been placed in the Library.

  For 1992–93 grant approval letters had been issued by 13 January 1993 to various organisations. A list of them has also been placed in the Library. In addition further approval letters up to the total provision of £17.8 million will be issued during the remainder of the year where payment is dependent for example on work starting on a project in the near future. The organisations in question are aware of the position.

SOCIAL SECURITY

  Pensioners
  Mr. McAllion
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when he next intends to meet representatives of pensioner groups to discuss the level of the state pension.

  Mr. Lilley
  My ministerial colleagues and I regularly meet representatives of pensioner groups.

  Mr. Gamier
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what has been the increase in real terms in benefits for pensioners since 1989.

  Mr. Hawkins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the total value of extra help which has been directed to less well off pensioners since 1989.

  Mr. Evennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security by how much more than inflation benefits for less well off pensioners have been increased since 1989.

  Miss Widdecombe
  As a result of improvements in income-related benefits, since 1989 expenditure for the year beginning April 1993 will be £1 billion higher.

  Mr. Congdon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what proportion of the average pensioner's income comes from occupational pensions, savings and earnings.

  Miss Widdecombe
  Of pensioners' gross average income 23 per cent. from occupational pensions, 17 per cent. from savings income and 8 per cent. from earnings.

  Pensions
  Mr. Dunn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many officially retired persons were in receipt of an occupational pension for the latest date for which figures are available, and on 1 April 1979; and if he will make a statement.
  97
  Miss Widdecombe
  We estimate that between 1979 and 1988, the most recent year for which information is available, the number of people over state pension age in receipt of income from an occupational pension rose from around 3 million to around 4·5 million. These estimates are based upon data from the 1979 and 1988 family expenditure surveys, and the 1979 and 1987 surveys of occupational pension schemes carried out by the Government Actuary.

  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will publish such comparable figures as he has available on provision for old age pensions in the United Kingdom and other EC countries, including health costs.

  Miss Widdecombe
  Direct comparison of pension rates is not possible because most EC states unlike the United Kingdom, have wholly earnings-related pension schemes. Meaningful comparisons can only be made when comparing whole benefit packages available to pensioners.

  The Department recently completed a comparative exercise of six member states using data supplied by an independent firm of actuaries. The exercise indicated, that when factors such as safety net provision and health care are taken into account, British pensioners who previously had been on low earnings arc better off than those in Germany, France, Italy and Spain, and only just behind those in the Netherlands.

  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make a statement on the income of pensioners.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The total average income of pensioners has increased by about one third since 1979. This is over five times as fast as it increased between 1974 and 1979.

  Family Credit
  Mr. Clappison
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make a statement on the range of net income over which families are eligible for family credit.

  Mr. Burt
  There is no minimum qualifying level of income for family credit. The upper limit will vary with the number and age of the children. A family with one child under 11 can get family credit if their net weekly income is less than £139 a week. A family with four children aged three, eight 11 and 16 could be eligible with a net income of £209 a week.

  Fraud
  Mr. Brazier
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what extra investment his Department is making in anti-fraud work.

  Miss Widdecombe
  An extra £10 million has been allocated for each of the next three financial years to help the Benefits Agency step up the fight against fraud and abuse. Financial incentives are also being introduced to encourage local authorities to combat housing benefit and council tax benefit fraud.

  Child Support Agency
  Mr. Fabricant
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make a statement as to what progress he has made in setting up the Child Support Agency.

  Mr. Burt
  I am pleased to report excellent progress has been made. The Child Support Agency will begin operations on 5 April as planned. Operating within the framework of the Child Support Act the agency will provide a clear focus for the assessment, collection and enforcement of maintenance payments, and ensure that many more parents meet their responsibility to maintain their children.

  Citizens Advice Bureaux
  Sir Thomas Arnold
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make a statement on the level of co-operation between social security officers and local citizens advice bureaux.

  Mr. Burt
  There is a high level of co-operation. Locally staff in many of our district offices regularly meet bureaux staff who have been involved in service planning exercises. Visits to local citizens advice bureaux also take place in many parts of the country. Nationally, the Department enjoys good relations with the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux which is for example, involved in several research projects.

  Lone Parents
  Mr. Coe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what are the latest available figures for the proportion of lone parents who receive maintenance.

  Mr. Burt
  The latest available estimates show that only 29 per cent. of lone parents receive regular maintenance payments. The corresponding figure for lone parents receiving income support is 22 per cent.

  Disability Allowances
  Mr. Skinner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when he expects to clear up the backlog of claims for disability living allowance; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Scott
  Claim levels for disability living allowance have stabilised and work on hand has now reduced to normal levels.

  I have expressed my regret for the delays which occurred following the introduction of disability living allowance, which was a massive task, resulting in over one million claims to disability living allowance and attendence allowance within a period of 10 months.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) how many staff have been allocated to the home visiting service; and how many home visits by Benefits Agency staff in connection with disability living allowance and attendance allowance have been made to date since February 1992 in total and by disability benefit centre;

  (2) how many claims to date for the disability living allowance have been completed (a) with the assistance of telephone calls and (b) with the assistance of visits made by the forms completion service staff in the disability benefits centre.
  99
  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 a copy will be placed in the Library.

  Letter from Michael Bichard to Mr. Paul Flynn, dated 15 January 1993:
  As Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency, it is my responsibility to answer questions about relevant operational matters. I am therefore replying to the points raised in your recent Parliamentary Questions to the Secretary of State for Social Security.
  You asked about the number of staff allocated to the home visiting service, and how many home visits by Benefits Agency staff in connection with Disability Living Allowance (DLA) and Attendance Allowance (AA) have been made to date since February 1992 in total and by Disability Benefit Centre. You also asked how many claims have been completed with the assistance of telephone calls and with the assistance of visits made by the forms completion staff in the Disability Benefit Centres (DBCs).
  The staff in the Customer Service Sections of the DBCs are involved in general duties to help customers, including forms completion work for both benefits. This may involve telephoning the customer to help in completing a claim form or it may involve a visit. There are around 200 Customer Service staff in the DBCs whose duties would include home visits. Since February 1992 to the end of December, over 2,500 home visits have been made to assist in the completion of claim forms. Over 63,000 DLA and AA claims have been completed with the assistance of telephone calls. The number of visits made by each DBC is shown below.

  Number

  Midlands

  394

  Leeds

  609

  Wembley

  181

  Bristol

  9

  Manchester

  38

  Edinburgh

  50

  Newcastle

  75

  Cardiff

  37

  Bootle

  729

  Sutton

  390

  I hope you find this reply helpful. A copy will appear in the Official Report. A copy will also be placed in the Library.

  Benefits Agency
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make a statement on the system of handling answers to parliamentary questions referred to the chief executive of the Benefits Agency.

  Mr. Burt
  When Members ask written parliamentary questions which concern day-to-day operational matters delegated to the Benefits Agency, my right hon. Friend and his Ministers will normally arrange for the chief executive to write to the Member, and will reply to that effect. The aim is to provide as full and helpful a response as possible on a timescale similar to that for a ministerial response to a parliamentary question. As the Lord President of the Council announced on 20 October Official Report, column 288 all such letters from chief executives arising from written questions, except for those concerning personal or confidential matters, are now printed in the Official Report. My right hon. Friend remains fully accountable to Parliament for the work of the Department of Social Security, including its executive agencies and we will continue to answer all oral questions.
  100
  Mr. Willetts
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what changes there have been in the service provided to claimants since the Benefits Agency came into operation in 1991.

  Mr. Burt
  Overall the Benefits Agency is providing a more efficient service to the public. Performance in most key service delivery areas has improved significantly since 1991. Significant progress has been made towards making the service more accessible, accountable and responsible to customer needs and expectations. The aims in the citizens charter have been expanded and are clearly laid out in the agency's own customer charter. In consultation with their customer's local units are setting up and publicising their own customer service standards.

  Housing Benefit
  Dr. Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what consideration he has given to the introduction of a universal housing benefit scheme covering both rent and mortgage interest payments; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Burt
  We have considered carefully the proposals that have been made for such a scheme. We have yet to be convinced that they would represent good value for the taxpayer, given the substantial extra cost.

  Invalid Care Allowance
  Mr. Kynoch
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many more people receive invalid care allowance currently than in 1979.

  Mr. Scott
  The number of people receiving invalid care allowance increased from 5,000 in December 1979 to 180,000 in September 1992.

  Social Fund
  Mr. Clapham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when he intends to review the social fund provision.

  Mr. Scott
  The level of social fund provision is kept under constant review. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced on 12 November, the gross budget for social fund discretionary payments for 1993–94 will be around £340 million. That is a 50 per cent. increase in two years—a clear indication of our commitment to ensuring that adequate help is provided. As far as this year is concerned, I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend to the hon. Member for Gateshead, East (Ms. Quin), earlier today.

  Mr. Canavan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) what was, for each social security office in the United Kingdom, the total amount of money applied for in cases in the current financial year where an application for a social fund loan met the criteria but the loan was refused because of budgetary constraints;

  (2) what was, for each social security office in the United Kingdom, the total amount of money applied for in cases during the current financial year where an application for a community care grant met the criteria but the grant was refused because of budgetary constraints.
  101
  Mr. Scott
  Information on the amount of money in cases where an application was refused on grounds of priority is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Mr. Canavan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was, for each social security office in the United Kingdom, the amount of money allocated to the social fund for(a) loans and (b) grants for the current financial year and the amount so far unspent in each category at the latest available date.

  Mr. Scott
  Details of social fund allocations for the current financial year and outstanding allocations at the latest available date, by Benefit Agency district are in the Library.

  Mortgage Interest
  Mr. Norman Hogg
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many households are having their mortgage interest payments met by his Department: and what the cost will be of these payments in 1992–93.

  Mr. Burt
  The latest available information indicates a total of 411,000 income support recipients receiving help with mortgage interest payments at a cost of £949 million. This is derived from the May 1991 income support annual statistical enquiry, a copy of which is in the Library. Estimates on the cost to the Department of these payments in 1992–93 are not yet available.

  Invalidity Benefit
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what criteria are used by the Benefits Agency to decide whether to call an invalidity benefit claimant for a medical examination.

  Mr. Scott
  The administration of benefits 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 a copy will be placed in the Library.

  Letter from Michael Bichard to Mr. Hugh Bayley, dated 15 January 1993:
  As Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency, it is my responsibility to answer questions about relevant operational matters. I am therefore replying to the points raised in your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security asking what criteria are used by the Benefits Agency to decide whether to call an Invalidity Benefit claimant for a medical examination.
  All claims for Invalidity Benefit are subject to scrutiny which may take the form of a reference to the Benefits Agency Medical Services to obtain a second opinion on incapacity for work. The selection of customers for reference is made impartially on the basis of standing instructions. The main considerations are the diagnosis or disorder causing incapacity for work and the length of time the person has been away from work as a result.
  Cases received by Medical Services are scrutinised by a doctor who decides whether or not to call a customer for a medical examination. That decision is based on the doctor's experience of the likely effects of the particular medical condition on a person's capacity for work, information that has been provided by the doctor who has signed the statement of incapacity and any information from previous references that is relevant.
  I hope you find this reply helpful. A copy will appear in the Official Report. A copy will also be placed in the Library.

  Income Support
  Mr. Ashdown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, how many applications for income support were made by 16 and 17 year-olds in south Somerset during 1992; how many of these applications were refused; and on what grounds.

  Mr. Burt
  The administration of income support 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 a copy will be placed in the Library.

  Letter from Michael Bichard to Mr. Paddy Ashdown, dated 15 January 1993
  As Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency it is my responsibility to answer questions about relevant operational matters. I am therefore replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security asking how many applications for Income Support were made by 16 and 17 year olds in South Somerset during 1992; how many of these applications were refused; and on what grounds.
  The complete range of information you requested is not fully available except at disproportionate cost. This is because the reasons for refusal of benefit are not routinely collected and could he obtained only by examining individually each claim where benefit was refused.
  The information I have outlined below is for offices in Taunton, Yeovil and Bridgwater which make up the Benefits Agency Somerset District. The total applications received will include some made under the severe hardship provisions.

  Applications from 16 and 17 year olds January—December 1992

  Total received

  Awarded

  Refused

  1,179

  991

  188

  I hope you find this reply helpful. A copy will appear in the Official Report. A copy will also be placed in the Library.

  Mrs. Mahon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will amend social security regulations so that the lower rate of incomes support is only applicable to those aged 18 to 24 years who live with their parents.

  Mr. Burt
  We have no plans to do so.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will estimate the cost of increasing the level of income support personal allowances for claimants under the age of 25 years to the rate of allowances currently paid to claimants over the age of 25 years.

  Mr. Burt
  The estimated cost of increasing the rate of income support for single claimants under 25 years to that payable to those aged 25 and over is £460 million in a full year. This figure includes the consequential increases in housing benefit and community charge benefit.

  Notes:

  1. The figure is rounded to the nearest £10 million.

  2. Modelled at 1992–93 prices and benefit levels using data drawn from the 1987–88–89 Family Expenditure Surveys, the 1991 Annual Statistical Enquiry, the 1991 Labour Force Survey and the May 1991 estimate of the Youth Training caseload.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will review the current levels of personal allowances payable to income support claimants under the age of 25 years.

  Mr. Burt
  Income-related benefits are under continuous review. We have no plans to amend the under 25 rate of income support.
  103
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) if he will make a statement on the reason for freezing the income support payments for the terminally ill in residential homes for the financial year 1993–94;

  (2) if he will list (a) the value of income support payments payable to the terminally ill in residential homes at the date when it was first introduced, (b) the current value and (c) the value recently fixed for 1993, at constant 1992 prices, together with the equivalent figures valorised to take account of rises in the retail price index since the year the terminally ill payment was introduced:

  (3) if he will estimate the annual additional money it would cost to uprate the terminally ill income support grant in 1993 by the same amount as the retail prices index.

  Mr. Burt
  The terminal illness limit was intended to meet the costs of the extra care provided to people who are terminally ill. However, the limit can also be paid where an adjudication officer is satisfied that a home is able to provide this type of care and the claimant is receiving it regardless of the nature of their condition. As a consequence the limit is often helping those who are not terminally ill within the accepted definition of this term.

  The real values of the maximum payments to people claiming the terminal illness limit in nursing homes under the supplementary benefit and income support schemes, in constant April 1992 prices, are:

  (a) at the time the system of national limits was introduced in April 1985, £291;

  (b) at the last uprating in April 1992, £280.

  Corresponding figures for the value in April 1993 cannot be calculated until the RPI for April 1993 becomes available.

  Had the terminally ill limit been uprated by the same amount as the retail price index, it is estimated that would have cost of the order of £15 million to £20 million in 1993–94. This estimate is subject to considerable uncertainly because of difficulties in projecting reliably the number of people claiming the terminally ill limit, following the introduction of the new arrangements for those entering homes from April 1993.

  We considered that an increase to this limit was not the best use of resources which could be better directed at the other income support limits. It was the policy intention to remove the differential between this limit and the basic elderly limit.

  From April 1993 responsibility for all patients in hospices falls to the national health service. Funds have been transferred to the national health service as part of the community care package for this new responsibility. In addition £1 million has been transferred from the Social Security budget to the Department of Health for 1993–94 to ensure additional funds are directed specifically to those who are terminally ill. This is an addition to the £1 million transferred for each of the three survey years that was announced the previous year.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will commission research to investigate the adequacy of income support available to claimants under the age of 25 years.

  Mr. Burt
  There is already a wide range of published information which bears on this issue. We have no plans to commission any further research.

  Water Charges
  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many representations he has received from income support claimants regarding direct payments to water companies; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Burt
  In the year ending 31 December 1992 we have received three letters from income support beneficiaries concerning direct payments for water charges.

  Mrs. Mahon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what plans there are to introduce a benefit to help with water charges.

  Mr. Burt
  There are no such plans.

  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what plans he has to amend paragraph 7 of schedule 9 of the Claims and Payments Regulations 1987 to allow more people to claim direct water payments; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Burt
  I refer the hon. Member to my reply to him on 14 December 1992 at column 72.

  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many applications under paragraph 7 of schedule 9 of the Claims and Payments Regulations 1987 for direct payments to water companies have been made to each regional DSS office; how many have been turned down; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Burt
  I refer the hon. Member to my reply to him on 14 December at columns 71–72.

  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when he next expects to meet the chairmen of the regional water companies to discuss direct payments by DSS offices to the water companies.

  Mr. Burt
  We have no plans to meet the chairman of the regional water companies and have received no requests to do so. Departmental officials hold regular meetings with representatives of the water companies, and have done so recently.

  Cohabitation Rule
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) how many claimants in(a) North Yorkshire and (b) England had a benefit withdrawn because they were thought to be living together with another person in each quarter for the last two years; and what proportion of these claimants subsequently had their benefit reinstated;

  (2) how many York claimants had a benefit withdrawn (a) by the York Benefits Agency office and (b) by the agency's area fraud office because they were thought to be living together with another person in each quarter for the last two years; and what proportion of these claimants subsequently had their benefit reinstated.

  Miss Widdecombe
  I understand from Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency that the information is not available and could be obtained only at a disproportionate cost.

  Ex-service Men
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will list the amount of benefits payable(a) weekly and (b) on any other basis to limbless ex-service

  105
  men specifically because they have had (i) one, (ii) two, (iii) three and (iv) four limbs amputated; and if he will make a statement.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The amount of war disablement pension payable in respect of disablement due to service varies according to the degree of disablement which is assessed on a percentage basis, 100 per cent. being the maximum. For amputees the assessment is determined by the site of the amputation. Details arc given in the table together with the corresponding weekly and yearly pension rates for privates/non-commissioned officers, and officers respectively.

  Percentage assessment

  Weekly rate £

  Yearly rate £

  Amputation of upper limbs

  Loss of both hands or amputation at higher sites

  100

  89·00

  4,685

  Forequarter amputation

  100

  89·00

  4,685

  Amputation through shoulder joint

  90

  80·10

  4,217

  Amputation below shoulder with stump less than 20·5 centimetres from tip of the acromium

  80

  71·20

  3,748

  Amputation from 20·5 centimetres from tip of the acromium to less than 11·5 centimetres below tip of olecranon

  70

  62·30

  3,280

  Amputation from 11·5 centimetres below tip of olecranon

  60

  53·40

  2,811

  Loss of four fingers

  50

  44·50

  2,343

  Loss of thumb and its metacarpel bone

  40

  35·60

  1,874

  Loss of thumb

  30

  26·70

  1,406

  Loss of three fingers

  30

  26·70

  1,406

  Loss of two fingers

  20

  17·80

  937

  Loss of terminal phalanx of thumb

  20

  17·80

  937

  Amputation of lower limbs

  Double amputation through thigh, or through thigh on one side and loss of other foot, or double amputation below thigh to 13 centimetres below knee

  100

  89·00

  4,685

  Double amputation through leg lower than 13 centimetres below knee

  100

  89·00

  4,685

  Hindquarter amputation

  100

  89·00

  4,685

  Amputation of one leg lower than 13 centimetres below knee and loss of other foot

  100

  89·00

  4,685

  Amputation through hip joint

  90

  80·10

  4,217

  Amputation of both feet resulting in end bearing stumps

  90

  80·10

  4,217

  Amputation through both feet proximal to the metatarso-phalangeal joint

  80

  71·20

  3,748

  Amputation below hip with stump not exceeding 13 centimetres in length measured from tip of great trochanter

  80

  71·20

  3,748

  Amputation below hip and above knee with stump exceeding 13 centimetres in length measured from tip of great trochanter, or at knee not resulting in end-bearing stump

  70

  62·30

  3,280

  Amputation at knee resulting in end-bearing stump, or below knee with stump not exceeding 9 centimetres

  60

  53·40

  2,811

  Amputation below knee with stump exceeding 9 centimetres but not exceeding 13 centimetres

  50

  44·50

  2,343

  Amputation below knee with stump exceeding 13 centimetres

  40

  35·60

  1,874

  Loss of all toes of both feet through the metatarso-phalangeal joint

  40

  35·60

  1,874

  106
  For multiple amputations, other than those mentioned in the table, a composite assessment of the degree of disablement is made, by reference to the combined effects of such injuries (subject to the maximum of 100 per cent.)

  Additional allowances may be awarded in respect of. for instance, unemployability and need for attendance. Mobility supplement (currently £33.70 a week, £1,757 a year) is also available; amputation of both legs at levels which are either through or above the ankle results in automatic entitlement.
  107

  Percentage assessment

  Weekly rate £

  Yearly rate £

  Loss of all toes of both feet proximal to the proximal interphalangeal joint

  30

  26·70

  1,406

  Amputation of one foot resulting in end bearing stump

  30

  26·70

  1,406

  Amputation through one foot proximal to the metatarso-phalangeal joint

  30

  26·70

  1,406

  Loss of all toes of one foot proximal to the proximal interphalangeal joint, including amputations through the metatarso-phalangeal joint

  20

  17·80

  937

  Loss of all toes of both feet distal to the proximal interphalangeal joint

  20

  17·80

  937

  Amputation of upper and lower limbs

  Loss of a hand and a foot

  100

  89·00

  4,685

  Maternity Pay
  Mr. Foulkes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) what pay will be provided for employees by central Government during the 14 weeks of maternity leave laid down under section 20 of the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Bill;

  (2) what will the employer's financial responsibility be for maternity pay for the 14 weeks of maternity leave laid down under section 20 of the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Bill.

  Mr. Scott
  Section 20 of the Trade Union Reform and Employment Rights Bill implements the maternity leave provisions of the EC directive on the protection of pregnant women at work. We are considering the directive's implications for maternity benefits and will make an announcement in due course.

  Grants and Loans
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many grants and how many loans were made by his Department in Doncaster in 1991–92; how many applications were refused; and what were the total sums involved.

  Mr. Scott
  Information on the number of grants and loans awarded and refused, by each Benefit Agency district, is in the Library. Information on the amount of grant and loan awards is also in the Library. Information on the amount of grant and loan refusals is not available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Unemployed People (Benefits)
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was the total amount of money paid to people who were unemployed and their dependants during 1992; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Burt
  The information requested is not available. The estimated total benefit paid to people and their dependants on account of unemployment for the financial year 1991–92 is £7,360 million.

  Note:
  Benefits for unemployed people include unemployment benefit, income support, housing benefit, community charge benefit and payments from the social fund to unemployed people and their families.
  The figure does not include child benefit, one parent benefit, maternity benefits, widows' benefits or any of the sickness or disability benefits to which unemployed people may also be entitled.

ENVIRONMENT

  Homelessness, Walsall
  Mr. George
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what is the average cost per unit of accommodation in(a) bed-and-breakfast accommodation and (b) hostel accommodation in the west midlands and Walsall;

  (2) what was the cost to Walsall metropolitan borough council of providing bed-and-breakfast accommodation for those families officially registered as homeless for each year since 1987.

  Mr. Baldry
  Walsall has provided no information to the Department on the. cost of bed-and-breakfast and hostel accommodation although it does make use of such accommodation to temporarily house homeless households.

  Corresponding information for the other authorities in the west midlands is also incomplete and my Department has no estimates.

  Mr. George
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many(a) families and (b) single people were accepted by Walsall metropolitan borough authority as homeless in the last year for which figures were available; and what is the estimate for the end of 1992.

  Mr. Baldry
  Local authorities report, in part E of their quarterly PI return, the number of households for whom they accept responsibility to secure permanent accommodation under the homelessness provisions of the 1985 Housing Act.

  Information for Walsall for the year ending September 1992 is as follows:

  of which

  Total households accepted

  Families and pregnant women

  Young single people

  Walsall

  1,956

  1,381

  90

  The Department has no estimates for the end of 1992.

  Tarmac Construction
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) if he will make a statement on the risk-sharing scheme agreed with Tarmac Construction as part of the sale of PSA Projects;

  (2) how much Tarmac Construction was paid as part of a risk-sharing scheme in addition to the £54.9 million paid as negative liability.
  109
  Mr. Redwood
  No risk-sharing scheme was agreed with Tarmac Construction as part of the sale of PSA Projects. The full details of the financial aspects of the sale were set out in the answer given to the member for Welwyn, Hatfield (Mr. Evans) on 25 November 1992.

  Caravan Sites
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what level of grant aid is available for capital works projects for caravan site provision for the traditional travelling community and for on-site units.

  Mr. Baldry
  For the current financial year £12·5 million has been allocated in England for capital works by local authorities to provide new gipsy caravan sites and to improve existing sites.

  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what percentage of the traditional travelling people in England will be provided for by(a) existing caravan sites, (b) those planned and (c) those under construction for those people.

  Mr. Baldry
  The Department does not hold information in the form requested. In January 1992, English local authorities counted a total of 12,777 gipsy caravans: 43 per cent. of these were parked on authorised council sites; a further 23 per cent. were on authorised private caravan sites; the remainder were on unauthorised sites.

  Apportionment of housing revenue account subsidy between housing and rent rebates

  £ million

  1990–91 outturn

  1991–92 outturn

  1992–93 1outturn

  1993–94 2outturn

  Housing element

  Positive entitlements

  1,356

  1,156

  1,027

  922

  Negative entitlements

  -200

  -283

  -495

  -792

  Gross rent rebates

  2,505

  2,877

  3,477

  3,760

  Total HRA subsidy

  3,661

  3,750

  4,009

  3,890

  Sum of positve housing element and gross rebates

  3,861

  4,033

  4,504

  4,682

  1 Estmated outtern.

  2 Forecast outturn.

  Housing Associations
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he received a copy of the report prepared by Hambros for the Housing Corporation on the private financing of housing associations; and if he will place a copy in the Library.

  Mr. Baldry
  Hambros presented its report to the Department on 31 January 1992. It contains commercially sensitive information and we have no plans to publish it.

  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) when he was informed of the proposals being considered by the Housing Corporation for a new approach to the allocation of housing association grant to developing housing associations; when he received a copy of the white paper "Revised Housing Association Funding Regime"; and if he will place a copy in the Library;

  (2) if he will list the housing associations which would qualify for housing association grant under the criteria being considered by the Housing Corporation in the paper
  110
  Mr. Nigel Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish a list of the locations or addresses of designated gipsy sites in England; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Baldry
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Plymouth, Devonport (Mr. Jamieson) on 23 November 1992 at column 536.

  Housing Subsidies
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish a table showing the total amount of housing revenue account subsidy payable to local housing authorities in England in each of the years for 1990–91 to 1992–93, and his estimate for 1993–94, indicating separately the housing and the housing benefit components, and showing the difference between the actual subsidy payable and the amount which would have been payable if housing benefit expenditure on rent rebates had qualified in full for subsidy.

  Mr. Baldry
  The information requested is shown in the table. The estimated figures for 1993–94 reflect the guideline rents and management and maintenance allowances determined by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on 17 December 1992.

  "Revised Housing Association Funding Regime", indicating (a) the size of each association, (b) any black and ethnic minority associations, (c) co-operatives and (d) associations which have taken over local authority housing under large-scale voluntary transfer procedures.

  Mr. Baldry
  I understand that the document to which the hon. Gentleman refers was a draft of a working paper being prepared by officials at the Housing Corporation. Ministers were informed of the existence of the paper when it was referred to in the press. Should there be any change in the corporation's policy towards the funding of housing associations, the corporation will no doubt make appropriate information available.

  PSA Building Management
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many non-industrial and industrial staff work for each PSA Building Management division; and in what parliamentary constituencies they work.
  111
  Mr. Robin Squire
  At 30 November 1992, 8,137 staff were employed in PSA Building Management (BM) as follows:

  Number

  BMHQ

  48

  non-industrials

  BM Scotland

  536

  non-industrials

  464

  industrials

  1,000

  Total

  BM South East

  1,351

  non-industrials

  520

  industrials

  1,871

  Total

  BM Noreast

  1,092

  non-industrials

  390

  industrials

  1,482

  Total

  BM Manchester

  1,117

  non-industrials

  677

  industrials

  1,794

  Total

  BM South and West

  1,248

  non-industrials

  694

  industrials

  1,942

  Total

  These staff work in the following parliamentary constituencies:

  BMHQ
  Croydon, Central

  BM Scotland

  Edinburgh, Central

  Edinburgh, Pentlands

  Midlothian

  Glasgow, Central

  Orkney and Shetland

  Caithness and Sutherland

  Moray

  Inverness, Nairn and Lochaber

  Banff and Buchan

  Aberdeen, South

  Angus, East

  Perth and Kinross

  Fife, North-East

  Dunfermline, West

  Dumbarton

  Stirling

  Western Isles

  Argyll and Bute

  Galloway and Upper Nithsdale

  Ayr

  Cunninghame, North

  Greenock and Port Glasgow

  BM South East

  Chelsea

  Brighton, Kemptown

  Windsor and Maidenhead

  City of London

  Twickenham

  Woolwich

  Maidstone

  Folkestone

  Canterbury

  Ashford

  Woking

  Thanet, North

  Guildford

  Crawley

  Portsmouth, North

  Havant

  Fareham

  Isle of Wight

  Chichester

  Hampshire, East

  Ealing, North

  Kensington

  Brentford and Isleworth

  Croydon, Central

  Hastings and Rye

  Gillingham

  112

  Dover and Deal

  Surbiton

  Hendon, North

  Portsmouth, South

  Gosport

  Southwark and Bermondsey

  Greenwich

  BM Noreast

  Newcastle-upon-Tyne, North

  Leeds, North West

  Ryedale

  Richmond (Yorks)

  Gainsborough and Horncastle

  Brigg and Cleethorpe

  York

  Huntingdon

  Colchester, South and Malden

  Norfolk, North

  Bedfordshire, Mid

  Bedfordshire, North

  Bedfordshire, South West

  Bury St. Edmonds

  Norfolk, South West

  Norfolk, Mid

  Norfolk, North West

  Cambridgeshire, South West

  Suffolk, Coastal

  Saffron Walden

  Chelmsford

  Ipswich

  Watford

  Bridlington

  Harrogate

  Skipton and Ripon

  Sheffield, Central

  Bassetlaw

  Beverley

  Don Valley

  Lindsey, East

  Broxtowe

  Rutland and Melton

  Norwich, North

  Suffolk, South

  Peterborough

  Hexham

  Berwick-upon-Tweed

  Southend, East

  Rochford

  Grantham

  Cambridge

  Stockton, South

  Cambridgeshire, South East

  Northampton, South

  BM Manchester

  Penrith and The Border

  Ceredigion and Pembroke, North

  Stretford

  Crosby

  Monmouth

  Rugby and Kenilworth

  Pembroke

  Warrington, North

  High Peak

  Cardiff, North

  Staffordshire Moorlands

  Chester, City of

  Broxtowe

  Leicestershire, North West

  Clwyd, North West

  Rutland and Melton

  Hereford

  Derby, North

  Wrekin

  Barrow and Furness

  Birmingham, Ladywood

  Stratford-on-Avon

  Leicester, South

  Meirionnydd Nant Conwy

  113

  Worcestershire, South

  Rushcliffe

  Lincoln

  Wyre

  Preston

  Nottingham, South

  Newport, East

  Grantham

  Hexham

  Ynys Mon

  Fylde

  Warwickshire, North

  Newark

  Vale of Glamorgan

  Swansea, East

  BM South & West

  Aldershot

  Aylesbury

  Banbury

  Bath

  Berkshire, East

  Bournemouth, East

  Bristol, North-West

  Cheltenham

  Christchurch

  Cirencester & Tewkesbury

  Cornwall, North

  Devon, North

  Dorset, South

  Dorset, West

  Exeter

  Gloucester

  Hampshire, North West

  Oxford West & Abingdon

  Plymouth, Devonport

  Plymouth, Drakev

  Plymouth, Sutton

  Reading, West

  Salisbury

  South Hams

  Southampton-Test

  St. Ives

  Stroud

  Surrey, North-West

  Swindon

  Taunton

  Teignbridge

  Westbury

  Weston-Super-Mare

  Wiltshire, North

  Winchester

  Witney

  Wokingham

  Wycombe

  Yeovil

  Local Government Finance
  Mrs. Anne Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will set out the calculations behind his Department's forecast of the amount to be made available for local authorities arising from the proposed partial release of receipts of council house sales and other capital assets.

  Mr. Baldry
  As a result of the temporary relaxation of the regulations on the use of capital receipts announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the autumn statement, it is estimated that local authorities in England will have some £1¾ billion of extra usable capital receipts. This estimate was based largely on authorities' own forecasts of their receipts in 1992–93. It was assumed that, had there been no relaxation in the rules, receipts would have continued at broadly the same rate. As a result of the relaxation, authorities will be able to use 100 per cent. of virtually all receipts obtained during the period 13 November 1992 to 31 December 1993. This implies extra 114
  usable receipts of about £1½ billion. It was also assumed that the relaxation would itself stimulate extra disposals, and hence extra receipts, which would not otherwise have arisen in that period. This accounts for the balance of the estimate.

  Mrs. Anne Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the revenue raised by local authorities(a) by the sale of capital assets other than council houses and (b) by the sale of council houses, in each financial year since 1979, including information on the current financial year.

  Mr. Baldry
  The information is as follows:

  Local Authority sales of Fixed assets: England

  £ million

  Housing dwellings1

  Housing land etc.

  Other services

  1979–80

  473

  38

  2

  1980–81

  656

  96

  2

  1981–82

  1,241

  99

  351

  1982–83

  1,769

  135

  425

  1983–84

  1,325

  124

  435

  1984–85

  1,129

  147

  520

  1985–86

  1,092

  137

  608

  1986–87

  1,274

  142

  656

  1987–88

  1,715

  149

  1,032

  1988–89

  2,772

  245

  1,791

  1989–90

  2,820

  216

  1,500

  1990–91

  2,026

  142

  756

  31991–92

  1,180

  156

  622

  41992–93

  1,385

  120

  460

  1 Capital value of local authority dwellings sold, including large scale transfers of stock to housing associations and discount repayments.

  2 Figures not available on a comparable basis.

  3 Provisional.

  4 Estimated.

  Source: Local authority returns.

  Mr. Clifton-Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the local authorities which are currently debt free.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  Returns to the Department indicate that the following authorities were debt free at 31 March 1992:

  Bedford

  Ryedale

  Bracknell

  St. Edmondsbury

  Chiltern

  Sevenoaks

  Christchurch

  South Bucks

  City of London

  Suffolk

  Dorset

  Swale

  Lincolnshire

  West Sussex

  Mid Sussex

  Other authorities may have become debt free as result of the commutation of grants for debt charges which took place on 1 October 1992. These are likely to include the following:

  Broadland

  South Northamptonshire

  Bromley

  South Wight

  East Cambridgeshire

  Tandridge

  Hove

  Torbay

  Mid Bedfordshire

  Wansdyke

  North Shorpshire

  Mr. Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are his proposals for the appropriate level of aggregate local authority spending in 1993–94 and the level of central support for that spending.
  115
  Mr. Redwood
  [pursuant to the reply, 12 November 1993, col. 962]: I am today placing in the Library a table of illustrative relevant notional amounts for each local authority.

  Air Pollution
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment he has made of the reasons for the air pollution alert issued on 30 December 1992; and how many callers took advantage of the departmental 0800-freephone public information line.

  Mr. Maclean
  Poor air quality was reported in bulletins on 30 December 1992 for London on the basis of nitrogen dioxide levels, derived from vehicle exhaust emissions and for Belfast and Sunderland on the basis of sulphur dioxide levels derived from domestic coal burning. Cold, still weather conditions hampered disperal of the pollutants.

  The number of calls registered on the FREEphone number was 191 on 30 December. This increased to 330 on 31 December.

  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assistance has been afforded to project Silesia in Poland to mitigate air pollution from industry under(a) the PHARE scheme and (b) European bank for reconstruction and development programmes.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  I have been asked to reply. Assistance to the environmental sector in Poland under the PHARE programme includes a regional programme in upper Silesia (around £12 million) which encompasses a project on abatement of low-level air pollution emission

  Authority

  Receipts of 1991–91 charges in 1990–91 as a percentage of budgeted yield

  Receipts of 1991–92 charges in 1991–92 as a percentage of budgeted yield

  1 Receipts of 1992–93 charges in 1992–93 as a percentage of budgeted yield

  Basildon

  90·6

  86·7

  44·5

  Braintree

  101·6

  89·5

  48·3

  Brentwood

  97·3

  102·2

  65·0

  Castle Point

  83·0

  96·5

  52·0

  Chelmsford

  96·6

  93·1

  55·8

  Colchester

  87·0

  90·7

  45·8

  Epping Forest

  89·8

  95·5

  53·2

  Harlow

  90·0

  80·6

  40·0

  Maldon

  104·7

  101·9

  55·3

  Rochford

  102·0

  102·3

  54·8

  Southend-on-Sea

  90·0

  92·2

  53·4

  Tendring

  91·5

  94·3

  59·7

  Thurrock

  97·1

  82·1

  50·1

  Uttlesford

  89·8

  89·9

  44·9

  Total for Essex

  93·2

  91·4

  51·1

  1 Figures for April-September 1992 only.

  Vehicle Emissions
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what further information has subsequently become available on pollution attributable to vehicle emissions in the Greenwich area, in particular from the monitoring of nitrogen oxide and black smoke emissions, since his answer of 9 June 1992,Official Report, column 154.

  Mr. Maclean
  Since the earlier answer of 9 June 1992 no further data are available on nitrogen oxides. For black
  116
  directed particularly at heating systems. Environmental programmes funded through the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development do not at present include specific assistance to Silesia.

  Air Quality Monitoring Station
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will indicate the location within Greenwich of the air quality monitoring station operated by Warren Spring Laboratory, referred to in his answer of 9 June 1992,Official Report, column 154.

  Mr. Maclean
  The study of nitrogen dioxide levels in 1991 referred to in the earlier answer of 9 June 1992 contained two sites in the Greenwich area. These are located at:

  West Greenwich Branch Library, Greenwich High Road, London SE10.

  Shrewsbury House, Bushmoor Crescent, Plumstead, London SE18.

  Black smoke is also measured annually at these sites.

  Community Charge
  Dr. Spink
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what has been the level of collection of the community charge in Essex in each year in which the charge has been in force.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The latest information available to the Department on the level of collection of the community charge for the local authorities in the county of Essex is as follows:

  smoke, a further year's data have been obtained from the national monitoring network, for two sites in the Greenwich area. The annual average black smoke concentrations (in microgrammes per cubic metre) for the last five years are as follows:

  Site 1

  Site 2

  1987–88

  11

  9

  1988–89

  14

  11

  1989–90

  18

  9

  1990–91

  20

  11

  1991–92

  12

  9

  117
  Site 1 is at West Greenwich branch library, Greenwich High road, London SE10; site 2 is at Shrewsbury house, Bushmoor crescent, Plumstead, London SE18.

  Council Tax
  Dr. Spink
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment he is making of the percentage levels of collection by local authorities of the council tax in its first year.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The council tax should be significantly easier to collect than the community charge, though community charge collection levels have improved in 1992–93 with authorities collecting on average 50 per cent. of their budgeted yield by the end of September. We shall be monitoring collection of the council tax in 1993–94.

  Mr. Steinberg
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment in what circumstances tenants under the age of 18 years in council properties and living alone are required to pay council tax.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  Where all the people living in a council property are under 18, the local authority will be liable for the council tax, subject to a discount of 50 per cent.

  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many A band council tax valued properties have been identified for each local authority in England.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  I am arranging for the available information to be placed in the Library of the House.

  Rented Properties
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish a table showing the total number of homes for renting by housing associations which have been approved by the Housing Corporation under its approved development programme in each of the years for 1987–88 to 1992–93, and his estimate of approvals in financial year 1993–94.

  Mr. Baldry
  The total number of homes for renting approved under the Housing Corporation's approved development programme since 1987–88, and the Housing Corporation's estimates for 1992–93 and 1993–94, are as follows:

  Number

  1987–88

  16,518

  1988–89

  19,959

  1989–90

  16,198

  1990–91

  13,751

  1991–92

  43,583

  1992–93

  40,600

  1993–94

  27,600

  The reduction in approvals in 1993–94 is partly the result of the corporation's response to requests from housing associations for a higher proportion of cash-backing for projects in the year in which they are approved.

  In addition to the provision of new homes for rent, the corporation also funds tenants incentive (TIS) grants and
  118
  do-it-yourself home ownership (DIYSO) schemes which release existing rental accommodation for reletting to the homeless. All of TIS and 60 per cent. of DIYSO is targeted in this way. The figures for TIS and DIYSO are as follows:

  TIS

  DIYSO

  1990–91

  1,654

  —

  1991–92

  3,241

  116

  1992–93

  3,400

  3,800

  1993–94

  5,400

  4,400

  In addition to the above figures, the housing market package announced in the Chancellor's autumn statement is expected to produce over 17,000 homes for rent and up to 2,000 TIS grants.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the Housing Corporation's rented housing programme by London borough for each year since 1964 in actual prices and in 1993 prices.

  Mr. Baldry
  This information cannot be provided other than at disproportionate cost.

  Victoria Street Premises
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 27 October 1992,Official Report, columns 539–40, what has been the total cost incurred, including rent, insurance, maintenance and. security, on the former DTI premises in Victoria street, between the date they were vacated in September 1991 and the present; when he expects the building contract on these premises to commence; and what is his estimate of the costs to be met for the duration of the building contract.

  Mr. Baldry
  In my answer of 27 October last at column 539–40, I advised that the property was vacated in September 1991 and that the weekly cost of holding it vacant is £40,000. It is a relatively simple calculation to determine that this totals £2·6 million to the end of 1992.

  Negotiations have still to be finalised and it is not possible to say when the building contract will commence or what the costs will be during the programme of 24 months for the refurbishment.

  Rates
  Dr. Spink
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the percentage level of collection of general rates in Essex in the last three years before the community charge system was introduced.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The information requested is not available.

  Poll Tax Debts
  Mrs. Mahon
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to allow councils to write off poll tax debts after April 1992 for people in hardship and where the cost of recovery exceeds the money owing or likely to be collected; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  No. It is for local authorities to decide their own policies on write-offs in line with good financial practice and with the approval of their external auditor.

  Opencast Mining
  Mr. Ronnie Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those planning decisions relating to opencast mining applications in Northumberland and Durham which have been called in by his Department in each of the last five years for the Secretary of State's ruling, indicating in each case whether premission was given or refused.

  Mr. Baldry
  No opencast coal mining applications in Northumberland and Durham have been called in by my Department in the last five years.

  Bed-and-breakfast Accommodation
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many homeless families are currently living in bed-and-breakfast accommodation for each housing authority together with the average cost per week per family for each housing authority area.

  Mr. Baldry
  Information on homeless households who were being dealt with under the homelessness provisions of the Housing Act 1985 and who were placed in bed-and-breakfast accommodation can be found in "Local authorities' action under the homelessness provisions of the 1985 Housing Act. England. Results for the third quarter of 1992. Supplementary Table", a copy of which is in the Library.

  Annual costs for bed-and-breakfast accommodation used, together with the related numbers of household days provided, for authorities which provided the information to the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA), are published by CIPFA in its "Homelessness Statistics 1990–91 Actuals", a copy of which is also in the Library.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will estimate the change in the number of families housed by local authority housing departments in bed-and-breakfast accommodation over the next 12 months.

  Mr. Baldry
  The Department does not make such estimates.

  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to reduce the number of families in bed-and-breakfast accommodation; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Baldry
  The Government encourage local authorities to seek alternatives to bed-and-breakfast hotels wherever possible when they place homeless families in temporary accommodation. At 30 September 1992 the use of bed-and-breakfast accommodation in England was 23 per cent. lower than a year earlier. New concessions on the arrangements for financing short-term leasing announced by my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Planning on 21 December will extend the stock of temporary accommodation available for housing homeless families.

  Residential Homes
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 29 October 1992,Official Report, column 850, if he is now in a position to announce if residential homes will be totally exempt from the council tax; and if he will make a statement.
  120
  Mr. Robin Squire
  We, have considered representations from care homes about council tax and considered the arguments put forward by the Joint Care Committee. We believe it is right that care homes should contribute towards the many local services from which they benefit. However, as I explained in my answer to the hon. Member for Dulwich (Ms. Jowell) 30 November 1992 at column 13, council tax bills for care homes will generally be modest.

  Urban Programme
  Mr. Turner
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many urban programme funded economic development projects will end in each of the financial years 1992–93, 1993–94, 1994–95 and 1995–96; what is the financial value of these projects in each year; and what are the figures in each case for(a) those targeted at ethnic minority communities and (b) those run by voluntary organisations.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  This information can only be provided at disproportionate cost.

  Mr. Turner
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) how many urban programme projects are scheduled to end in the financial years 1992–93, 1993–94, 1994–95 and 1995–96; what is the financial value of these projects in each year; and what are the figures in each case for(a) those targeted at ethnic minority communities and (b) those run by voluntary organisations;

  (2) how many urban programme funded environmental projects will end in each of the financial years 1992–93, 1993–94, 1994–95 and 1995–96; what is the financial value of these projects in each year; and what are the figures in each case for (a) those targeted at ethnic minority communities and (b) those run by voluntary organisations.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  This information can only be provided at disproportionate cost.

  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment his Department has made of the effect of changes in urban programme funding on urban wildlife projects.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  Urban wildlife and other projects already approved for three or four years will continue to be funded as urban programme commitments. There are a number of other sources of funding for urban wildlife projects.

  Local Government Commission
  Mr. Nigel Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will publish a table of the names of consultants employed by local authorities in making proposals to the Local Government Commission, the authority that employs them and the cost to the local authority.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  This is a matter for individual local authorities.

  Mr. Nigel Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the total cost to the Exchequer in 1992–93 of the Local Government Commission; what estimates he has for future costs; and if he will make a statement.
  121
  Mr. Robin Squire
  The cost of the Local Government Commission for 1992–93 is estimated at £2.630 million, and at £3–259 million, £3–300 million and £3.439 million for the three following years.

  Mr. Nigel Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many people are employed by the Local Government Commission; what is the cost to the Exchequer; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The Local Government Commission currently has 28 staff in post and estimates its annual expenditure on pay and related costs will be of the order of £0.9 million for 1993–94.

  Mr. Nigel Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what opinion polling has been conducted by the Local Government Commission to ascertain the popularity of proposed boundaries; what is the total cost; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  This is a matter for the Local Government Commission and I have asked the chairman to write to the hon. Member.

  Housing Corporation
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) if he will list the expenditure by the Housing Corporation on administration and accommodation in each year since 1964;

  (2) how many staff were employed by the Housing Corporation in each year since 1964.

  Mr. Baldry
  The information requested is as follows:

  Year ending 31 March

  Accommodation costs

  Administration costs

  Number of staff

  1965

  4.9

  16.0

  —

  1966

  14.9

  101.1

  —

  1967

  45.5

  155.8

  —

  1968

  40.0

  211.2

  —

  1969

  60.7

  267.1

  —

  1970

  61.0

  262.2

  —

  1971

  62.8

  314.6

  —

  1972

  71.1

  421.9

  —

  1973

  100.8

  553.0

  —

  1974

  139.6

  791.3

  180

  1975

  163.0

  1,216.5

  240

  1976

  307.6

  1,919.8

  363

  1977

  600.7

  2,760.1

  401

  1978

  873.7

  3,405.1

  452

  1979

  1,019.0

  4,344.0

  550

  1980

  1,457.0

  6,413.0

  649

  1981

  1,879.0

  9,096.0

  780

  1982

  2,522.0

  9,014.0

  639

  1983

  2,500.0

  9,790.0

  663

  1984

  2,700.0

  10,336.0

  715

  1985

  2,781.0

  10,955.0

  713

  1986

  2,924.0

  11,657.0

  714

  1987

  2,929.0

  12,354.0

  728

  1988

  3,100.0

  13,400.0

  720

  1989

  3,500.0

  16,700.0

  787

  1990

  3,300.0

  16,600.0

  745

  1991

  4,100.0

  18,400.0

  745

  1992

  4,500.0

  20,700.0

  734

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the proposed percentage change in the Housing Corporation's annual development programme for rented housing for 1993–94 compared with the approval development programme for 1992–93.
  122
  Mr. Baldry
  The figures are as follows:

  £ million

  Percentage change

  1992–93

  1,584

  1993–94

  1,558

  -1·64

  In addition to the annual development programme for 1992–93, £577 million was allocated to the Housing Corporation in the Chancellor's autumn statement to enable housing associations to purchase new, empty and repossessed properties by 31 March 1993, providing around 17,000 extra units of social housing.

  Under this housing market package, £20 million has also been provided to the corporation this year for additional tenants' incentive scheme grants to housing association tenants. This will enable up to 2,000 new first-time buyers to enter the housing market, releasing the same number of units of social housing for reletting.

  Land Designation
  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how much land nationally, and in London, is designated for office development, for industrial development and for housing development.

  Mr. Baldry
  In 1990–91 local planning authorities reported having 33,600 hectares of land with outstanding planning permission for private housing development. This information is contained in the Department's publication "Development Control Statistics: England, 1990–91", which is available in the Library.

  The Department does not collect information on land designated for public housing, for office development or for industrial development.

  Local Authority Accommodation
  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many families were living in local authority accommodation in each year since 1979.

  Mr. Baldry
  The available estimates for numbers of families living in local authority accommodation in England are:

  Year

  Million

  1981

  3·57

  1984

  2·99

  1988

  2·58

  1991

  2·30

  The figures are from labour force survey housing trailers and families are defined as couple households with or without children, and lone parent households. The labour force survey is a sample survey and so the estimates are subject to sampling error.

  Homelessness
  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment for how many households local authorities accepted responsibility for securing permanent accommodation under the homeless provisions of the Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977 in each year since 1979.

  Mr. Baldry
  The information for local authorities in England is as follows:
  123

  Year

  Households accepted

  1979

  55,530

  1980

  60,400

  1981

  66,990

  1982

  71,620

  1983

  75,470

  1984

  80,500

  1985

  91,010

  1986

  100,490

  1987

  109,170

  1988

  113,770

  1989

  122,180

  1990

  140,350

  1991

  144,530

  A new reporting system was introduced for non-metropolitan districts from the fourth quarter of 1980 and for the other authorities from the third quarter of 1982. As a result, figures for 1979 to 1982 are not strictly comparable with those for later periods.

  From the second quarter of 1991 the definition of acceptances was altered to exclude intentionally homeless and all the figures have been adjusted to the new basis.

  Empty Properties
  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to allow local authorities to use money from accumulated capital receipts from sale of council properties for purchase and renovation of empty properties.

  Mr. Baldry
  My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced in his autumn statement a significant relaxation of the rules governing the use of local authorities of capital receipts. Authorities are thus able to spend 100 per cent. of almost all capital receipts received between 13 November 1992 and 31 December 1993. This represents a substantial increase in authorities' spending power.

  The Government have no plans to allow authorities to spend accumulated receipts. These receipts are available to redeem debt and thus to reduce the cost of that debt. Also, many authorities have used these resources in this way, rather than accumulating the receipts, and they should not be disadvantaged for having followed Government policy.

  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many empty privately-owned properties there were in each year since 1979.

  Mr. Baldry
  Estimates of empty private dwellings reported by English local authorities in their annual housing investment programme (HIP1) returns are as follows:

  Year

  Empty private properties (thousands)

  1979

  485

  1980

  504

  1981

  503

  1982

  539

  1983

  541

  1984

  548

  1985

  545

  1986

  552

  1987

  570

  124

  Year

  Empty private properties (thousands)

  1988

  580

  1989

  589

  1990

  587

  1991

  638

  1992

  706

  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many local authority properties were sold in each year since 1979.

  Mr. Baldry
  Details of sales and transfers of local authority dwellings in England in the years 1979 to 1991 are given in the table.

  To owner occupiers

  To housing associations1

  Other sales and transfers1

  1979

  40,533

  —

  —

  1980

  79,641

  —

  —

  1981

  94,237

  —

  —

  1982

  186,746

  —

  —

  1983

  129,568

  —

  3,045

  1984

  97,684

  —

  —

  1985

  86,858

  —

  —

  1986

  82,775

  272

  297

  1987

  93,086

  678

  5,658

  1988

  137,596

  8,176

  123

  1989

  148,039

  13,765

  247

  1990

  99,176

  30,420

  8,029

  19912

  54,959

  20,120

  3

  1 Includes block transfers to housing associations and the private sector. Transfers to housing action trusts are excluded.

  2 Provisional.

  Mr. Fraser
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what percentage of housing associations he expects to be engaged on grant-aided development programmes in 1994–95 and 1995–96.

  Mr. Baldry
  These are matters which will be determined by the nature of bids put forward by housing associations themselves and by the detailed criteria applied by the Housing Corporation in assessing those bids. The corporation's decisions on allocations for 1994–95 will not be finalised until the early part of 1994.

  Councillors
  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will consider introducing legislation to prohibit qualification for local election candidacy for those whose principal or only work in the relevant district is as sitting councillors.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  We are currently considering the position in the light of the recent Court of Appeal judgment.

  London Docklands Development Corporation
  Mr. Leighton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the social affairs and social housing budget of the London Docklands development corporation for each of the last 10 years.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The London Docklands development corporation's actual expenditure on these two items
  125
  is given in the table. In 1992–93, the corporation has budgeted £6 million for social housing and £3 million for social affairs.

  LDDC expenditure

  £ million

  Social affairs

  Social housing1

  1983–84

  4

  2

  1984–85

  5

  —

  1985–86

  4

  —

  1986–87

  4

  —

  1987–88

  5

  —

  1988–89

  9

  45

  1989–90

  11

  67

  1990–91

  21

  32

  1991–92

  11

  4

  1992–93

  3

  6

  1 The years 1988–91 include expenditure of £105 million in support of the Limehouse Link relocation programme.

  Fulmer Main Drainage
  Mr. Tim Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 30 October,Official Report, column 864, when he now expects to make a decision on Fulmer main drainage.

  Mr. Maclean
  [holding answer 11 December 1992]: I have written to my hon. Friend.

  Radioactive Waste
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what proportion of the low-level radioactive waste destined for the planned Nirex depository will originate from the reprocessing of imported foreign nuclear fuel.

  Mr. Maclean
  [holding answer 11 January 1993]: I understand that the proportion of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) originating from the reprocessing of foreign spent fuel, during the period 2007–2018, is predicted to be 5 per cent. of the total United Kingdom LLW arisings in that period. This waste could be returned to the country of origin or, if BNFL's request to substitute equivalent waste is accepted, disposed of either to the existing Drigg LLW disposal site or in the Nirex deep disposal facility.

  Departmental Property
  Mr. Straw
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list(a) the total number of residential properties owned by his Department, (b) the number of such properties which are empty and (c), (b) as a percentage of (a).

  Mr. Baldry
  [holding answer 11 January 1993]: Property Holdings, part of the Department of the Environment, owns and manages 93 residential properties, as distinct from those held and managed by other Departments as part of their departmental estate. Of this total, 17 (18.3 per cent.) are empty.

  Government Car Service
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans the Government have to privatise or franchise the administration of the Government car service, wholly or in part.
  126
  Mr. Baldry
  [holding answer 13 January 1993]: The Government car service is planning to market test its accounts support and office cleaning services in 1993.

  Waste Disposal
  Mr. Alison
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what scope exists for his intervention, other than on appeal from an applicant, to consider important environmental issues raised by an individual application for a waste disposal licence, such as those arising from the Gale Common stage II ash disposal application, details of which have been referred to him.

  Mr. Maclean
  [holding answer 14 January 1993]: The Control of Pollution Act 1974 provides that waste disposal operations may be carried out only in accordance with a licence issued by a waste regulation authority. Before a licence is issued, an authority must consult the National Rivers Authority. In the event of disagreement between the regulation authority and the National Rivers Authority, either party may refer the matter to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State may also become involved in a licensing issue if the matter is referred to hirn by an applicant for a licence, or the holder of a licence, on appeal.

  These arrangements will continue when the present provisions in the 1974 Act are replaced by the licensing provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 on 1 April this year. A waste regulation authority will have to be satisfied that any applicant for a waste management licence is a fit and proper person. Grounds for rejecting a licence have been widened to include the prevention of pollution of the environment and serious detriment to the amenities of the locality. In addition, the 1990 Act provides that the Secretary of State may direct a waste regulation authority as to the terms and conditions to he included in a licence for which an application has been made to an authority.

  The Secretary of State is aware of local concerns about the Gale Common stage II site and has asked the waste regulation authority to consider them before any licence is issued.

  Nitrogen Dioxide Levels
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many times in 1992 nitrogen dioxide levels in London exceeded the safety limits; and how many testing sites currently operate in Greater London.

  Mr. Maclean
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: The limit value in the EC directive on nitrogen dioxide (85/203/EEC) was not exceeded at any of the sites in London in 1992. There are currently two sites monitoring for compliance with the EC directive at Bridge place, Victoria and in Warwick road, Earl's Court. Two other sites also measure nitrogen dioxide in London. These are at Russell square, Bloomsbury, which forms part of the recently established enhanced monitoring network, and at Cromwell road, Kensington, a kerbside site on a busy road.

  The EC directive contains two non-mandatory guide values and in 1992, on the basis of provisional data, both were exceeded at three sites, with only one of the guide values exceeded at the Warwick road (Earl's Court) site.

  Press Office
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many staff were employed by his Department's press office in each year since 1979.

  Mr. Howard
  [holding answer 15 January 1993]: The staff in post for the information directorate since 1 April 1989 are as follows:

  Number

  1 April 1989

  47

  1 April 1990

  43

  1 April 1991

  45

  1 April 1992

  43

  Before 1989, the information directorate of this Department was part of the common services of DOE and Department of Transport and separate figures for the resources for each Department are not available. Global information for this period is published each year in the
  128
  form of a management information system for Ministers (MINIS) dating back to 1979 and is available in the House of Commons Library.

  Street Lighting
  Ms. Coffey
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what studies his Department has carried out into the effectiveness at crime prevention of the new white street lights relative to conventional sodium yellow lights; and if he will publish the results.

  Mr. Jack
  I have been asked to reply.

  The most recent Home Office research on the relationship between street lighting and crime and the fear of crime was published in August 1991 (Crime Prevention Unit Paper, 28, "The Influence of the Street Lighting on Crime and Fear of Crime" and CPU Paper, 29, "The Effect of Better Street Lighting on Crime and Fear: a Review"). Copies of both are in the Library of the House. These studies did not specifically examine the differential effects on crime of white and yellow street lights.

Preamble
Reassembling after the Christmas Recess, the House met at half-past two of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Chichester.

Channel Tunnel: Anti-Rabies Measures
Lord Boyd-Carpenter Lord Boyd-Carpenter asked Her Majesty's Government:
What action they are taking to prevent the introduction of rabies into the United Kingdom through the Channel Tunnel.
The Minister of State, Department of Transport (The Earl of Caithness): My Lords, animal health controls at the Channel Tunnel and its terminals are and will be just as strict as those presently in force at the sea ports and airports. In addition, the Channel Tunnel concessionaires have established a number of preventative measures to stop wild animals straying into the tunnel, and more will be put in place once the tunnel is operational.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer, but is he aware of the fact that, by providing open physical access, the tunnel is in a different position from those points of entry where there is access by sea or air? Are Her Majesty's Government conscious of that difference and of the need, therefore, to take far greater precautions at the entrance to the tunnel than at other points of entry into this country?
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, it is for that very reason that we are taking additional measures. There will be three lines of defence: there will be a main perimeter fence, a secure boundary, and an electric system all the way round the interior of the tunnel to try to prevent animals entering. There will also be baited traps throughout the tunnel system.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, I am sure that the Minister will view with approbation the fact that the House would welcome the strongest possible measures. The three lines of defence seem to be encouraging. I only hope that they will not trap any human beings. However, can the Minister say whether there is to be any removal of the requirement in respect of quarantine for domestic dogs? I understand that the Government have said that that matter is under consideration. Is it still under consideration and, if so, when can we expect a response?
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, that is an important point. I can assure the House that quarantine remains where there is any risk of importing disease.
Lord Beloff: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that there is at least an equal, if not a greater, danger
716
from boozy day-trippers to Calais bringing back domestic pets now that apparently there are no controls whatever at the ports?
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, there will he plenty of control at the ports—whether they be sea ports, airports, or the Channel Tunnel ports. I am sure that my noble friend recognises that if people wish to take their pets abroad—and I hope that they do not bring them back the same day—they are able to do that at the moment.

NACAB Report: Consumer Credit
2.40 p.m.
Lord Ashley of Stoke Lord Ashley of Stoke asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will discuss with the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux the practices of the credit industry following the publication of its report on the problems of 1,782,000 of their clients who sought advice on consumer and debt matters in the year ending April 1992.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Baroness Denton of Wakefield): My Lords, I shall be pleased to discuss this matter with the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux if it wishes to do so.
Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, although I welcome the Minister's Answer, is she aware that this report reveals the extent to which very poor people are cruelly exploited by extortionate rates of interest while trying to cope with very low and inadequate incomes? In one case mentioned in the report the rate of interest was 972 per cent. As a result, people slide from poverty into penury. When the Minister has these discussions, will she suggest that action is taken against the sort of pressure that is exerted by some of the banks and against some of the very unfair practices that exist?
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord that it is the people at the bottom of the income scale who suffer most from this problem. The Consumer Credit Act contains provisions to allow the courts to reopen extortionate credit bargains. In producing his report, the Director General of Fair Trading emphasised that it was important that we publicise that fact as much as possible.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, does the Minister accept that an increasing number of people are using credit as a sort of sticking plaster for quite inadequate benefits? Is she satisfied that the Consumer Credit Act really does give the sort of protection that is needed for some of these people who seem to me not to be protected? Will she raise this issue when she meets the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux?
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I am pleased to reassure the noble Lord that I shall, of course, cover those subjects. I quote from the report of the Director General of Fair Trading. He said:
"Most credit for most consumers most of the time causes no problems".
It is multiple debt that causes problems. Perhaps I should add that the 1.8 million cases referred to in the NACAB report are inquiries. The Policy Studies Institute has shown that half a million households have three or more debts. Those are the ones that we should be looking at.
Lord Bruce of Donington: My Lords, will the Government give some consideration to the possible re-enactment of the main provisions of the Moneylenders Act 1927, the repeal of which by the Consumer Credit Act left some very considerable gaps? Is the Minister aware that in the pre-war years the provisions of, in particular, Section 6 of the Moneylenders Act 1927, which are not currently in force today, proved a considerable check against illicit credit, undue pressure and all the evils that come from unrestricted money lending?
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I repeat that most credit does not cause problems; 85 per cent. of credit relates to mortgages. However, I agree with the noble Lord that there is work to do on the Consumer Credit Act. As soon legislative time is available we will do it.
Lord Mishcon: My Lords, when the Minister sees representatives of the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux will she take the opportunity to express the admiration of the House for the work that they do? Will she also say how generous the Government will be in their grants to the organisation?
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I welcome any opportunity to praise the work of the citizens advice bureaux. They provide help which would be sadly missed if they did not exist. Obviously I cannot prophesy future income, but in the past we have managed to ensure real-term growth in their income.
Lord Peston: My Lords, I thank the Minister for saying that she is willing to see representatives of the CAB. But does she agree that, although the problems involve a minority of borrowers, that is the characteristic of problems generally in our society? It is always the minority about which we are worried; but that does not make the situation less important. If anything, it makes it more important. The Consumer Credit Act goes back to 1974. It was drafted well ahead of the great boom in borrowing that took place in the 1980s. Do I understand her to say that she and her department are at least open to considering possible reform of or amendment to that Act when legislative time can be found?
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, yes.

Social Security Fraud
2.45 p.m.
Lord Benson Lord Benson asked Her Majesty's Government:
In the light of the announcement by the Secretary of State for Social Security on 9th December 1992 that he expected to save about £1 billion next year by the elimination of fraud, for how many years has fraud on this scale existed.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Social Security (Lord Henley): My Lords, fraud appears to have been increasing in recent years. Benefit savings achieved by our fraud investigators have trebled over the past six years. We hope to reach a target of £460 million in the current year. We believe total fraud to be still higher which is why we have a new target of savings of £1 billion for 1993–94.
Lord Benson: My Lords, does the Minister agree that the individuals in the DSS who have acquiesced in that enormous misuse of public funds should now be identified and prevented from holding office under the Government in future?
Lord Henley: My Lords, I do not accept what the noble Lord has to say. What I am trying to make clear is that we place a very high priority on the detection of fraud, the deterrence of fraud, the recovery of overpayment of fraudulently paid money and prosecution where it is relevant. It is very, very difficult ever to estimate the extent of fraud within the social security system. While we place a high priority on deterring it and detecting it, we also wish to administer the benefits system in the best manner possible to make it accessible to all those legitimately entitled to their benefits.
Baroness Faithfull: My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Benson, about fraud. Is my noble friend sure that social security offices are staffed adequately, with people adequately trained to do the job?
Lord Henley: My Lords, yes. We had some 2,853 people in the year 1991–92 employed on fraud work in our local offices up and down the country. We certainly intend to offer more specialist training to those fraud staff and greater training to people, for example, within the Post Office who help to administer benefits on our behalf. We hope by that means to increase quite dramatically the amount of money to be recovered.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, none of us condones fraud. But following what the Minister has just said, the number of people prosecuted last year for DSS fraud fell by almost a half. We all know that the social security legislation is complex and that both benefits staff and claimants make innocent mistakes. How much of last year's putative savings of £427 million were due to the recovery of payments made as a result of innocent error as opposed to overpayments made as a result of fraud? Secondly, does he agree that the latest government figures suggest that in 1988–89

719
some £1.6 billion of benefit money went unclaimed? In the light of that, while the Minister rightly pursues those who claim what they are not entitled to, will he pursue with equal vigour those who do not claim that to which they are entitled?
Lord Henley: My Lords, the take-up of benefits is entirely another question. In passing, I should point out to the noble Baroness that £9 out of £10 gets through to individual claimants. We certainly intend, as I said earlier, to deal with fraud as an important priority. We intend to see that taxpayers' money goes to the right people. We intend to ensure that benefit gets to the appropriate claimants. As I said, £9 out of £10 already does.
The noble Baroness asked how much of the £427 million was money actually recovered. I am afraid that we do not have figures on the amount of money recovered, but we intend, as I said earlier, to continue to pursue fraud with the utmost vigour. We think that we have enough staff to do that.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, will the Minister amplify his answer? How much of the £427 million recovered was money obtained by fraud as opposed to overpayments made as a result of innocent errors by staff and claimants?
Lord Henley: My Lords, all that money is fraud. We do not give separate figures for money recovered. I cannot give separate figures showing whether money is fraudulently overpaid, innocently overpaid or the result of official error. The £427 million is largely a notional figure produced as a result of multiplying the weekly benefit savings identified by the number of weeks it is estimated that people would have been overpaid.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, does the Minister accept that of that £427 million he cannot tell how much relates to fraud and how much relates to honest mistakes?
Lord Henley: My Lords, all that figure relates to fraud. I am not giving a figure for the recovery of moneys which were overpaid as a result of official error or an innocent error by the individual concerned.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, bearing in mind that it is estimated that more than £4 billion is lost as a result of tax evasion, will the Minister assure the House that the Government will also pursue tax evaders with the utmost vigour?
Lord Henley: My Lords, the noble Lord will accept that that is a totally different question and one to which he knows the answer. Clearly the Government pursue those who evade taxes in the same way as they pursue those who try to gain benefits fraudulently.

Regimental Bands
2.50 p.m.
Lord Vivian Lord Vivian asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will ensure the future of regimental bands in view of unit medical cover currently provided by regimental bandsmen.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Viscount Cranborne): My Lords, the future structure of bands in the Army is at present under review. A number of options are being considered but it would be wrong for me to anticipate the outcome.
Lord Vivian: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer. Does he agree that the Government are fully committed to the preservation of the regimental system; and would not the removal of regimental bands indicate that they are changing their present policy? Secondly, does my noble friend agree that the abolition of regimental bands will mean that a number of trained soldiers will be denied valuable field training experience because, when regiments leave their barracks in order to train, those trained soldiers will have to stay behind to carry out barrack security duties currently undertaken by regimental bandsmen?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I am delighted to give my noble friend the assurance about the regimental system which he seeks. All Ministers in the Ministry of Defence and members of the Army Board have repeatedly given that assurance. It gives me great pleasure to give a similar assurance to my noble friend today. Furthermore, I can reassure him that the review process will take full account of the additional duties undertaken by bandsmen; for instance, medical and security tasks and how they can be fulfilled in the most cost-effective way. My noble friend may agree that it would be unwise of me to anticipate the results of the review and answer a hypothetical question.
Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone: My Lords, will my noble friend confirm that when the regiments in question are engaged in operational duties it is still Army practice to look to the personnel of the regimental bands for stretcher bearers?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, my noble and learned friend knows that in wartime bandsmen have a task as medical orderlies and that that task is still part of their duties. However, I must point out that that task is not fulfilled during the course of their duty in Northern Ireland.
Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, will the review to which my noble friend referred include examination of the arrangements for training military bandsmen, in particular the three training establishments where that takes place, no doubt using a considerable amount of scarce resources?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his question, conscious as I am of his considerable knowledge and experience of these matters. Yes, indeed, the future of the training schools

721
is being kept under active review and will form part of the review to which I have referred. I can only repeat that no decision has yet been taken.
Lord Donaldson of Kingsbridge: My Lords, will the Minister confirm my memory that the Government spend more money on regimental bands than, through the Arts Council or in any other way, on any other form of music?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I am ashamed to admit to your Lordships that I have not yet indulged in making comparisons with my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for National Heritage in respect of how much he spends on music. The approximate cost of Army bands for this year, including capitation, is anticipated to be £50 million. I must point out that that considerable amount of money has to be examined in the light of the reduction in the overall military forces. As many of your Lordships have pointed out, manpower is a continuing issue which we keep under review. We are well aware of the importance of ensuring that we have adequate numbers of operational soldiers over and above bandsmen.
Lord Grimond: My Lords, I greatly admire military bands, but does the Minister not agree that the fact that they provide stretcher bearers is a slightly eccentric reason for keeping them?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, no doubt the noble Lord is a better judge than I of the eccentricity of others. The review is couched in less subjective terms than he suggests. The results will be entirely pragmatic and will attempt to take account not only of the future of Army manpower as a whole but of the most cost-effective way of maintaining the morale which bands undoubtedly provide to the military man during the execution of his duties.
Lord Williams of Elvel: My Lords, will the Minister confirm that the five bands of the Foot Guards and the mounted band of the Household Cavalry are not threatened by the proposals because they constitute state bands which perform public duties? If that is the case, does it mean that all other regimental bands are not state bands?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I am constantly astonished by the remarkable authority with which the noble Lord informs your Lordships of the true state of affairs in my department. He and other noble Lords will not expect me to anticipate the results of the review today. However, I give an undertaking to your Lordships' House that as soon as a decision is taken I shall make an announcement in an appropriate form.
Viscount Allenby of Megiddo: My Lords, will the Minister assure the House that in the review to which he has referred there is no intention of reducing the number of territorial and other reserve force bands which play such an important part in recruitment to
722
those forces? They often supplement the bands of the regular forces and it is important that that should continue.
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I confirm that the present review does not count within its remit the status of Territorial Army bands. As far as my department is concerned their status will remain the same for the foreseeable future.
Lord Mackie of Benshie: My Lords, did the Minister's answer to the noble Lord, Lord Williams, mean that the noble Lord was correct in saying that the Household Cavalry band and the band of the Foot Guards will not be subject to review?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I apologise for not having made my reply clear. However, much as the noble Lord tries, I hope that I shall be able to withstand his blandishments and ask him, as I asked the noble Lord, Lord Williams, to wait until the completion of the review to hear my announcement.

Business
2.59 p.m.
Lord Hesketh: My Lords, at a convenient moment after 3.30 p.m. my noble friend Lord Cranborne will, with the leave of the House, repeat a Statement that is to be made in another place on Iraq.

Asylum and Immigration Appeals Bill
Brought from the Commons on Wednesday last and printed pursuant to Standing Order 48; read a first time.

Agriculture Bill [H.L.]
The Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Earl Howe): My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That the amendments for the Report stage be marshalled and considered in the following order—

Clauses 1 to 3,

Schedule 1,

Clauses 4 to 11,

Schedule 2,

Clauses 12 to 25,

Schedule 3,

Clauses 26 to 32,

Schedule 4,

Clauses 33 to 55,

Schedule 5,

Clause 56.—(Earl Howe.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

British Coal and British Rail (Transfer Proposals) Bill
3.1 p.m.
Read a third time.
Clause 1 [Power to act in relation to proposals for transfer of functions, property etc.]:
Lord Donoughue Lord Donoughue moved Amendment No. 1:
Page 1, line 10, after ("include") insert ("providing subsection (1B) below has been satisfied").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, for the convenience of the House, in moving this amendment I shall speak also to Amendment No. 5.
This is the only amendment which we move on the coal aspect of the Bill. However, it absorbs new and important developments which have taken place since Committee stage. Therefore I trust that the House will allow me to explain in a little detail why the amendment is proposed and what it seeks to achieve.
The amendment seeks to ensure that in future decisions on the destiny of the British coal industry observe two procedural aspects: to proceed with due consultation with the relevant parties according to agreed procedures; and to proceed with independent scrutiny of the facts, the figures and analysis in the decision-making. That approach is not new; we have pressed consistently for that on this side of the House. In the big debate on 19th October our Motion specifically called for such independence of review. The House voted to agree that Motion by a comfortable majority with support from all sides, including government supporters. In Committee I moved amendments raising those issues, especially relating to due consultation.
Throughout that time the Government have resisted such pressures. They refused to set up a formal independent inquiry into the coal industry and I shall say more on that later. They instituted an internal review but not a proper independent inquiry which this House demanded. They rejected criticisms that the DTI and British Coal had ignored and breached the laws in agreed procedures relating to due consultation on pit closures. I argued that in Committee and it was rejected.
There has recently been a most important development. The courts, represented by Lord Justice Glidewell and Mr. Justice Hidden, announced their judicial verdict since we went into Recess and since the Committee stage. That verdict was given in the Recess and was entangled in the Christmas diversions and it may be that some noble Lords did not have the opportunity to study it. Certainly this is the first time that this House has had a chance to consider that judgment.
It was a devastating judgment. I cannot recall a time when a government department, a Secretary of State and a public corporation were judged to be so wrong doing. The judgment also supports our case as previously put, and as put in this amendment.
For the assistance of the House, I shall summarise briefly the judgment of 21st December of Lord Justice Glidewell and Mr. Justice Hidden. It concluded that the decisions of the Secretary of State for trade and
724
British Coal—namely, on 13th October to close 31 collieries and on 19th October to close 10 and to review the other 31—were unlawful, and that the Secretary of State was ultra vires in his actions and decisions. The judgment stated that the decision was made without any consultation with the unions and so was in breach of Section 99 of the Employment Protection Act 1975, now Section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992. The decision seemed also to be in breach of Article 2 of 1975 Directive No. 75 of the European Council.
It states that the Secretary of State and British Coal deprived the trade unions and workforce of a legitimate expectation that the modified colliery review procedure would be followed and also that the decision to close the 10 pits without any independent scrutiny was "irrational". The court concluded also that British Coal and the Secretary of State should not reach a final decision on closures until, first, the review procedure had been completed; and, secondly:
"some form of independent scrutiny had been followed in relation to each of the collieries".
The judgment states that the court is very anxious about what happens now. It ruled that:
"What is needed is the rapid addition of some independent scrutiny".
I repeat, "some independent scrutiny". The court had in its possession knowledge of the actions which the Government had taken and clearly did not consider them to be sufficiently independent. Lord Justice Glidewell concluded that the decisions of 13th and 19th October were quashed.
What an incredible indictment and what a humiliation that is for the Government, the department and British Coal! The Secretary of State and British Coal were deemed by distinguished judges to have acted, "unlawfully," "ultra vires" and, "irrationally". The judgment states categorically that the Government joined with British Coal in flagrantly breaching British law, a European directive and the coal industry's long-established consultative process.
I wonder how noble Lords on all Benches feel about that. I am sure that everyone will agree that it is not a matter of pride. I have no recollection of such a powerful judicial condemnation of any government and their advisers.
My Lords, what do we conclude? I believe that we are perfectly justified in concluding, first, that in the area of consultation, which is the first area mentioned in the amendment, the Government and British Coal cannot be sufficiently trusted to obey the law or follow agreed industry procedures. Those rights and obligations in relation to consultation must be guaranteed and entrenched. In my view I should add that that will relate to safety as well as to closures because there are further signs in British Coal's submission to the coal review that it proposes to alter safety standards but it has not consulted the unions on that. That is what this amendment seeks to achieve and I do not see how the Government, given their record, recent history and the court's judgment, can resist that.
The Minister may argue that since November the consultative procedures have been followed in relation

725
to closures. I must advise the House to view that with scepticism. Since the court's judgment quashing the decisions, there are no valid closure decisions in existence on which to consult. The Government and British Coal have been found guilty of abusing the consultative process and cannot be trusted to use it properly in the future. Those processes are not being properly followed now. The amendment seeks to correct that situation in future in relation to the coal industry by entrenching and guaranteeing the proper conduct of due consultative procedures. That is consultation.
The second aspect of our amendment concerns independent scrutiny. The court judgment pronounced that what was needed was,
"the rapid addition of some independent scrutiny."
The House, and much outside opinion, has also called for that, and this amendment seeks to address that factor.
The Government have admittedly—and we always attempt to be fair when we can—made some gestures in this direction. I should like briefly to explain why we think that they are not enough. The first gesture—it is really more than a gesture because we welcomed it—is the Government's own review of the coal industry. That is welcome because it has opened up the energy debate. But it is not an independent review. It is an internal review, and the Government have chosen to ignore the vote in this House calling for an independent review.
The Secretary of State has repeatedly stated in the past that he finds the arguments for closures compelling. He has not, to my knowledge, retracted that. The Prime Minister said the same on television, and to my knowledge he has not retracted that. The official advisers within the department are still the same people who drafted electricity privatisation in such a way that the market was structured, tilted, to exclude coal. They have prejudged the issue. We have no evidence that they have changed their minds, and there has been no White Paper so far.
Two Select Committees in another place are due to report—the Trade and Industry Committee and the Employment Committee. We welcome that and look forward to those reports. They are independent, although of course they contain government supporters. However, they are not permanently reviewing the future of the coal industry in the way that we believe is required; nor are the Government committed to accepting their conclusions.
Here I should like to say a few words about Boyds, the American consultants. We have heard that the company was appointed as consultants in response to the court's view that an independent scrutiny was required. The Secretary of State and the Department announced that, in response to the court's judgment, they were appointing Boyds to report on the closure of the 10 doomed pits. Since then we have also read that that decision has been retracted; that it has not been appointed. It would be helpful if the Minister would clarify the position on the appointment of Boyds. Has that company been appointed in response to the court's request for independent scrutiny, or has there
726
been another U-turn? It was appointed and then dismissed, or was it never appointed at all? The attempt to appoint Boyds, whether or not it still holds, is significant because it demonstrates that the Government do not yet understand or accept the concept of independent scrutiny as has been put forward here and supported by the court. Boyds is not independent; it is closely associated with the earlier policies that led to the closure decision.
I should like to restate what the judge said. He said that it is for British Coal and the unions to decide how such an independent scrutiny should be conducted. He said that not only should there be an independent scrutiny—and we have stated that Boyds is not independent—but he stated explicitly that the unions should be involved in that decision. The unions were not consulted on who should do it and how the independent scrutiny would be conducted before that announcement. So there was yet another arbitrary, one-sided decision to appoint Boyds as the independent scrutiny. That was in breach of the industry's consultation obligations, in defiance of the court's decision, and in defiance of the decision that it should be done jointly with the unions.
We have neither due consultation nor sufficient independent scrutiny. Those are two crucial factors necessary for future decision-making in the coal industry, and which have been called for by the court, by those who work in the industry, by most independent outside commentators, and by many in this House. This amendment seeks to provide just that, and to provide it on a consensual basis by agreement among all interested parties to secure an agreed future for this industry. It is a necessary protection against the kind of arbitrary, doctrinaire, ill-considered and lack of consultative decision-making from which the industry has recently suffered. The amendment seeks to ensure that such decision-making will be based on an objective and fair analysis of the facts and is figures, and is taken within the rational framework of a coherent energy strategy.
That is what the British coal industry needs and deserves but has not recently experienced: independent scrutiny, coherent analysis, due consultation, and decisions within the law of the land. I trust that the Minister will accept that as being in everyone's interest. I also trust that we will not just have nit-picking on the mere words of the amendment. I hope it will be accepted that the basic principles of independence and consultation will be incorporated in the Bill. I beg to move.
3.15 p.m.
Lord Ezra: My Lords, I should like to support the amendment moved by the noble Lord, Lord Donoughue, for a number of reasons. First, he was right to draw our attention to the important developments that took place while this House was in Recess and to the judgment of the court on 21st December. This immediately followed events that took place on 13th October when the Government's original announcement was made and then the amended announcement on 19th October. It is right

727
therefore that this opportunity should be seized to emphasise the fundamental issues raised in that judgment.
Let me deal first with the consultative procedure. One of the most important traditions established since the enactment of the Coal Industry Act 1946 was the progressive development of consultation, particularly with regard to the key, very human and often emotional issue of colliery closures. During the time that I was in the Coal Board we took immense pains in preparing the case, with technical assessment of the remaining reserves and of the difficulties in mining those reserves if we were of that opinion. I can remember, when particularly difficult closures were being considered, that presentations were made by a team to the full board before they went down to the colliery to make the presentation. On some occasions we invited Members of Parliament from the various parties to come so that they could also be apprised of the issues involved, and the reasons that had led us, as managers trying to do what was in the best interests of the industry, to our conclusions.
That was an important tradition, established over many years. The saddest part of the most recent developments was the Government's announcement about the closures on 13th October, which seemed to set aside entirely this great tradition of consultation. Therefore, at the very least we need to be reassured that that will be restored, that from now on no pits will be closed without the full consultative procedures taking place, and indeed that that will be the procedure to be adopted whoever might end up owning these pits. We also have to think about the future. That can be put down as a condition in the licence to mine the coal from the pits that may or may not be sold to other parties.
As to the independent review procedure on which the noble Lord, Lord Donoughue, also laid emphasis, the House barely needs to be reminded that a majority of your Lordships were in favour of such an independent review and independent approach. I believe that the views then expressed by a majority, and carried by a majority vote, should be endorsed by the procedures to be adopted from now on.
A great difficulty has been created by what happened on 13th October. The concern of all of us in the House must surely be to find a fair and reasonable way out of that difficulty. I believe that the amendment so ably moved by the noble Lord, Lord Donoughue, presents a way of dealing with one of the most important aspects of that difficulty.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, I wish to raise two quite separate points which were not raised by my noble friend Lord Donoughue in his absolutely brilliant introductory speech. The first relates to coal and the second to the relationship between coal and rail. As far as I understand the position, British Coal has complained that coal imported from non-European Community countries amounts to dumping in a number of respects. I believe that the allegations relate to Colombian coal, where child labour is widely used, and to South African coal, where exploitation of another kind takes place. My understanding is that the Commission has declined to take action. I wonder
728
whether the Minister can confirm or deny that position. If the Commission has declined to take action where the Coal Board believes that a strong case has been made out, will the Minister indicate whether the board and/or the Government have it in mind to take proceedings against the Commission as regards its failure to act?
My second point concerns the relationship between the freight transport movements of British Rail and the closure programme of British Coal. Have the Government taken into account the relationship between those two industries in that regard? That is not an unreasonable question to ask because the Government have set about this hybrid procedure to deal with the two industries. That was undertaken very unwisely, but none the less my question is relevant. It is rendered even more relevant by the fact that Sir Bob Reid, giving evidence before the House of Commons Select Committee on Employment, indicated that British Rail's profit from coal was substantial. He said according to a report in the press that the,
"latest figures for transporting bulk goods, including coal, disclose a turnover of £505 million and an operating profit of £67.5 million … the only way to offset these losses would be for the Government to increase its subsidy to BR, or a fare increase".
He also said that if British Coal's current plans were to be undertaken 1,151 employees would have to be made redundant as far as the railways are concerned, and they would come mainly from staff operating the system from pithead to power stations. He indicated that eventual job losses could reach about 2,770 over four years. He also made a remarkable comment when he said that he, as chairman of British Rail, was given no warning of the announcement made by British Coal. Those are serious matters. What I and the House will want to know is whether those factors were taken into account by the Government in the assessments they undertook.
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Donoughue, has introduced into this debate the judgment of Lord Justice Glidewell and Mr. Justice Hidden on the colliery closure decisions announced on 13th and 19th October. Despite the eloquent case made by the noble Lord at no point can I see that it has any relevance to the Bill which we are considering today. This Bill and the closure decisions are entirely separate subjects. They are both important subjects. In case recent festivities have affected the memories of noble Lords, I should remind the House of the purpose of our deliberations on this Bill. We are here to give a Third Reading to a Bill whose purpose is to allow two corporations to make preparations for privatisation. That is a narrow technical purpose but one which is of vital importance to the two corporations.
Without this Bill British Coal and British Rail would be severely handicapped as regards contributing to and commenting on plans for privatisation. However, I must respond to the noble Lord, Lord Donoughue, in view of the nature of the points he made despite their lack of relevance to this Bill. My right honourable friend the President of the Board of Trade has noted the judgment of the court on these cases and in the light of that judgment has appointed

729
Boyds—this has been mentioned—which is an internationally renowned firm of mining consultants, to produce an independent report on the 10 pits. I noted but did not understand the noble Lord's comment that previous knowledge reduces independence. The matter we are discussing is a separate exercise from the report on the 21 pits. It is of course for British Coal and the mining unions to decide whether the appointment of Boyds meets the needs of the case.
Lord Donoughue: My Lords, I must refer to my comments on Boyds in questioning the true independence of that firm. Will the Minister tell us who paid Boyds for its previous advice and involvement in the department's policy making?
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I do not believe that the matter of who paid a consultant is relevant to that consultant's independence. I emphasise again that it is for British Coal and the mining unions to decide whether the appointment of Boyds meets the need for an independent element as suggested by the court. I emphasise to noble Lords that the appointment by the President of the Board of Trade is not intended in any way to pre-empt the outcome of the discussions between British Coal and the unions on the procedure which they should now follow. However, the Government hope that British Coal and the unions will view this appointment as a helpful step which introduces an appropriate independent element and that they will agree to make use of it.
British Coal and the unions will be given the opportunity to make representations to Boyds before the draft report is produced. They will also be able to accompany Boyds on the latter's pit visits. My right honourable friend has asked Boyds to arrange for the mining unions and British Coal to receive copies of the report in draft and has also asked Boyds to receive their comments. He will require Boyds to take into account those comments in finalising its report. It will of course be for Boyds to decide on the final content of its report as it is essential for all concerned that the report should be independent.
My right honourable friend proposes to publish Boyds's final report. No final decisions will be taken on closing the 10 pits until the consultation process has been completed, Boyds has reported on the 10 pits and Parliament has had the chance to debate the coal review White Paper and the report of the Trade and Industry Select Committee. Those are not gestures. I believe that they demonstrate that the Government take the judgment of the court very seriously.
In addition to those developments in relation to the 10 pits, noble Lords will also appreciate that the review of the future of the 21 pits proposed for closure in October currently being undertaken is deep and wide-ranging. Evidence has been received from over 300 organisations and individuals. All the evidence has been passed to the Trade and Industry Select Committee and made publicly available except in cases where those submitting it have asked that it should not be. The Government will be publishing a
730
number of studies commissioned from independent consultants. The Trade and Industry and Employment Select Committees are conducting their own independent inquiries. There will be a White Paper, which the Government hope to publish as soon as possible next month and which this House and another place will have an opportunity to debate. As your Lordships will know from earlier stages of the Bill, no decision will be taken on the timing of coal privatisation legislation until after those debates.
If the amendment is an attempt to inject a further element of review covering essentially the same ground as the coal review, the two Select Committees and the Boyds study of the 10 pits, then it would serve little purpose other than to postpone the important decisions which must be reached to end the uncertainty currently facing both British Coal and the miners and to delay British Coal's ability to make plans to improve productivity and reduce costs in order to secure the largest possible share of the market.
Further, if the amendment merely seeks to add an independent process of scrutiny to any possible pit closures, then again it would serve little purpose in the light of the way British Coal has responded to the observations of Lord Justice Glidewell. Again, it would continue the uncertainty facing British Coal and its employees.
It would appear from the amendment that, if the Secretary of State made a proposal to British Coal which included the possibility of the closure of a colliery, then before British Coal could consider that proposal there would be an independent inquiry chaired by a person appointed jointly by my right honourable friend the President of the Board of Trade, British Coal and the relevant trade unions. Colliery closures are not proposed by the Secretary of State to British Coal but are a management matter for British Coal under its statutory duties and functions. They are therefore proposed by British Coal and are subject to obligations to consult in relation to proposed redundancies. The powers of the Bill, which concern the facilitating of privatisation, are not related to British Coal's ability in law to propose colliery closures. Therefore, the amendment would probably not bite on the colliery closure proposals as intended.
The noble Lord asked whether the appointment of Boyds had been confirmed. The appointment of Boyds resulted from remarks by Lord Justice Glidewell that that might provide the way forward, although it was recognised that agreement on that form of scrutiny was a matter for British Coal and the unions.
I turn now to the question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, in relation to dumping. As he well knows, it is for the European Commission to decide whether complaints, including that made by British Coal, merit further investigation. The Government expect the Commission to take its responsibilities in this area seriously and therefore to consider the complaint seriously. I understand that the Commission has not yet reached a decision on

731
whether to open an investigation. The Government have told the Commission that they have no objection to a formal investigation being started.
I shall leave it to my noble friend to comment in detail on any matters concerning British Rail's case in respect of freight, but obviously that is part of the review.
I hope that the noble Lords recognise that the amendment is not appropriate for the Bill and would continue the uncertainty which surrounds the coal industry. It would have a damaging effect on the ability of British Coal to contribute to the privatisation process which is the main purpose of the part of the Bill relating to coal. I hope that I have answered the questions raised by the noble Lord and that he will be encouraged to withdraw the amendment.
3.30 p.m.
Lord Dormand of Easington: My Lords, before the noble Baroness sits down will she deal with the point which arises from her statement that the Government will not consider the closure of any pits until the Boyds report has been received and considered? Is she aware—I am sure that she is—that in some cases, including at least one of the 10 pits, miners are going to the pits but are being refused employment even though they are being paid? Can one think of anything more ludicrous than to have miners at a pit and yet not to produce coal? If the noble Baroness and her colleagues think that that is not relevant to the Bill, they must be living in cloud-cuckoo-land. She ought to deal with that specific issue because the matters which my noble friend Lord Donoughue raised indicate a flagrant disregard of the decision of the court. As I have said before in this Chamber, if a pit is not worked it very soon crumbles and production at that pit may be stopped for ever. These points ought to be dealt with in detail now.
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I must inform the noble Lord, Lord Dormand, that, as he will know, that is a matter for British Coal. However, I do not believe that there is anything in the judgment which requires coaling in the 10 pits to recommence while consultation takes place.
Lord Donoughue: My Lords, I thank the Minister for what she said. Some of it was quite stunning. To suggest that with a few amendments we on this side of the House have created uncertainty in the coal industry is breathtaking. In the creation of uncertainty in an industry we all bow to the Government and the department. I bow to the Minister.
Baroness Denton of Wakefield: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for allowing me to intervene. I did not say that the noble Lords had caused the uncertainty. I stressed that continuing that uncertainty would not be helpful to the future of the industry or to the people who work in it.
Lord Donoughue: My Lords, I do not believe that that is an adequate response to what we propose. The statement that the Bill has no relevance to the other wider matters which we have raised is also stunning.
732
One cannot detach the Bill and its proposals for privatisation from British Coal's proposals for pit closures. They are interrelated. Nothing that the Minister has said has given the assurance which we sought. It is not a question of uncertainty but of continuing consultation and continuing independent scrutiny. None of that is guaranteed. Therefore we must test the opinion of the House.
3.39 p.m.
On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 1) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided Contents, 110; Not-Contents, 133.

Division No. 1

CONTENTS

Airedale, L.

John-Mackie, L.

Ardwick, L.

Judd, L.

Ashley of Stoke, L.

Kennet, L.

Attlee, E.

Kilbracken, L.

Beaumont, of Whitley, L.

Listowel, E.

Blackstone, B.

Llewelyn-Davies of Hastoe, B.

Bonham-Carter, L.

Lockwood, B.

Boston of Faversham, L.

Longford, E.

Bottomley, L.

Lovell-Davis, L.

Brimelow, L.

Macaulay of Bragar, L.

Brooks of Tremorfa, L.

McCarthy, L.

Bruce of Donington, L.

McIntosh of Haringey, L.

Carmichael of Kelvingrove, L.

Mackie of Benshie, L.

Carter, L.

McNair, L.

Castle of Blackburn, B.

Mallalieu, B.

Cledwyn of Penrhos, L.

Mason of Barnsley, L.

Clinton-Davis, L.

Milner of Leeds, L.

Cocks of Hartcliffe, L.

Monkswell, L.

David, B.

Morris of Castle Morris, L.

Dean of Beswick, L.

Murray of Epping Forest, L.

Donaldson of Kingsbridge, L.

Nicol, B.

Donoughue, L.

Northfield, L.

Dormand of Easington, L.

Ogmore, L.

Ewing of Kirkford, L.

Peston, L.

Ezra, L.

Pitt of Hampstead, L.

Falkender, B.

Plant of Highfleld, L.

Falkland, V.

Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L.

Fisher of Rednal, B.

Prys-Davies, L.

Fitt, L.

Rea, L.

Foot, L.

Richard, L.

Gallacher, L.

Ritchie of Dundee, L.

Galpern, L.

Robson of Kiddington, B.

Geraint, L.

Rochester, L.

Gladwyn, L.

Sainsbury, L.

Graham of Edmonton, L. [Teller.]

Seear, B.

Sefton of Garston, L.

Greenhill of Harrow, L.

Serota, B.

Grey, E.

Shackleton, L.

Hamwee, B.

Shaughnessy, L.

Hanworth, V.

Shepherd, L.

Harris of Greenwich, L.

Stallard, L.

Hayter, L.

Stedman, B.

Healey, L.

Stoddart of Swindon, L.

Hilton of Eggardon, B.

Strabolgi, L.

Hirshfield, L.

Taylor of Blackburn, L.

Hollick, L.

Taylor of Gryfe, L.

Hollis of Heigham, B.

Tordoff, L. [Teller.]

Holme of Cheltenham, L.

Turner of Camden, B.

Hooson, L.

Underhill, L.

Howie of Troon, L.

Wallace of Coslany, L.

Hughes, L.

Wedderburn of Charlton, L.

Hunt, L.

White, B.

Jacques, L.

Williams of Elvel, L.

Jay, L.

Wilson of Rievaulx, L.

Jay of Paddington, B.

Winchilsea and Nottingham, E.

Jeger, B.

733

NOT-CONTENTS

Addison, V.

Hood, V.

Alexander of Tunis, E.

Hothfield, L.

Allenby of Megiddo, V.

Howe, E.

Archer of Weston-Super-Mare, L.

Hylton-Foster, B.

Ironside, L.

Arran, E.

Johnston of Rockport, L.

Astor, V.

Kimball, L.

Auckland, L.

Kinnoull, E.

Belhaven and Stenton, L.

Knollys, V.

Beloff, L.

Lindsey and Abingdon, E.

Bessborough, E.

Liverpool, E.

Blatch, B.

Lloyd-George of Dwyfor, E.

Blyth, L.

Long, V.

Boardman, L.

Lyell, L.

Borthwick, L.

Mackay of Ardbrecknish, L.

Boyd-Carpenter, L.

Mackay of Clashfern, L.

Brabazon of Tara, L.

Macleod of Borve, B.

Braine of Wheatley, L.

Malmesbury, E.

Butterworth, L.

Manchester, D.

Cadman, L.

Mancroft, L.

Caithness, E.

Margadale, L.

Campbell of Alloway, L.

Marlesford, L.

Campbell of Croy, L.

Merrivale, L.

Carnegy of Lour, B.

Mersey, V.

Carnock, L.

Monk Bretton, L.

Cayzer, L.

Morris, L.

Charteris of Amisfield, L.

Mountevans, L.

Chelmsford, V.

Moyne, L.

Clanwilliam, E.

Munster, E.

Cochrane of Cults, L.

Nelson, E.

Cockfield, L.

Norfolk, D.

Constantine of Stanmore, L.

Norrie, L.

Cox, B.

O'Cathain, B.

Craigavon, V.

Orkney, E.

Cranborne, V.

Orr-Ewing, L.

Cullen of Ashbourne, L.

Palmer, L.

Cumberlege, B.

Pender, L.

Dacre of Glanton, L.

Platt of Writtle, B.

Davidson, V.

Plummer of St. Marylebone, L.

De Freyne, L.

Pym, L.

Denham, L.

Quinton, L.

Denton of Wakefield, B.

Rodger of Earlsferry, L.

Eccles of Moulton, B.

Romney, E.

Effingham, E.

St. Davids, V.

Elles, B.

Selborne, E.

Elliot of Harwood, B.

Shannon, E.

Elliott of Morpeth, L.

Simon of Glaisdale, L.

Elton, L.

Strange, B.

Erne, E.

Strathcarron, L.

Erroll of Hale, L.

Strathclyde, L.

Faithfull, B.

Strathmore and Kinghorne, E. [Teller.]

Flather, B.

Fraser of Carmyllie, L.

Sudeley, L.

Fraser of Kilmorack, L.

Terrington, L.

Gainford, L.

Teviot, L.

Geddes, L.

Thomas of Gwydir, L.

Goschen, V.

Trefgarne, L.

Greenway, L.

Trumpington, B.

Gridley, L.

Ullswater, V.

Hailsham of Saint Marylebone, L.

Vaux of Harrowden, L.

Vivian, L.

Harding of Petherton, L.

Wakeham, L.

Harmar-Nicholls, L.

Walker of Worcester, L.

Hayhoe, L.

Westbury, L.

Henley, L.

Wharton, B.

Hesketh, L. [Teller.]

Wolfson, L.

Hives, L.

Wynford, L.

Holderness, L.

Young, B.

Resolved in the negative, and amendment disagreed to accordingly.
3.48 p.m.
Lord Clinton-Davis Lord Clinton-Davis moved Amendment No. 2:
Page 1, line 10, after ("include") insert ("providing subsection (1C) below has been satisfied").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, it may be for the convenience of the House if we discuss Amendment No. 6 with Amendment No. 2.
The effect of the amendments is to debar the use of powers under the Bill relating to British Rail pending the publication of reports on the effects of proposals by the Transport Select Committee and the chairman of British Rail. I justify the amendment on two grounds. The first is the growing confusion and uncertainty about the nature and likely effects of the Government's proposals. Hardly a day passes without some changes being announced. On 8th December it was announced in the Financial Times that the Government had given the clearest indication that they were prepared to bend their rail privatisation plans to make them more attractive to would-be train operators.
The article said that the Government:
"might be ready to drop its insistence on open access and allow operators effective monopolies on some lines, particularly British Rail's Network SouthEast commuter routes".
It is extraordinary that this fundamental point should be suddenly slipped in, although the Minister may say, "Well, it hasn't happened; it's just faulty reporting in the Financial Times". If that is right, then there it is. But if in fact there is substance to that report, it indicates how the Government have not thought their way through these issues.
The second point has been the absence, so far as concerns the Government's plans, of a full and open debate. If we take those points together, I believe that they reinforce the need for a fundamental review of what it is that the Government propose. The Transport Select Committee and the chairman of British Rail are well placed to be able to contribute to a review of this kind. I pray that in aid of one of the points to which I drew attention in the intervention that I made and which did not produce any reply of substance from the Minister's noble friend.
Regarding the uncertainty, I have no doubt that the Minister will say that we should await the publication of the Bill. As I understand it, that is imminent. That is not a proper response because it highlights the dangers of proceeding with poorly worked out, inadequately discussed proposals. The amendments will at least ensure that the powers in the Bill could not be used until a more open and orderly debate had taken place.
I believe that the chairman of the Transport Select Committee has made out the case for the amendments. Indeed, it has been corroborated by the reply that he received to a letter he wrote on 25th November to the Secretary of State for Transport. Following the publication of the Green Paper on the BBC by the Government, Mr. Adley wrote in the following terms:
"The Green paper is remarkable for the way in which it sets out a variety of options in a reasonably objective way, illustrating the practical advantages and disadvantages of each. There will now be a five months' consultation period. There is not even mention of legislation at this stage, let alone a detailed timetable for it".
He went on to ask whether any lessons might usefully be gleaned from the approach that had occurred in

735
relation to the BBC as concerns the rail privatisation proposals. The Secretary of State replied on 14th December:
"BR privatisation—and the ways of achieving it—have been discussed since 1988 and formed part of our manifesto commitments at the election. I think we owed it to the public to make clear the broad principles which we see governing the privatisation of BR and we did it as soon as we could after much thought by publishing the white paper in July. But we have not made up our minds on every detail. That is why we have issued—and will issue—various further documents about the way in which we think our proposals should he implemented".
That response ignores the fact that the debate which occurred between 1988 and the date upon which the White Paper was published was simply based on press reports, speculation and not on any Green Paper or a formal statement of the Government's views.
The letter also overlooked the difficulties that have arisen as a result of what I might call the "drip feed" of consultation documents. We have had one or two already. We are promised, I think, eight in all. What is required is a comprehensive view of the Government's proposals on which a full and open public debate might take place.
One aspect of the Government's proposals which is coming under increasing criticism is the proposal for the establishment of a track authority. Indeed, the Transport Select Committee has focused very much on that issue. But the Secretary of State has acknowledged in the debate which took place in another place on 12th January that this is, "at the heart of our proposals". That was the term he used. But how important is that heart in reality? Mr. Roger Freeman, winding up the debate, said that the Government,
"do not rule out the possibility of what we call vertical franchising".—[Official Report, Commons, 12/1/93; col. 863.]
The Secretary of State said at col. 795:
"In other areas of transport, we do not generally expect the provider of services to run the infrastructure as well. Therefore, the split between Railtrack and rail services is well precedented".
But Mr. Roger Freeman said at col. 863:
"In certain cases, it may make a lot of sense for franchisees to control the signalling and infrastructure—subject, of course, to the freeholding interest of Railtrack".
I think that there is an element of confusion between those two approaches.
Then there is the whole question of franchising to which I have already referred. The White Paper and the franchising document made it clear that the Government envisaged no protection from competition for companies operating franchised services. That has been widely criticised and potential franchisees have made it abundantly clear that it could well undermine the whole concept of franchising.
Therefore, in the light of that anxiety, there have been indications that the Government were reconsidering their position. But again in a further round of correspondence with the chairman of the Transport Select Committee, Mr. Roger Freeman indicated that the Government had not reached the view that franchising and open access are incompatible. His letter dated 7th December goes on to refer to problems in relation to track and station capacity in London. It ignores the key issue of whether franchising can work in a fully competitive environment.
Whether we are talking about whatever alias for these proposals the Government choose—privatisation, semi-privatisation or commercialisation (the term changes almost weekly, if not daily)—it is clear that a large number of issues require continuing open debate. That should happen before the Bill is debated. It has happened elsewhere in other respects. It is to the advantage of Parliament and of the community as a whole and it is certainly to the advantage of the future of the British railway system, and it should happen before the powers in the Bill are used. I beg to move.
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, in wishing the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, and the rest of the House a happy new year, may I suggest to the noble Lord one new year's resolution? It is not to believe everything that he reads in the press with the addiction that he has done in the past.
The Bill before us empowers BR to act in relation to proposals put to it by the Secretary of State. We look forward to BR being able to play its full part in the preparation for privatisation. BR's input will be important. The amendments tabled by the noble Lord would prevent BR from doing anything under the powers which this Bill confers on it in response to a proposal from my right honourable friend until such time as both the Transport Select Committee in another place and the chairman of British Rail have published reports setting out their reactions to that proposal.
Although I am sure that the whole House listened carefully to what the noble Lord said, I should not be surprised if the House found it as difficult as I to understand the reasoning behind the amendment. Let me turn first to the Transport Select Committee. As your Lordships will be aware, that committee is conducting an inquiry into the Government's rail privatisation proposals. This has been under way for some time and my right honourable friend has given evidence to the committee. The work of the Select Committee will provide valuable input into Parliament's consideration of the main privatisation Bill and into the further development and implementation of the proposals once the legislative framework is in place. However, nothing would be gained by preventing BR from making its input until such time as the Select Committee had produced its report.
The noble Lord's amendment also suggests that further work by BR should not proceed until a report on the effects of the proposals has been published by the chairman of British Rail. The ability of the chairman to produce a considered report may to some extent be constrained until the Bill before us is enacted. But my right honourable friend has discussed our proposals with the chairman on numerous occasions. We have kept the chairman abreast of developments in the proposals and BR is ready to make its full contribution. This will be needed during the passage of the main privatisation Bill and the period of implementation thereafter. The chairman of BR has also given evidence to the Select Committee which will no doubt he reflected in its report. But why

737
stop BR from playing its full part until its chairman has published a report? I am sure the House will agree that there can be no sense in that.
Let me repeat what I have said many times on this Bill. The objective of our privatisation proposals is to improve the quality of service to rail customers. We have published our proposals in the White Paper and in subsequent policy and consultation documents. Perhaps I might add that the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, criticised us for having what he called a drip-feed of consultation papers. He would be far more vociferous if we had not put out the consultation papers and had held them up until the last one had been prepared. He would have rightly said that the Government were withholding the information that they had. We have been absolutely honest in putting out the consultation papers as soon as they have been received. Yes, there are more to be delivered to the Government; yes, there are more for the House and everyone else to see. But as soon as we get them it is right that we make them available, as we have done in the past.
We believe that our proposals are the right way forward. We have welcomed the widespread debate which they have initiated and which will no doubt continue during the consideration of the main privatisation Bill in Parliament and on into the implementation of our proposals. All the views that we have received have helped contribute to the refinement of our proposals. I am sure noble Lords would agree that there has been no shortage of opportunities both here and in another place, or in outside debates, to consider the proposals that we have had.
We look forward to the contribution to the current debate which will be made by the Transport Select Committee and to our continuing discussions with the chairman of British Rail. I am sure the House will agree that preventing British Rail from making its full contribution would serve to hinder rather than help the process of further development of our proposals.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, I do not find that reply at all convincing. The Minister chided me for having some assiduity about press reports. I am not alone in that in this country nowadays. Certainly I asked him whether there was any truth in the matter. Is it not a perfectly reasonable point to make when so reputable a newspaper as the Financial Times draws attention to this matter? The Minister has said that there is no truth in it. But I rely far more on statements that have been made by the Secretary of State and the Minister of State in another place and in correspondence. I would claim that there is a great deal of doubt in the light of that and of the conflicts that have arisen between the statements made by both of them. It requires the Government to be far clearer in their thinking about what they are proposing.
The Minister said that the Government's objective is to improve the quality of service. It is the objective of us all. It is the way they are going about it that will produce a negative effect. That is a matter for the debate that will take place later this afternoon.
738
The Minister said that I would be more critical of the Government if they had not been forthcoming with consultation papers. I suppose there is some truth in that. Yes, I would. But he misses the whole point of my argument, which is that consultation should have taken place on the basis of a Green Paper, not the shrivelled White Paper that they ultimately produced —which was not in time for the debates in another place—which casts very little light on the Government's proposals. They should have enabled a full public debate to have taken place inside and outside this House because it is a matter of serious importance.
Then the Minister said—somewhat in conflict with his earlier remarks—that there had been no shortage of opportunities to consider the proposals in this place during the currency of the Bill. Every opportunity has been taken. There has not been a debate when either the noble Baroness or the noble Earl has not said that this was not a suitable vehicle for discussing the probing amendments—amendments which reflected very great concern on our part—and we should wait for the main Bill. They justify the rather unattractive and uninformative answers that they give on that score. Then the Minister says that there is no shortage of opportunities to consider the proposals. I do not believe that the Minister has responded properly to the case that we have made and I must therefore test the opinion of the House.
4.6 p.m.
On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 2) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided Contents, 103; Not-Contents, 137.

Division No. 2

CONTENTS

Addington, L.

Hamwee, B.

Ardwick, L.

Hanworth, V.

Ashley of Stoke, L.

Harris of Greenwich, L.

Attlee, E.

Hayter, L.

Beaumont of Whitley, L.

Healey, L.

Blackstone, B.

Hilton of Eggardon, B.

Bonham-Carter, L.

Hollick, L.

Boston of Faversham, L.

Hollis of Heigham, B. [Teller.]

Brimelow, L.

Holme of Cheltenham, L.

Bruce of Donington, L.

Hooson, L.

Carmichael of Kelvingrove, L.

Howie of Troon, L.

Carter, L.

Hughes, L.

Castle of Blackburn, B.

Hunt, L.

Cledwyn of Penrhos, L.

Jacques, L.

Clinton-Davis, L.

Jay, L.

Cocks of Hartcliffe, L.

Jay of Paddington, B.

David, B.

Jeger, B.

Dean of Beswick, L.

John-Mackie, L.

Donaldson of Kingsbridge, L.

Judd, L.

Donoughue, L.

Kennet, L.

Dormand of Easington, L.

Kilbracken, L.

Ennals, L.

Kinloss, Ly.

Ewing of Kirkford, L.

Listowel, E.

Ezra, L.

Llewelyn-Davies of Hastoe, B.

Falkender, B.

Lockwood, B.

Falkland, V.

Longford, E.

Foot, L.

Lovell-Davis, L.

Gallacher, L.

Macaulay of Bragar, L.

Galpern, L.

McCarthy, L.

Geraint, L.

McIntosh of Haringey, L.

Gladwyn, L.

Mackie of Benshie, L.

Graham of Edmonton, L. [Teller.]

McNair, L.

Mallalieu, B.

Grey, E.

Mason of Barnsley, L.

739

Milner of Leeds, L.

Shackleton, L.

Morris of Castle Morris, L.

Shepherd, L.

Nicol, B.

Stallard, L.

Northfield, L.

Stoddart of Swindon, L.

Ogmore, L.

Strabolgi, L.

Peston, L.

Taylor of Blackburn, L.

Pitt of Hampstead, L.

Taylor of Gryfe, L.

Plant of Highfield, L.

Tordoff, L.

Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L.

Turner of Camden, B.

Prys-Davies, L.

Underhill, L.

Rea, L.

Wallace of Coslany, L.

Richard, L.

Wedderburn of Charlton, L.

Ritchie of Dundee, L.

White, B.

Robson of Kiddington, B.

Williams of Elvel, L.

Rochester, L.

Williams of Mostyn, L.

Sainsbury, L.

Wilson of Rievaulx, L.

Seear, B.

Winchilsea and Nottingham, E

Serota, B.

Young of Dartington, L.

NOT-CONTENTS

Aldington, L.

Hayhoe, L.

Allen of Abbeydale, L.

Henley, L.

Allenby of Megiddo, V.

Hesketh, L. [Teller.]

Archer of Weston-Super-Mare, L.

Hives, L.

Holderness, L.

Arran, E.

Hood, V.

Astor, V.

Hooper, B.

Auckland, L.

Hothfield, L.

Belhaven and Stenton, L.

Howe, E.

Beloff, L.

Hylton-Foster, B.

Bessborough, E.

Ironside, L.

Birdwood, L.

Johnston of Rockport, L.

Blyth, L.

Kenilworth, L.

Boardman, L.

Kimball, L.

Borthwick, L.

Knollys, V.

Boyd-Carpenter, L.

Lane of Horsell, L.

Brabazon of Tara, L.

Lauderdale, E.

Braine of Wheatley, L.

Leigh, L.

Brigstocke, B.

Lindsey and Abingdon, E.

Broadbridge, L.

Liverpool, E.

Butterworth, L.

Lloyd-George of Dwyfor, E.

Cadman, L.

Long, V.

Caithness, E.

Lyell, L.

Campbell of Alloway, L.

Mackay of Ardbrecknish, L.

Campbell of Croy, L.

Mackay of Clashfern, L.

Carnegy of Lour, B.

Macleod of Borve, B.

Carnock, L.

Margadale, L.

Charteris of Amisfield, L.

Marlesford, L.

Chelmsford, V.

Merrivale, L.

Clanwilliam, E.

Mersey, V.

Cochrane of Cults, L.

Milverton, L.

Constantine of Stanmore, L.

Monk Bretton, L.

Cox, B.

Morris, L.

Craigavon, V.

Mountevans, L.

Cranborne, V.

Moyne, L.

Cullen of Ashbourne, L.

Munster, E.

Cumberlege, B.

Nelson, E.

Dacre of Glanton, L.

Norfolk, D.

Davidson, V.

Norrie, L.

De Freyne, L.

O'Cathain, B.

Denham, L.

Orkney, E.

Denton of Wakefield, B.

Orr-Ewing, L.

Eccles of Moulton, B.

Oxfuird, V.

Effingham, E.

Palmer, L.

Elles, B.

Pender, L.

Elliot of Harwood, B.

Platt of Writtle, B.

Elliott of Morpeth, L.

Plummer of St. Marylebone, L.

Erne, E.

Porritt, L.

Faithfull, B.

Prentice, L.

Finsberg, L.

Pym, L.

Flather, B.

Quinton, L.

Fraser of Carmyllie, L.

Rankeillour, L.

Fraser of Kilmorack, L.

Reading, M.

Gainford, L.

Richardson, L.

Geddes, L.

Rodger of Earlsferry, L.

Goschen, V.

Romney, E.

Gridley, L.

St. Davids, V.

Hailsham of Saint Marylebone, L.

Selborne, E.

Simon of Glaisdale, L.

Harmar-Nicholls, L.

Stedman, B.

740

Strange, B.

Ullswater, V.

Strathclyde, L.

Vaux of Harrowden, L.

Strathmore and Kinghorne, E. [Teller.]

Vivian, L.

Wakeham, L.

Sudeley, L.

Westbury, L.

Swansea, L.

Wharton, B.

Terrington, L.

Wolfson, L.

Teviot, L.

Wyatt of Weeford, L.

Thomas of Gwydir, L.

Wynford, L.

Trumpington, B.

Young, B.

Resolved in the negative, and amendment disagreed to accordingly.

Iraq: Coalition Action
4.15 p.m.
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall repeat a Statement being made in another place this afternoon by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Defence. The Statement is as follows:
"Yesterday and earlier today the coalition took further military action against Iraq. There were a number of separate operations.
"At 0845 hours GMT today, four RAF Tornado GR1 aircraft and two Victor tankers took part in a further coalition operation, involving over 40 US, British and French aircraft, against Iraqi air defence facilities and command and control facilities in southern Iraq, which had continued to pose a threat to coalition aircraft in the no-fly zone. Attacks were also carried out to suppress air defence installations which threatened the security of coalition aircraft participating in the operation. All coalition aircraft and aircrew returned safely.
"Four RAF aircraft participated in the attack against an air defence operations centre at A1 Najaf. Two Tornado GR1 aircraft were to use 10001b laser guided bombs against targets designated by the TIALD pods, carried by the other two aircraft. One of the Tornados was unable clearly to identify the target and did not release its weapons in order to avoid the possibility of causing civilian casualties or damage to other buildings in the area. However, the other Tornado successfully completed the attack.
"Like the operation on 13th January, this action was taken in self defence to ensure the safety of coalition aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone below the 32nd parallel in support of UNSCR 688. This was a follow-up to the action taken on 13th January. Early indications are that further significant damage has been inflicted on Iraq's residual air defences in the southern no-fly zone. Assessment of the results is continuing.
"This followed action in the latter part of yesterday when cruise missiles, launched from the US Navy ships in the region, attacked a facility connected with the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction programme. The early indications are that the facility was extensively damaged. This action was taken to ensure that Iraq complies with its mandatory obligations under UNSCR 687 and related resolutions. Iraq has committed a number of material breaches of UNSCR 687 and wilfully

741
ignored the warnings given by the Security Council and the US, UK, France and Russia on 11th and 14th January respectively.
"There has also been a number of incidents in the northern no-fly zone. On 17th January, an Iraqi fighter aircraft violated the no-fly zone in the north of Iraq. The Iraqi aircraft was engaged and shot down by coalition aircraft. In addition, coalition aircraft were illuminated by Iraqi air defence radars on a number of occasions in the last few days, including an RAF Jaguar on 16th January. This was in violation of the coalition demarche of 14th April 1992, which warned Iraq against a number of specific actions which would be taken as indicators of hostile intent. Following one such incident an SA-6 battery was attacked on 17th January by coalition aircraft armed with the high speed anti-radiation missile (HARM). Initial damage assessments indicate that the SAM system was put out of action. Iraqi air defence radars were again attacked using HARM on 18th January.
"These coalition actions have clearly demonstrated to the Iraqis the seriousness of our demand that Iraq should comply with UN resolutions and our continuing determination to maintain the no-fly zones in the North and South of Iraq. If the Iraqis still refuse to comply with United Nations resolutions the Government will not shirk from considering the need for further action in consultation with coalition partners.
"The House would not wish me to conclude without expressing again our appreciation of the continuing efforts of our servicemen and women serving in the Gulf. They can be assured that they enjoy the wholehearted support of the vast majority in this House and of the British public at large." My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
4.21 p.m.
Lord Williams of Elvel: My Lords, the House is grateful to the noble Viscount for repeating the Statement made in another place and I, from these Benches, wholeheartedly endorse what the Government, and indeed the noble Viscount, said in appreciation of the servicemen and women serving in the Gulf. We have nothing but the highest admiration for people of this country working in difficult circumstances. We also support action in no-fly zones. It is essential that the Kurds and the Shias are protected from what threatens to be genocide by the Iraqi Government.
Beyond that I enter one or two important caveats. We understand that last Wednesday's attack was within the terms of UN Resolution 687. As such, we are reassured. But there is no point in that reassurance if such actions lead to full-scale war. I hope that the noble Viscount will bear that in mind when he replies. I will come to the upshot later in my questions to the noble Viscount.
My questions are as follows. Are the US Government now going a bit too far? Are we going beyond what was decided by the United Nations Security Council? Are we in danger of losing the
742
ultimate authority that those actions must have, not of one country alone but of the international community as represented by the United Nations? Who are the members of the coalition referred to on many occasions in the Statement? Is it the same coalition as operated in what was known as the "Gulf War"? In other words, are the Syrians involved? Are the Saudi Arabians involved? Who are the people involved in the coalition?
Next, by what authority did President Bush decree a missile attack on an installation in Iraq, outside the no-fly zones? Was it by reference to some United Nations resolution about which we have not yet heard? How did that missile attack result in the apparent destruction of the al-Rashid Hotel in the centre of Baghdad which housed foreign journalists? Was that a mistake? We all know that Tomahawk cruise missile guidance systems are not entirely reliable. In the Government's view, was it an anti-aircraft missile which fell in the wrong place? What is the truth of that matter?
We all understand that President Bush wants to go out on a fine and heroic note. But does that fine and heroic note have to implicate British servicemen flying British planes in a dangerous area? Should not the whole matter be taken back to the Security Council for full debate so that we can obtain proper authority for further action, if any is needed?
Lord Bonham-Carter: My Lords, I thank the noble Viscount for repeating the Statement made by his right honourable friend in another place. I associate those of us on these Benches with the tribute rightly paid to our servicemen and women in the Gulf area. On behalf of my colleagues I should say that I do not expect the Government to receive a blank cheque from any Opposition party to indulge in operations of this kind. We must be satisfied that such operations are justified by reference to three criteria.
First, we must be satisfied on the principle of proportionality; that is, that the action we take is related to the offence committed—put crudely, that the punishment fits the crime. Secondly, we must be satisfied that there is agreement between all our partners in the coalition. That is an important point and one with which I am in agreement with the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Elvel. Thirdly, it must be abundantly clear that we are acting and seen to be acting as an instrument of the United Nations and in accordance with international law.
It is the second of those conditions which worries me. I am not at all sure that our actions can have the full assent and support of some of our partners in the coalition. Indeed, one knows that it places a strain on, for example, the Syrians and the Saudis to remain with us. It is crucially important that we maintain their support in the whole affair.
I have a further reservation that in all these matters the purpose and object of our policy should be clear in the mind of our Government and that of the United States in particular. It is not enough to give the obvious answer that all we are trying to do is secure compliance with the Security Council resolution. We must consider the wider implications of our policy. Perhaps this is not the time at which to do that and the

743
matter should be the subject of a wider debate. However, is it or is it not the policy of the United States to overthrow the Iraqi Government? If it is not, we must tread extremely carefully. If it is, is this the most efficient way to do it? If so, will that lead to the break-up of Iraq and thereby have serious consequences throughout the Middle East? Further, is the object of our policy clear to the Iraqis? If it is not, it will not succeed.
Those are questions which must be addressed even though they cannot be fully answered this afternoon. Therefore, while in general I support the measures designed to secure compliance with the Security Council resolutions, we must be sure that those resolutions justify the actions we take.
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I am particularly grateful for the remarks of the noble Lords, Lord Williams and Lord Bonham-Carter, about the quality of the service of our servicemen during the course of these operations. Those remarks will be read with appreciation by the servicemen concerned.
The noble Lord, Lord Williams, asked whether this action will lead to full-scale war, and in that context both he and the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, directly and by implication, asked what was the purpose of our policy. In the first instance, the purpose of our policy was indeed reflected in the two principal Security Council resolutions, 687 and 688, under which we are acting as part of the coalition. I shall come to the membership of the coalition in a moment. Those resolutions—especially Resolution 688 —were passed with the objective of trying to ensure some degree of protection against the terrible things the Iraqi Government were doing to the Shi'ite population, particularly in the marshes of southern Iraq, and also to the Kurds north of the 36th parallel. Therefore I suggest that we have a clear policy and a limited policy and I hope your Lordships will agree that, in view of the clarity of that objective and its limited nature, the response has so far been restrained and proportionate to the objective I have described.
In that context it is important that we should be clear what the United Nations Secretariat itself feels about whether the coalition has acted under adequate authority. I should like to quote the Secretary-General himself, who said on 14th January:
"The raid yesterday, and the forces that carried out the raid, have received a mandate from the Security Council, according to Resolution 678, and the cause of the raid was the violation by Iraq of Resolution 687 concerning the cease-fire. So, as Secretary-General of the United Nations, I can say that this action was taken and conforms to the resolutions of the Security Council and conforms to the Charter of the United Nations".
I think your Lordships will agree that that adds considerably to the assurances that we have endeavoured to give in respect of authority. It may also help if I assure your Lordships, in the context of who the coalition is, that there has been constant consultation by the United States not only with the participants in the present action—the French and the British—but also with other prominent members of the coalition forces that took part in the Gulf War two years ago.
744
The noble Lord, Lord Williams, also asked about the incident at the al-Rashid Hotel. I am not in a position as yet to give a definitive answer to the important question which he asked. All I can say is that there are two ways of looking at it. Either a Cruise missile, which, contrary to what the noble Lord said, has a reputation for being one of the more accurate weapons of modern warfare—the noble Lord may shake his head but many experts would disagree with him—went between 13 and 18 kilometres off course; alternatively, your Lordships may feel that it was remarkably convenient that the most public building in Iraq so far as concerns foreign correspondents was the subject of an attack and an explosion. I do not comment on what actually happened. We are endeavouring to address ourselves to that as a matter of urgency. I shall be happy to answer any of your Lordships' questions on this subject as soon as I am in a position to do so.
The noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, set out certain criteria. I have endeavoured to answer at least the last two of the criteria which he enunciated. So far as concerns his first one, I refer him to the noble Lord, Lord Williams, who himself, by implication, said that we were not yet engaged in a full-scale war. I hope that it will not be necessary to do so.
4.36 p.m.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that in the present troubled state of the world many of us find it enormously encouraging that this country should be acting in collaboration with the United States, France and Russia? That combination has great potential for maintaining the peace of the world and is a rather gratifying outcome of this very difficult situation. Is he also aware of the feeling of many of us that, if action had not been taken in the face of Saddam Hussein's defiance of the United Nations' decision, the good effects of the action taken earlier and of the war which we fought would have been largely offset, and that therefore it was essential that firm action should have been taken?
Finally, I add my own profoundly moved admiration for the gallantry and determination of our own forces acting in a dangerous situation in a distant part of the world and maintaining the highest standards of British arms.
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I am most grateful to my noble friend for what he has said, particularly for his final remarks. We try to protect our forces, as I am sure my noble friend knows, as far as is possible. Yet he equally well knows that the duty of servicemen is to fight when absolutely necessary. I wholly agree with him—and here I return to a question from the noble Lord, Lord Williams, which I did not fully answer—that it is eminently in the interests of this country to take part in the operations that are going on in Iraq. I have no doubt at all that the servicemen taking part in those operations are well aware of the geo-political imperatives that make that so. I agree with my noble friend that it is extremely gratifying that the collaboration that the founding fathers of the United Nations envisaged in London and San

745
Francisco at the end of the Second World War is finally beginning, particularly in view of the extremely gratifying—I use my noble friend's word—approval of Russia as the fourth member of the Security Council for our demarche.
Lord Ennals: My Lords, it will not be my intention to criticise the policies of Her Majesty's Government and I pay tribute to the work of those who have been involved in this conflict. But in supporting my noble friend on the Front Bench I express a concern about where this takes us. I recognise that there have been severe breaches of Security Council Resolutions 687 and 688 and I note the statements made by the Secretary-General. However, does it not seem to the Minister that when the Security Council passes resolutions it is not for a group of countries to determine how to react if those resolutions are not carried out? Would it not be preferable to return to the Security Council in order to get a further mandate?
The Minister simply referred to the three members of the coalition, but does he accept that considerable strains are now being placed on some of the other members of the coalition who were involved in the Gulf War? One is Russia, one is Egypt and another is Syria. We could list them. As this might go on week after week, are there not real dangers that there will be further infringements of the Security Council resolution? Would it not be wiser now to return to the Security Council and to get its backing rather than risk the danger of a very important coalition, with a very important objective, getting itself into the sort of difficulties that I have outlined?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I have already quoted the remarks made by the Secretary-General of the United Nations on 14th January and I shall certainly not weary your Lordships by repeating what I quoted a few moments ago. I shall say merely that he is satisfied—as we are satisfied—that we are operating well within the existing authority and that what is at stake here is the authority of the United Nations itself. The noble Lord, Lord Ennals, is far too experienced in international affairs not to have at his fingertips the extraordinary and growing list of violations (which amount to a series of defiances) by Iraq of a number of Security Council resolutions. He will know that Iraq has refused to co-operate with UN inspectors on searches for weapons of mass destruction—which are themselves undoubtedly one of the greatest threats to peace in the post-cold war world. Iraq has refused to allow UN inspectors to use their own aircraft to, from and within Iraq itself—and the noble Lord will know the dangers of that. And so on and so forth —I could go on with a list, but I shall not weary the House.
We are perfectly satisfied that we have that authority and if it becomes clear that that authority needs renewing, refreshing or extending, we shall have no hesitation in going back to the Security Council. We are fully confident that we have its backing and that we will have its backing when and if the time comes. Perhaps the noble Lord will allow me to suggest this to him: I did not refer only to three members of the coalition. He will be aware that not
746
only is Russia a permanent member of the Security Council, but that there are a number of other members of the coalition whose active support and encouragement has been essential in order to make sure that this operation is possible at all. I refer particularly to members in that part of the world.
Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone: My Lords, is it not entirely consistent with what my noble friend has said that we should remember at all times that these actions arose out of something which called into question the whole efficacy of the United Nations; namely, the deliberate and wholly illegal obliteration of one member of the United Nations by another in total defiance of the United Nations' charter, and that if we showed any faint heartedness in this respect at this stage in time, the good work which we did two years ago would be entirely lost?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I am extremely grateful to my noble and learned friend and can add nothing to what he has just said.
Lord Ewing of Kirkford: My Lords, the tributes to the troops who are involved in these actions are very generous and I am sure that they will be well received, especially by the families of those troops. However, is the Minister aware of the cases that were widely publicised in the press at the weekend and that the financial entitlements that were due to the dependants of those troops who were tragically killed in the Gulf War two years ago have still not been paid? While tributes are all right and very acceptable, tragically, they do not pay the mortgage or feed the children. Will the Minister agree to look into this problem? Although I do not expect him to give me an answer off the cuff because it is a very important matter, I hope that he will write to me and explain exactly what is going on in relation to the dependants of the troops who were tragically killed in the Gulf War two years ago.
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I am extremely grateful to the noble Lord. Again, this is a matter in which I have taken some interest in the past few weeks and months. The noble Lord will know that the Gulf Trust is about to be wound up and that over £3 million was subscribed to it by a generous public. Many grants have already been made although there are still some outstanding claims which are being addressed not only by the trust, but by what I might call their "residual legatees", which are the three main service charities. In so far as I am able, I shall certainly be happy to give chapter and verse to the noble Lord, and I accept with pleasure his kind offer that I should write to him. However, perhaps I may advise him that there have been a number of disagreements about who is entitled to what, as is always the case, however undesirable, when large sums of money are at stake. The objective of the Ministry of Defence and certainly of the independent trustees of the Gulf Trust—and I must stress to the noble Lord that they are independent—has been to make sure that there is as equitable and as rapid a distribution as possible. That is still our objective in spite of it being over two years since the end of the Gulf War.
Lord Beloff: My Lords, I wonder whether I may return to a point which I think is very important and which was raised originally by the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter. My noble friend the Minister rightly says that our servicemen are convinced of the justice of the cause and of its concern to this country, but they must also be concerned that what is being done is likely to bring about the desired result. We are told that these are efforts to persuade the present regime in Iraq both to observe the conditions of the cease-fire and to cease the persecution of the Shi'as and the Kurds, but everything that has come out of Iraq during these events suggests that there is not the slightest intention or willingness on the part of the Iraqi regime to consider either of these since Iraq denies both any special status for its minorities (and with it the idea of the no-fly zone) and that the United Nations has the rights of intervention on which we are acting.
If it is not possible to persuade the present government in Iraq, one is faced—is one not?—with the proposition that was advanced by the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter; namely, is it our intention to see that this regime falls? That is a very serious issue, but unless we know what the objective is (and unless it is an objective that we can see can be reached), is it fair to ask our gallant servicemen to risk their lives further?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, if I may be impertinent for a moment, perhaps I may say that the noble Lord, Lord Beloff, always asks extremely pertinent questions. He will know as well as I do that on the question of the nature, membership and complexion of any future government of Iraq, the "standard reply" (if I may put it like that) up to now has been that this is a matter for the Iraqi people. I am sure that the noble Lord will not expect me to add to that standard reply this afternoon.
However, I can say that short of that there is undoubtedly, as I have already tried to explain to the noble Lords, Lord Williams of Elvel and Lord Bonham-Carter, a narrower objective which is certainly in itself worthy of putting our servicemen's lives at risk for. It is, first of all, to make sure that Iraq is not tempted yet again to transgress and violate the borders of Kuwait. We know that there have been rather curious activities in the past few weeks in that regard. However, as a result of the pressure that the coalition has applied to the Iraqi Government, those activities have ceased for the moment and the appropriate withdrawals have taken place.
In addition there are the humanitarian considerations which arise out of the extraordinary activities of the Iraqi Government—in the north against the Kurds and in the south against the Shi'as. That in itself is reason enough for us to take the action that we have and justification enough for the SC resolutions that I have mentioned.
Baroness Robson of Kiddington: My Lords, does the Minister accept that it was with great relief that we heard his quotation from the statement made by the Secretary-General on the 14th of this month when he said that the coalition was acting within United
748
Nations resolutions? Will the Minister tell us what has been the Secretary-General's reaction to the attack on the military installations on the outskirts of Baghdad?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I am afraid that I cannot supply the noble Baroness with an answer as satisfactory as the one I gave to the noble Lord, Lord Williams. Although I cannot supply her with a verbatim quotation, we are in constant touch with the United Nations secretariat, and our understanding so far is that it is satisfied with the legality and authority we have to carry out that action.
Lord Clark of Kempston: My Lords, I urge my noble friend to resist the blandishments of noble Lords opposite to return to the United Nations. It is obvious that the allies are working within United Nations resolutions. Returning to the United Nations would merely delay matters and give Saddam Hussein a little more breathing space to enable him to continue to persecute the Kurds and the Shi'as. Surely we should continue with the present policy and not necessarily return to the United Nations?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. In rather less noble fashion, I suspect that Saddam Hussein has probably not read of the actions—my noble and learned friend Lord Hailsham will be able to help me with this—of Quintus Fabius Maximus Cunctator. I suspect that he is at least a spiritual friend in the strategic sphere of that eminent Roman general. One of the results of his cut-and-run tactics has been to make it more difficult for the United Nations and the coalition forces to know when to strike. There comes a moment when we can delay no longer. We should be playing his game if we tried to delay any operation in the way that some noble Lords opposite appear to be suggesting.
Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, is the Minister aware that I support the action that has been taken? However, does he agree that the action of the pilot who refused to fire his ammunition because he was afraid of killing civilians was admirable? He showed determination while risking his life and then refused to fire in case there were civilian casualties. Should not that attitude—determination plus restraint—be the hallmark of the operation?
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I am most grateful to the noble Lord and wholly agree with him. As I said in the Statement, there were two pilots in Tornados at the target. The one who failed to discharge his bombs for the reasons given by the noble Lord was the first to attack. The second pilot discharged his bombs, and, as far as we know, hit his target. The two aeroplanes then went round again to ensure that they had hit the target and that there had been no mistake. Unfortunately it was difficult to see because of the amount of dust in the area at the time.
Lord Archer of Weston-Super-Mare: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that Mr. Basahni and Mr. Telebahni are immensely grateful to the allies for keeping to Resolutions 687 and 688, whatever the word "allies" means, because for them that is their life every day? Will he never forget that the majority of the

749
Iraqi people are good people who live in daily fear of an evil man? If ever we give up that resolve, that evil man will kill innocent Kurds and Shi'as, whatever we say in this House or any other place.
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, I am of course grateful to my noble friend for what he has said in drawing our attention to the plight of the Kurds. I am sure that your Lordships are aware that the Iraqi Government continue an economic blockade of northern Iraq. As a result, the United Nations, supported by Western donors including this country, is mounting a major humanitarian operation there. For the past several weeks the Iraqis have been harassing United Nations convoys. They have planted bombs and obstructed the issue of travel permits for Iraqi Government-controlled territory. We deplore such harassment. Of course we support fully the United Nations efforts to ensure that humanitarian efforts get through. As I am sure my noble friend is aware, we are committed to protecting the Kurds in northern Iraq through the northern no-fly zone. He will also know that it was with considerable pleasure we registered the fact that on Christmas Eve the Turkish National Assembly renewed Operation Provide Comfort, which I hope my noble friend's Kurdish friends will also take as evidence of our commitment to help them.
Lord Finsberg: My Lords—
Viscount St. Davids: My Lords, the allotted 20 minutes has now elapsed. I suggest that we continue with the business on the Order Paper.

British Coal and British Rail (Transfer Proposals) Bill
4.56 p.m.
Proceedings after Third Reading resumed on Clause 1.
Lord Clinton-Davis Lord Clinton-Davis moved Amendment No. 3:
Page 1, line 10, after ("power") insert ("subject to subsection (1A) below").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, it may be for the convenience of the House if we take also Amendment No. 4. This is a matter which we touched upon in an earlier debate. The issue was to be dealt with in further consultations, as the Minister said at the time. It is important that we return to it, because my understanding is that the consultations have not yet been completed. In effect, we are seeking to probe further. We do not intend to divide on the issue so everyone who is not directly affected by or interested in the issue can go home.
The strict purpose of the amendments is to exclude from the Bill's provisions any actions concerning rail services supported by a PTE. It is of course important to probe the implications of the Government's proposals for rail services in metropolitan areas outside London.
PTAs and PTEs—together with British Rail in respect of rail services—have responsibility for public
750
transport in their areas. Local rail services are operated by regional railways, but the PTAs and PTEs say where they should operate and provide the financial support required for them. The amendments are prompted by the continuing uncertainty over the future important role of the PTAs and PTEs and the importance of local rail services. They are critically important to enable metropolitan authorities to contribute towards a reduction in the impact of urban transport on the environment. They are also important for a number of other reasons, not least the retention of a clear and decisive local interest in relation to those rail operations.
It is interesting to note that, in a number of discussions on rail privatisation generally that have taken place, the Prime Minister himself has indicated his support for action to create a local and regional identity for rail operations and operators. That strong regional identity, even though he may not be entirely aware of it, is clear in relation to the services supported by the PTAs and the PTEs. It is clear in relation to the network of services provided, even the publicity which they promote, and in the frequent use of distinctive local livery.
Since we previously debated the issue a joint publication has been issued by the regional railways and the AMA, of which I am current president and of which my noble friend Lord Underhill was president until November last year. The document is entitled Signals for a Better Future. It gives emphasis to the significance of the partnership which exists between local government and British Rail, with its impact on the economy and the environmental quality of the metropolitan areas.
I shall précis the report's conclusion. The argument is that the document presents rail as one of a number of cogs in the local and regional transport machine but a vitally important cog. The conclusion states:
"An important benefit of the partnership between regional railways and local government is that railways are looked at alongside other aspects of transport policy. The result is a coherent and cost-effective strategy".
I made that point during our discussions on an amendment tabled at an earlier stage of the Bill.
It is important to note that those are the views of the regional railways and not only of the AMA. What do the regional railways bring to the situation? As rail operators they bring considerable professionalism and expertise. In conjunction with local highway and planning authorities the PTAs and the PTEs have the ability to determine appropriate rail investment and support in the context of the overall transport needs of the areas for which they are responsible and their accountability to local taxpayers. There is a close working relationship with the regional railways and each PTA and PTE. The PTAs and PTEs can monitor the standard of service provided and take action where appropriate. All those factors have been proved to be efficient and to work to the advantage of the local communities and regions. So why place all that in jeopardy? The system has not been proved to be found wanting and the Government have yet to make out their case.
There is considerable anxiety that the benefits of the current arrangements will he lost as a result of the

751
Government's proposals. At best the PTAs and the PTEs will be obliged to cope with a more bureaucratic regime with less direct control over the rail operator. A relationship will be based on contractual lines alone rather than on a common policy goal. At worst, the quality, the scope and the cost of urban transport systems, in particular those affecting rail services, could suffer as a result of the new access and charging regime.
When the issue was discussed in Committee the noble Earl said:
"the PTAs and PTEs will continue to be responsible for specifying the services to be provided in their areas. Services will continue to be run under contract, initially by BR. The franchising authority, taking the PTA/PTE specification, will be responsible for franchising those services to private sector operators".—[Official Report, 1/12/92; col. 1285.]
We said that we were not satisfied with that, and some improvement has since been made by the Secretary of State.
The issue was raised further by my honourable friend John Prescott. He wrote to the Secretary of State, who stated that the PTEs would be jointly involved with the franchising authority in specifying and letting any franchise contract covering services for which they are responsible. He went further than the noble Earl was able to go and I am glad that he did so. I do not blame the noble Earl because he must take instructions on these issues from the Secretary of State. Of course the Secretary of State was talking about an involvement in letting. Unfortunately, that does not close down other areas of uncertainty.
We agree with the AMA and the regional railways that the successes which were set out in the document to which I have referred should be built on. The PTAs and the PTEs should be able to participate in decisions taken by the franchising authority as to how Section 20 services should be grouped in a franchise and about the scope of the business to be franchised. That goes further than the vague phrase "involvement in letting".
They should be able to participate in the short-listing of respondents to invitations of interest in franchises and the assessment of any repackaging proposals. They should be able to participate in negotiations between the franchising authority, Railtrack and the regulator relating to train paths, timetables and so on. The PTAs and the PTEs should be able to specify in detail the services which they wish to support and determine precisely how they feature in franchises. They should be able to determine all fares and the services which they subsidise. They should be able to set performance standards for services which they support, monitor performance on those services and, where appropriate, impose penalties. They should be able to participate in decisions on any service developments and enhancements relating to services which they support. They should have a right of appeal against any decision taken by the franchising authority or Railtrack affecting local rail services. We also take the view that they should have a financial guarantee via the Section 20 bolt-on for any commitments entered into as a result of the inclusion of local rail services in a franchise.
We ask the Government to specify where they stand on those issues because there is a lack of clarity. Is the Minister in a position to explain in more detail than he was able in Committee how under their proposals the Government see the role and responsibility of the PTAs and the PTEs relating to rail services? I beg to move.
Lord Teviot: My Lords, in Committee I discussed with my noble friend the bureaucracy of the system. He told me implicitly—and I believe him—that bureaucracy will not occur and everything will be straightened out. We must wait for the main Bill. However, I wish to address your Lordships on a new issue.
My right honourable friend the Prime Minister has declared that he wishes to see railways with a clear local identity. I agree with that implicitly. The only railways which have a local identity at present are the local passenger transport executive networks in the metropolitan areas. The trains and the stations have their own livery and are marketed as a local network. That has been achieved because the passenger transport authorities and the passenger transport executives are already effective as a franchising authority.
I wish to ensure that their role is in no way diminished by denationalisation. The creation of the franchising authority as a separate body could cut across the direct relationship between the PTAs and the PTEs, which pay for local services, and the railway which provides them. I see no reason for the intervention of the franchising authority, which already has a successful relationship.
Lord Underhill: My Lords, perhaps I may comment briefly on the speech made by my noble friend on the Front Bench. He has made out a powerful case for the amendment which also stands in my name. As my noble friend said, since we last discussed this matter there has been the publication of the joint report by the Association of Metropolitan Authorities and the regional railways. We did not have that when this matter was discussed previously. That document not only praises the work which has been done, but it sets out in complete detail the various schemes carried through by each of the PTAs and the PTEs. I hope that the Minister will take that into consideration when he replies.
In addition, paragraph 39 of the White Paper published in July went out of its way to stress how much the valuable co-operation of the PTAs, the PTEs and the railways was appreciated. I hope that the Minister will keep those two points firmly in mind when he replies because that co-operation between those bodies and the railways system is vital. Nothing should be done to impair that for the future.
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, first, perhaps I may say how nice it is to welcome the noble Lord, Lord Underhill. We have debated transport matters on many occasions in the past and I am delighted by his intervention today. We shall consider carefully the representations made to us and study them with great care.

753
The Bill before us enables BR and British Coal to act in relation to proposals put forward by the Secretary of State. The effect of the amendment is to reverse that in one area. It seeks to preclude BR from acting in relation to any proposal which might have the effect of disturbing existing Section 20 agreements between PTEs and BR. I am sure that the House will agree that to put an arbitrary constraint on what proposals BR may act in relation to is quite wrong.
As the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, reminds us, we discussed the position of the PTAs and the PTEs in Committee. At that time the noble Lord tabled amendments which sought to impose a duty on BR to consult PTAs and PTEs about any proposals put to it which related to Section 20 agreements. This amendment would preclude BR from doing anything in respect of any such proposal. I am sure that the House will agree that the whole matter has become rather contradictory and confusing. Nevertheless, I understand, given the noble Lord's position as president of the AMA, that the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, takes a keen interest in the position of the PTEs and PTAs in that regard and that he intends to probe government policy.
In doing so, the noble Lord mentioned the uncertainty of our policy towards PTAs and PTEs. I have found that rather surprising because we have made very clear our policy toward the future involvement of the PTAs and PTEs in the procurement and specification of railway services in their areas. Our proposal is that the PTAs should continue to set the policy for local rail services in their areas, that the services should continue to be specified and subsidised, where necessary, by the PTEs, and that the PTEs should be jointly involved with the franchising authority in specifying and granting any franchise contract covering services for which they are responsible.
I believe that that answers many of the questions and worries expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis. I hope also that that will give some reassurance to my noble friend Lord Teviot. I took a careful note of what he said and would wish to study that in the Official Report.
Clearly there will need to be some changes to existing arrangements under Section 20 of the 1968 Act, not least because it will in future be private sector franchisees, rather than BR, which provide services for the PTAs and PTEs. It will therefore, inevitably, be necessary for us to look, with BR and with the PTAs/PTEs themselves, at the Section 20 agreements the PTEs have with BR, to see what needs to be done to ensure that services can continue to run smoothly in PTE areas.
If the railway network fitted neatly within PTA boundaries, it might be easier to argue that each PTA should be made a local franchise authority. However, as I know my noble friend Lord Teviot knows, that is not the case. Many of the trains which serve PTA passengers run beyond a single PTA area. It would not be sensible, operationally, to think of letting franchises covering only parts of a service. Provisions
754
will be included in the main privatisation Bill to give effect to our proposals. Therefore, we shall have many opportunities to consider those at a later stage.
5.15 p.m.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, I thank the noble Earl for his reply. I shall certainly consider that. I have already indicated that the amendment aims to probe the matter further. Equally, I hope that the Government will pay careful attention to the points which I have raised in today's debate and which I am sure will be reiterated to him in the further consultations which will take place—if not with him then with the Secretary of State in the not too distant future.
I am not at all satisfied that there is a strong case made out by the Minister to change the situation. That is the burden of the argument raised by the noble Lord, Lord Teviot. The burden is on the Government; it is not on us. It remains for them to substantiate the case which I do not believe they have done so far. However, this has been a useful exchange and I hope that it will provide a good basis for further discussions which will take place and that the Government may yet come to the conclusion that the wider role of the PTAs and PTEs, which I describe in my earlier remarks, is consistent with their programme. In those circumstances, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendments Nos. 4 to 6 not moved]
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, I beg to move that the Bill do now pass.
Moved, That the Bill do now pass.—(The Earl of Caithness).
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, it is rather strange that the Government have been in such haste to enact this Bill. They are unable to wait for the report of the Select Committee in another place which is inquiring into pit closures, although that is imminent. They are unable to wait for the interim report of the transport Select Committee on privatisation in another place which is due this week. It is odd that that should be the case because the Secretary of State revealed recently that it would take 12 years to complete the privatisation process, semi-privatisation, commercialisation or call it what you will. I noted, however, that in our debate on 15th December, the noble Earl, Lord Caithness, said that this was a genuine privatisation proposal so that he has nailed his colours to that particular mast.
Whenever we have sought to probe the Government's intentions in detail, whenever we have sought to establish vital safeguards through the amendments which we have proposed, as I said earlier, we have been told repeatedly that this Bill is the wrong vehicle. The vehicular argument is the one often used by Ministers in distress. We are told that it is merely a Bill to enable British Rail and British Coal to prepare for privatisation, to secure advice, and so on.
I submit that equally repeatedly the Government have missed these essential points. In order to carry

755
out their functions properly, those advising the nationalised industries need to form a sensible assessment of the assets and liabilities of those industries. They need to understand the implications of the proposals. It is not only noble Lords on this side of the House who suggest that there is a lack of clarity in the Government's proposals. The CBI has said that the proposals lack clarity and detail. How is it therefore that those advisers can undertake their tasks with the care which is required?
The noble Lords, Lord Ridley and Lord Young, and the noble Viscount, Lord Whitelaw, who have hitherto been very strong proponents of the concept of general privatisation, have questioned the desirability and practicability of these proposals. I also say that this House should have been much more privy to the thinking of the Government—if in fact one can so dignify what is going on in their minds—and therefore the amendments that we have put down, which have sometimes been wrongly characterised as wrecking or inappropriate by Ministers, have not yielded the information to which we were entitled. I grant the Ministers that there have been exceptions to that. They have chosen to be more forthcoming about some things rather than others.
The other matter to which I want to refer at the outset of my remarks is that it was extremely unwise —I hope it will not constitute a precedent—for these two industries, separate interests and separate concerns, to be taken together in this Bill. I remember that the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter, raised one or two question marks about that in an earlier debate, and he was right. I hope that the Government will say that it will not be repeated.
One other matter that relates to the issues raised by my noble friend Lord Donoughue earlier concerns consultation. The issue that was raised by my noble friend is relevant to all areas of consultation undertaken by this Government. Their bona fides are in doubt. That has been made clear as a result of this extraordinarily trenchant judgment on the part of Lord Justice Glidewell.
It is interesting to note that on 1st December (at col. 1275 of Hansard) the noble Earl, Lord Caithness, just a few days before that judgment, said:
"These amendments refer to consultation, but I do not think this is something that needs to be imposed on either British Rail or British Coal because they will be fully aware of their obligations in this respect".
He went on:
"Let me reassure the Committee that we too are aware of the importance of consultation".
That was not the view taken by Lord Justice Glidewell. The Minister ought to reflect further on what he had to say on that occasion.
I do not propose to say much more about coal, except to ask the noble Earl to answer the question I put to his noble friend, who then passed the question on to him in the earlier debate. I hope the noble Earl will take that up. I think he has forgotten it. If the noble Earl indicates that he can remember the point then I need not reiterate it. I see that he does.
I turn now to the rail issues in relation to this Bill. We have urged the Government to think about an integrated transport policy. It would be nice to think
756
of this Government embracing a sensible transport policy. In a sense it would of course require them to cross the Rubicon, but the trouble is that they would not have the infrastructure or the transport to do that, and that constitutes something of a problem.
It was only after the Bill had reached its Committee stage in this place that the Government issued their White Paper. But it was not as something that cast a great deal of illumination on the way in which they propose to deal with the myriad problems that they have created for themselves; and it is odd that it should have taken so long after the Bill had been introduced in another place for the Government to deign to do that. Of course when it comes to coal they have not done it even now. What they did was to declare a variety of objectives consonant with their prejudices and then endeavoured later on to tack on the reasons for undertaking that course. It is an unconvincing exercise that has been widely condemned in the serious press and by a number of their own supporters, as I have already indicated.
What all of us want to see is a British railway system that functions as a national service and an efficient and safe service of high quality, with profitable services helping to maintain the less profitable ones. Cross-subsidisation is an integral part of any transport system if a network service, and one which in part operates as a social service, is to be maintained, and as a service too that contributes to a sensible and integrated transport system and environmental policy. We are not just after a change of livery or televisions being on trains. It is a fundamentally different approach.
We recognise that there is a need to inject private capital into the system. It is done in France. It is done elsewhere. It should be done on a wider basis than it is currently done in this country. There is nothing wrong with importing experience and expertise from the private sector into British Rail management. These matters are critically important to aid investment and to help to sustain the railway manufacturing industry, which currently is in dire straits. I want to come back to that later.
Against that background it is fascinating that, in contrast with every other privatisation introduced by this Government, where the White Papers or Green Papers have always given emphasis to the question of greater investment, the framework element of investment has been singularly missing. It is dealt with rather casually in the White Paper in paragraphs 42 and 43 in relation only to infrastructure. Yet there is a massive investment famine so far as railways are concerned.
I referred in an earlier debate to a report that had been commissioned by Transport 2000 through its very respectable consultants, Steer Davis Gleave. That report concluded:
"There will be a risk of further reduction in investment for a number of reasons: fragmented decision-making between Railtrack and train operators; difficulties in buying or leasing rolling stock; higher track charges, especially for freight; and conflicts between franchising passenger services and allowing open access to the tracks".

757
These are charges that have been made not only by me, as the Minister well knows, but by many others, and which have never properly been refuted by the Government.
Despite the investment problem the autumn spending statement projects spending in grants and loans halving over the next three years. It has been reported—and perhaps the Minister will comment on this specifically; I hope it is not true—that even the £150 million that has been allowed for leasing new trains cannot be taken up because British Rail cannot afford the repayments.
There is uncertainty too over the unnecessary diversion of privatisation, which is already causing the situation to deteriorate much further. The lack of any framework for new investment and for co-ordinating electrification or signalling schemes between Railtrack and different train operators will almost ineluctably lead to further serious decline in the quality and perhaps even the quantity of rail services. What we need is a huge change of priorities in our transport investment expenditure—moving a good deal from road to rail—particularly in the light of this Government's environmental objectives, which are hardly mentioned in relation to the White Paper.
I turn then to the question of network benefits. Despite assertions to the contrary, there is no evidence at all that the Government intend to protect the network benefits that prevail at the moment. Will the Minister give an undertaking that there will be statutory protection for a national timetable and for national information systems? Will he give assurances that railcards and other network fares schemes will be retained? What will he say, if anything, about discount through tickets? Those are important as 40 per cent. of current rail journeys are made on discount fares or railcards which would involve more than one franchisee. Will those be protected? I am not speaking merely of protecting through tickets at standard fares. My understanding is that the Government assert that no protection is required because these measures are in "the interests of operators". However, bus deregulation—that is hardly a good precedent for privatisation of the railways —has established that network information and fares schemes are not in the market interest. For example, Manchester Metrolink, which is a privately run train scheme in Manchester, has already decided that it wants to have nothing to do with British Rail national timetables.
There is another problem in this regard. The regulator's remit is to promote competition and to protect network benefits. Unless this is clarified we could find a situation where agreements on timetables, connecting trains, information and fares between different companies could be debarred altogether as being anti-competitive. That is precisely what happened in the bus industry as a result of the intervention of the Office of Fair Trading.
I come next to the question of bureaucracy and the lack of accountability. I realise a lack of accountability may have certain attractions for this Government. My noble friend Lord Cocks referred to this point forcefully on Second Reading. He may well wish to
758
say something more about that. There is a proliferation of different authorities and the scope for buck-passing and indeed for legal argument will be immense.
As regards track charges, we have no idea what will be required in this regard. I believe that Railtrack is supposed to make a return on assets of 8 per cent. Will this operate as an incentive to disinvest and to close lines? Freight trains at present pay only marginal costs when sharing track with passenger trains and the same applies to local trains using InterCity track. Do the Government have any plans to protect this system? If not, under the new regime we could easily see costs rising for these services, leading to higher subsidies, higher fares and higher charges or—the alternative is stark—reduced services.
Most track investment is expected to be financed through the charges according to the Government, but they pay no attention to the fact that competition from other modes of transport—the railways do not represent a monopoly—will mean that railways will be further prejudiced. The only way out of this problem would be for the railways to be treated on the same basis as roads. However, the Government show no inclination of doing that.
A track charges regime is crucial to the future of freight. Freight is disappearing because of BR's objectives requiring rail freight to be profitable. Other areas which will be left to the operators will include staffing on stations and making trains and stations more accessible and safer. If they find that economies in these areas are required because they will not be given priority, the outlook for passengers will be very bad. As regards investment, network benefits, the organisation of the regime, charges, freight and passenger needs, huge problems persist. Those problems have not been addressed either in the documents issued by the Government hitherto or, what is more relevant, in the debates we have had.
I referred earlier to the railway supply industry which is in crisis. There are 9,000 jobs at stake. Because of investment problems British Rail is placing no new orders. Without orders at home the prospect of winning overseas orders is virtually non-existent. There are doubts now as to whether this industry can survive beyond 1994. Will the Government stand idly by and allow this vital industry to go to the wall?
My next point has been referred to on previous occasions. To use the expression of Lord Justice Glidewell it is a wholly irrational decision on the part of the Government to refuse to allow British Rail, with its expertise and experience, to bid for franchises. That makes no sense whatsoever. It is not just noble Lords on these Benches who have raised this matter. Many other independent people have also raised it.
In my first conclusion I refer to the questions of which I gave the Minister notice earlier today. However, I have raised these points in previous debates and I have not yet received a reply from him. On 15th December at col. 512 of the Official Report I asked the Minister to inquire into a point which excluded British Rail from being able to tender. I asked the Minister whether that would infringe Community law. He promised to look into the matter.

759
What is the position? Is there a possible contravention of Community law here or not? If he says there is not, I should like to know why not.
There is also the matter of the EC acquired rights directive to which I referred on 30th November at col. 1239 of the Official Report. I asked the Minister what effect that directive would have as regards workers changing employment from a public utility to a privatised company. I drew attention to a recent ruling in the European Court of Justice to the effect that the United Kingdom regulations implementing the directive were inadequate. The regulations restricted the protection to workers in commercial ventures. The European Court of Justice decided that was unlawful. The Government had claimed wrongly that the regulations had always covered the public sector. What is the position on that matter now? The Minister has had a long time to consider both those points and I hope he will comment on them this afternoon.
I am glad to see the report issued by the Health and Safety Executive. I am also glad that the Minister in another place—I believe it was the Secretary of State —indicated that the Government accepted all the proposals. The Health and Safety Executive is, however, saying in effect that a more dangerous system could be introduced on privatisation unless the Government control the position carefully. Why countenance such a change at all if it contains any major risk?
We believe that privatisation may lead, and indeed is likely to lead, to much higher fares and will damage accessibility and levels of service. We believe in a united, unified network for passengers. We also believe that there needs to be a sustained investment in expansion, in the modernisation of trains and in infrastructure. We believe it is important that improvements and not cuts in services should be made. That is what the nation is really looking for but the Government have not begun to make out the case for change.
I now come to my final conclusion. I wish to thank all the local authority bodies, trade unions, consumer bodies, transport industries, transport interests and others who have given us such important support throughout the passage of this Bill. I wish to thank our own researchers in this place and our own Back-Benchers in this House for the help they have given to us throughout the course of the Bill. Even though we have often fundamentally disagreed with the Ministers I thank them for the courtesy they have yielded to us. Above all, I thank my noble friend Lord Donoughue for his constant support and help—I hope it has been mutual —in the work we have undertaken during the course of this Bill.
5.30 p.m.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, I find myself in a position of some emotion at this stage of this Bill for the following reason. Unlike a certain number of noble Lords, I was in this Chamber—then another place—when the measures were carried which nationalised both the railways and the coal industry. I recall with a measure of pleasure the fact that on
760
both those occasions I ventured to warn the House —that is, the other place—that that was a disastrous decision that would in due course have to be reversed.
Therefore it gives me some pleasure that we have now reached the stage at which Her Majesty's Government are asking the industries concerned to undertake work in preparation for denationalisation. That shows that if one waits long enough one generally achieves a satisfactory outcome, although in this case I had to wait a long time.
I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, will not regard it as offensive if I say that many of his, as always, well argued points will have to be dealt with, and which will no doubt be deployed and will have to be answered, when the denationalisation Bills come before your Lordships' House. However, it seems to me that at this stage there is comparatively little obligation on Her Majesty's Government to answer those save to say, as I would venture to say, that they are all matters which the industries have to consider now under the duties which are being imposed on them, and that your Lordships will certainly have to consider them when the privatisation measures appear.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for allowing me to intervene. As he knows, I always enjoy his contributions. If there is a great deal of doubt, uncertainty and lack of clarity—to use the CBI's term—about the proposals, that does not help the professional advisers who are supposed to advise British Coal and British Rail during their consideration of the ways in which privatisation may take place.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, I agree entirely. There are serious points which will have to be considered. However, it is surely not the noble Lord's argument that at this stage of the Bill, when we are considering the Motion that the Bill do now pass, that the whole procedure of asking the authorities for those industries to consider the steps that need to be taken for denationalisation should suddenly be dropped. It is quite clear that everyone's mind is now directed towards the serious problems which arise in connection with denationalisation, particularly in connection with the railways.
We have reached a stage at which it is surely right to ask the industries concerned to think about the matter and to give the Government, the country and your Lordships' House their views as to the problems. When the Bill to privatise the industries comes before your Lordships' House, we should then consider the arguments and come to a decision whether those arguments should prevail. I always listen to the noble Lord's arguments with interest; but I suggest with great respect that at this stage to deploy a great deal of argument against privatisation will not be of great assistance. It will not assist this House and will certainly not assist the industries concerned.
I shall not say anything about the coal industry. For reasons with which your Lordships are familiar that is becoming quite a small industry, and whatever happens I am afraid it will become smaller. However, the rail privatisation will be a matter of great practical importance.

761
There is one problem which I hope the railways board will consider. As a frequent rail traveller, I know that British Rail seems to have lost the concern that it used to have for the well-being of passengers. If one travels by British Rail, one finds a certain detachment towards the interests and comfort of passengers. That is quite different from what one finds if one travels by air and from the care which the airlines take of their passengers. I have some experience of that because, as your Lordships may recall, I was chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority and I studied how the airlines worked. There is also much more concern for the comfort and well-being of passengers on coaches on the roads.
If one travels through Paddington Station, as I frequently do, one is left standing in a large, chairless arena, almost always waiting for the time when a train is due to depart to be indicated before one can proceed towards the platform. There is an atmosphere which suggests that British Rail does not care much for the comfort or well-being of its passengers.
5.45 p.m.
Lord Taylor of Gryfe: My Lords, what right does the noble Lord have to make such generalisations about British Rail services? I speak as a former member of the board and someone who travels 500 miles from Scotland to London every week and 500 miles back again. My experience is totally at variance with the generalisations which have been made against British Rail personnel.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, I am very glad that the noble Lord travels comfortably. I should hate to think of his doing anything else. I can only speak from my own experience. I mention in particular the experience of those who have to use what used to be the old Great Western system. At one time, under private enterprise, that was probably the best and most comfortable section of the railway system. Now there is not only a very low standard of efficiency in which punctuality is virtually unknown, but there also seems to be a disregard for the comfort of passengers. I do not think that that is unique to the western section of the network. I think that it is certainly true of the southern section. I believe that the noble Lord is right and that some of the lines to Scotland still retain some of the old approach to the care of passengers; but I assure the noble Lord that that is not the general experience. It is, alas!, not generally the case.
It is very important that an organisation which has to cope with passengers should have some concept of care for them and should demonstrate that care. It is only in that way that traffic will be built up in the way that we all want to see it built up.
I do not think that we shall achieve that under public ownership. Once all those in an organisation, from the board at the top to the most junior person working at the lower levels, realise that in the future their living depends on satisfying the needs and wishes of the public, there is a much greater chance of having a system which will be efficient in itself and in due course will become reasonably profitable.
762
I leave this thought with your Lordships. One has to induce a commercial approach in British Rail, a desire to attract custom and to interest the public in British Rail, and one must induce an interest in the public. In order to achieve that I believe that some form of privatisation is necessary.
The precise form of privatisation is a difficult question. No one who has studied the matter believes for a moment that privatising British Rail will be anything like as easy as was the privatisation of a good many other organisations. The fact that there is only one railway track will be a factor of special difficulty. There will be very real problems, which I know your Lordships will discuss fully when the privatisation Bill comes before this House.
However, we are not there yet. We have only reached the stage of considering the Government's extremely sensible proposal that the board should be asked to consider what action should be taken preparatory to privatisation; and that in the light of that consideration the Government should come to a decision as to what is to be put into the privatisation Bill. When that Bill is considered, I am perfectly certain that we shall have vigorous controversy. However, I am also sure that we shall be discussing a Bill of the very greatest practical importance to this country.
No one can travel by rail, as the noble Lord opposite states he does, without being worried by the weaknesses of the system. The noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, referred to the cancellation of various proposals. There was the announcement in the press recently that proposals for additional safety expenditure had been postponed. Those are real problems which indicate that the present system is unsatisfactory and requires to be changed.
The substance of the changes will be a matter for the next Bill. I hope and believe that they will be sensible. I hope and believe too that they will centre on the ordinary, commercial approach of a satisfied customer holding and supporting a satisfactory organisation. In considering the duties which we are imposing on it by this measure, I hope that the board will have that approach very much in mind.
Lord Howie of Troon: My Lords, I do not wholly recognise the picture of Paddington Station, if I heard the noble Lord aright. I find it far from cheerless. It has been refurbished and painted. Its general aura of cheerfulness has been greatly increased. It contains a statue—although it is not a good one—commemorating Isambard Kingdom Brunel. If the noble Lord has been as miserable, as he seems to have been at Paddington Station, he could always have gone into the hotel where happiness can be purchased quite readily.
However, I wish to make this point on the privatisation of British Rail. I draw attention again to an objection which I have made previously in the House. It is about the proposal to create a track authority as opposed to the authorities with which we are familiar. I have cited how the railways began in the early part of the 19th century with a track authority with franchisees on the Kilmarnock and Troon line in 1812, on the Stockton and Darlington line in 1825,

763
and on other railways at about the same time. The modern method of running a railway was devised in 1830 on the Manchester and Liverpool railway. By comparison with the track authority system which had been used in the earlier railway systems, the modern method was quickly shown to be preferable. Indeed two Select Committees of this House demonstrated that quite clearly in the 1840s or thereabouts.
I believe that we make a mistake in returning to a track authority system. Nowhere else on earth is such a system used to any great extent. I know that little bits exist here and there on Amtrak. I know that the Swedish railways run a small part of their system in that way. Such a system would be a sizable error. I sincerely hope that the Government will have second, third or even fourth thoughts before they embark on that mistaken path.
The Government's proposals in the Bill for the coal industry are part of a strategy. They are an economic strategy extending their ideology of privatisation. However, they are not an energy strategy. That gives me great disquiet. An energy strategy, rather than an economic or financial strategy, is required which is aimed at energy and practised through reorganising the coal and other energy industries.
I make two points. The first is a brief quotation from a paper which has been sent to me from the Management Centre at the University of Bradford. It is a paper by Jonathan and Ruth Winterton on the strategic implications of proposed colliery closures. The quotation itself cites Schumacher in 1960 when he was the economic adviser to the National Coal Board. What Schumacher said is extremely interesting and should be reflected upon. He stated:
"The concepts of 'economic' and 'uneconomic' cannot be applied to the extraction of non-renewable resources without very great caution… To eliminate the losing factory means the elimination of waste. But to close the losing colliery means merely to change the time sequence in which finite resources are being used… It is a policy of doubtful wisdom and questionable morality for this generation to take all its best resources and leave for its children only the worst. But it is surely a criminal policy"—
that perhaps goes a little far; "mistaken" would be a better word—
"if, in addition, we wilfully sterilize, abandon, and thereby ruin such relatively inferior resources as we ourselves have opened up but do not care to utilize".
I do not wish to stress that point any further.
The economic strategy on energy seems to me improper in one specific sense. The problems of the coal industry in relation to electricity arise because we now use gas as a secondary rather than a primary fuel. I regard that as inherently wrong. I speak with the background not of an economist or a chartered accountant, but of an engineer. We have a duty upon us to utilise finite resources to their best capacity. That does not mean merely their cheapest capacity. If we have an energy resource, it is incumbent upon us to use that energy resource in such a way that we obtain the maximum efficiency from it; that we produce the most energy—it can never be 100 per cent.—from the fuel at our disposal.
So far as I can make out, if natural gas is used to make electricity a secondary fuel, we achieve about 30 per cent. efficiency from it on a good day. On the other
764
hand, if gas is used directly we achieve at least 60 per cent. efficiency or rather more. By using gas to produce electricity, we throw away 30 per cent. of its thermal efficiency. That might make economic sense to a chartered accountant but it does not make sense to anyone who believes that when we are dealing with a finite resource we should use it to its best advantage.
The Government's policy in regard to rail privatisation by the track authority is mistaken. The Government's insistence on utilising gas as a secondary rather than a primary fuel is also mistaken. Beyond that, the Government are probably doing a good enough job.
6 p.m.
Lord Ezra: My Lords, we have been debating a technical Bill with a limited objective, as the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter, reminded us. It was nevertheless to be expected, as the subject of the Bill was the privatisation of two major enterprises, that a number of major issues should have been raised. I am sure that that did not come as a surprise to noble Lords on the Front Bench opposite.
I wish to start by expressing my appreciation of the way in which Ministers dealt with matters, sometimes at considerable length. It was most helpful to us, even though we did not entirely obtain the answers we wished.
I am at one with the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, when he regrets that the two industries are being dealt with in one Bill. In my opinion, this led to a most untidy debate; we dodged about from one issue to the next, half on one, half on the other. Sometimes issues were linked, sometimes they were not. It would surely have served the Government's purpose far better if we had separated the two entirely so that those who participated in the railways debate would have been people who knew about the railways and those on coal would have been people who knew about coal.
Furthermore, I am in serious doubt as to whether the coal part of the Bill should have been brought forward at this time. We have been told repeatedly that the reason is that without this Bill empowering the managements of rail and coal to consider privatisation and employ consultants there would be no powers for them to do so. I am afraid that I cannot accept that. If the noble Earl and the noble Baroness will kindly look up the Coal Industry Nationalisation Act 1946, they will find that it is a remarkably short Act. As the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter, will, I am sure, recall, it empowered the board to do all those things which it considered to be right in the interests of the industry. With a prospective Act of privatisation, surely if it were put to legal experts they would be empowered under that Act to have a serious look at the implications of privatisation. Therefore, in my opinion, this does not add anything to the powers that the board already has.
Furthermore, there should have been a delay because of all that has happened since we had our Second Reading on 16th July. When after the Summer Recess we moved on 30th November to the Committee stage much had happened. Again, I feel

765
that it would have served the Government's interests far better if the present problems over the coal industry had been dealt with and then the Bill had been introduced. We should then at least have known what the background was against which a possible privatisation measure was to be introduced. Thus we have had an untidy and difficult debate over an issue which should have been relatively straightforward and simple.
During the course of that debate, as I mentioned, the Government commented on a number of issues raised. I should like to itemise the major issues which I think were raised and on which the Government gave varying degrees of assurances as concerns the coal industry. I shall naturally look forward to seeing those assurances carried out, as I am sure that they will be, when we see an eventual privatisation measure.
The issues include pensions. Everyone agrees—the Government totally agree—that particularly for coal they are a vital issue because half a million people are involved in pensions which they either now receive or which have been deferred because of the rapid closure of the industry.
We were also given assurances on safety that high standards would be maintained, whatever changes in ownership took place. On research, we were assured that vital research, particularly on clean coal technology, would be continued. We were assured that the high environmental standards which are enjoyed at present in the coal industry in its nationalised form would be continued, although the issue that seemed to me to remain in doubt was whose was the responsibility for the environmental impact of previous mining operations. At the moment that responsibility rests with British Coal. With whom it would rest when the assets are sold to some third party remains to be determined.
On concessionary coal, we were given a formal assurance that it would be continued. We were told that the coal industry social welfare organisation would continue. We were given general assurances on redundancy payments for future closures. Today we discussed consultative procedures, particularly in relation to closures. That is quite an important list.
If all those matters are introduced, as I am sure they will be, in the proposed privatisation legislation, it might be difficult for some to visualise how a third party could do any better with all those obligations than the present management. Therefore we shall have to see how, with all those restraints and obligations, nevertheless the transfer of ownership could be considered worth while. That is a question to which we shall come later.
I wish to conclude by saying that we shall obviously return to this on several occasions. We shall debate the whole coal issue again when we have received the forthcoming White Paper. We shall look at it again when we have the proposed legislation.
I end with a plea. I made this request at the time of the Second Reading and repeat it now: I hope that before the Government put their proposals for the privatisation of coal forward in the form of legislation
766
they will let us have a White Paper as they did in the case of the railways. Then we shall be able to debate it fully before we reach the legislative stage.
Lord Mason of Barnsley: My Lords, I am pleased to follow my noble friend Lord Ezra, especially as I wish to deal solely with the coal industry. I am totally opposed to the Bill. I find it unbelievable that a government could seriously contemplate introducing a Bill which paves the way to privatise the coal industry when the energy industries, by the Government's making, are in such turmoil. Every sector—gas, nuclear power, electricity and coal—is unsure of its future, a turbulence created by the political stupidity of the President of the Board of Trade. His statement of 31 pit closures caused shock waves throughout the country. It was shocking and politically naive, with no Cabinet consultation and totally disregarding the rules of pit closures and of government legislation. It is inconceivable that one Minister could make so many mistakes, create a people's revolt, with national demonstrations, and be proved to be so utterly wrong. One wonders how he has survived. In any case, confidence in the man will never be the same.
The Government have been plotting and planning the rapid run-down of the coal industry in recent years, hoping to leave a rump of highly profitable pits for the privateers. For example, recent government legislation has given the open-cast coal mining industry the right to expand production from 15 million tonnes per year to 25 million tonnes. The extra 10 million tonnes of output would close 10 pits.
The Government gave the signal to the energy industry that coal could be imported without any restriction on tonnage. Therefore we now have 12 million tonnes of cheap coal coming through the ports of Britain. Much of it is quarried coal, open-cast coal, lignite, brown coal, some based on cheap labour and some tonnage subsidised. There is no doubt that it is unfair competition against the British coal industry. That affects another 12 pits.
The Government are continuing to import French nuclear power. It is equivalent to the annual output of five coal mines. Then there was the decision to allow North Sea gas to be burned in our power stations—a premium fuel in preference to British Coal's power station coal. Every conversion to gas or a new gas station cuts back the demand for power station coal.
What is also most galling is that it is publicly known —and the European Commission is aware of it—that the German deep-mined coal industry is heavily subsidised. Where are the British Government's protests? The Germans survive with subsidies while our own industry is being sabotaged by a series of deliberate government measures designed to create a privateers' paradise in the energy market.
Expanding opencast coal mining means the loss of 10 pits; cheap coal imports (12 million tonnes) loses another 12 pits; French nuclear power is equivalent to five pits. Twenty-seven coal mines have been closed or are closing as a result. There is also the fact that with the imports of fuel from abroad, we are constantly adding to our unemployment figures. We are importing unemployment: 17,000 jobs are going with

767
those coal mines alone from the imports of coal and nuclear power from France. And there are the knock-on effects from the loss of 35,000 jobs. We are also concerned about the future security of coal supplies.
In the haste to prepare for the privatisation of the coal industry, the Chairman of British Coal presented a plan to the President of the Board of Trade to close 31 pits—two-thirds of the industry—leaving 20 coal mines. Perhaps a dozen might survive at the end of the century. To shut them down in a mad rush, contrary to all the rules, with the 90-day consultative and review period totally ignored, was dictatorial and bombastic. But it has turned out to be an act of the worst political ineptitude in parliamentary history. Were these acts not all a preparation for privatisation? Just a handful of pits were to remain, having weeded out the uneconomic and the marginal coal mines; also having rigged the market.
There has been a further humiliation for the Government, as referred to in my noble friend Lord Donoughue's opening remarks. Eight coal miners with the National Union of Mineworkers and with the National Association of Colliery Overmen, Deputies and Shotfirers and the Union of Democratic Mineworkers challenged in court the Heseltine Statement. A judgment was delivered ruling that decisions by Heseltine and British Coal were unlawful. They were made without any consultation with the unions and were in breach of Section 99 of the Employment Protection Act 1975, and from October 16th 1992 of Section 188 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidated) Act 1992. It was stated that the decision to close the first 10 pits without any independent scrutiny was irrational. Mr Justice Hidden made it clear that these problems had to be resolved within the law and not outside it. The whole episode was an unlawful act.
With all this going on, British Coal's blunders, ministerial misjudgments and illegal acts by Ministers, should a Bill be going through this House? Should this happen when there is so much uncertainty about the coal industry's future, and while numerous committees of inquiry are sitting: the Select Committee on Employment, the Select Committee on Trade and Industry, the John Boyds American consultative inquiry, the Government's internal inquiry and the eventual White Paper? It is nonsense to move a Bill through this House at this stage with all these inquiries going on and as yet no conclusions. There has been an independent report from the European Parliament's public policy advisers stating that the Government's controversial plan to close 31 mines is based on short-term thinking. The consultants calculate that production costs for Britain's deep mines could be cut by a quarter on average over the next few years as new technology is exploited, making British coal cheaper than the upper price band on the world market. A premium to ensure security of supplies would make it cheaper still.
I believe that the series of reports which we are awaiting will come to similar conclusions. Therefore, in the light of this series of government blunders, mistakes, misjudgments, illegal acts over the coal
768
industry and the unease throughout the energy sector, how can this House give this Bill its blessing today? I do not believe that it should, and the Bill should be thrown out.
6.15 p.m.
Lord Underhill: My Lords, at the Second Reading of this Bill I was given the responsibility of making the opening speech in opposition to the proposals in the Bill. By Second Reading on 13th July we had not received the White Paper. We went very hurriedly into the Committee stage and subsequently the Report stage.
At Second Reading I said that this Bill had all the hallmarks of the Government's obsession with privatisation. Nothing said during the whole passage of this Bill, including the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter, has removed the view that I held at Second Reading. When eventually we had the White Paper, it was clear that there were many blanks and that the Government did not know how they were going to proceed with the steps of privatisation. Perhaps I may say—this point will come out when we have the Bill before us—that the real issue is modernisation with adequate finance, not privatisation. We have been told time and again—and it has been repeated this afternoon—that this Bill does not give British Coal or British Rail powers to implement privatisation. What it does is give them the power to consider these proposals and make preparations for privatisation.
I listened very carefully to the noble Lord, Lord Boyd-Carpenter. He said that discussions that are taking place will help decide what is to be put in the Bill. Now we are told—and on this occasion I am prepared to believe the press because there must be some government leakages—that the Bill is to he published soon: this Friday. If the present Bill, which empowers discussions to take place and proposals to come forward, has not yet been approved, how the devil can the privatisation Bill be published this week? We have not yet passed this Bill which gives powers for the discussions to take place. If discussions have taken place, what consideration has been given to the various points raised by Members, including two Members of your Lordships' House on the Conservative side who expressed great anxiety over the Government's proposals? What view has been held by the umbrella organisation for some 80 user-groups which have expressed worry over the proposals for privatisation?
The Government have said that the proposals being brought forward in the Bill will bring in management skills. I believe that nothing can replace the skills of railway management which exist in British Rail today. It is not just my view. Paragraph 3 of the White Paper pays tribute to the progress made by British Rail and notes that the efficiency of British Rail compares very favourably with other European railways. Later on the Secretary of State, at Second Reading in the other place, went on to pay a tribute to the dedicated management and workforce of British Rail.
The suggested management skill to be brought in over and above the railway skills that exist now in

769
British Rail is to be supplemented by a very involved bureaucracy. I shall not go into all the details; but various authorities, we are told, are going to be established, presumably by the Bill. They will arise from discussions with British Rail. Yet the discussions with British Rail are supposed to be encouraged and developed as a result of passing this Bill this afternoon. We understand that decisions about what will be the various bureaucracies have already been taken. Yet this Bill has not been passed. We understand that certain people have been approached as appointees to the various authorities. Names have even been mentioned. Yet the Bill has not been passed today. It has not had Royal Assent. If the discussions could take place on all these things now, why do we have this Bill? We have wasted a few weeks. If the Bill is necessary, why are such decisions being taken now?
I should like to supplement one or two of the points made by my noble friend Lord Clinton-Davis. In relation to British Rail bids for franchises should not be permitted. The Government must explain the reason for that decision, particularly as we have been told that one of the major purposes of the Bill is to develop competition. I am sure that noble Lords would welcome an answer to that question before the Bill is placed before us.
Competition will take place when bids for franchises are made, in the same cockeyed way as the Government introduced competition for franchises in commercial television. Where will competition take place if the services and lines are franchised? There will not be one company competing with another company; there will be a complete break-up of the rail network. It would have made sense if the Government had decided to privatise the entire network, but for the reasons explained in the White Paper that was considered to be financially impossible. Therefore the British Rail network will be completely broken. Applications for franchises will only be made by companies that expect to make a profit on a particular service. The Minister for Transport, Mr. Roger Freeman, has made it clear that those services which do not make a profit will be run by British Rail. After the profitable ones have been taken away it will be more difficult to run the unprofitable services.
The Bill demonstrates the illogical thinking of the Government. I should like the noble Earl to explain why discussions are now taking place when the passage of the Bill has not been completed.
Lord Cocks of Hartcliffe: My Lords, in July during Second Reading of the Bill I raised the question of the regulators and how each successive privatisation adds to the army of regulators and how, with the best will in the world, they are bound to develop group behaviour. Competition will develop between them; there will be a career structure and there will be various pressures upon them. I asked the question: who will regulate the regulators? Here we are, six months on: there has been no discussion of that issue in Committee or on Report and the role of the regulators has hardly been mentioned.
My noble friend Lord Donoughue on 13th November mentioned the dilatoriness of the electricity
770
regulator in regard to the economics of gas-fired power stations, the regional electricity companies and the contributions that have been made to the current problems in the coal industry.
My noble friend Lord Clinton-Davis on another occasion raised the subject of the advertisement that was issued by the Department of Transport for the post of regulator, which stated, "knowledge of public transport not essential". I do not make too much of that point, having been previously involved in a very minor way with the appointment of government Ministers to some departmental briefs.
No serious discussion about the matter has taken place. Some noble Lords were lucky enough to have points that they raised on Second Reading taken into account by the Government; I have had no such joy.
There is growing concern about the group behaviour. I illustrated my remarks on Second Reading by mentioning the photographs that appeared in the annual reports. There is further evidence about regulators developing group behaviour. The Independent on Sunday issued 1993 resolutions from local government, Whitehall and the utilities. The regulators of the utilities would be very peculiar if they did not get on the blower to each other and say, "I have had the Independent on; what will you say?" The gas regulator's resolution was,
"To get the best deal possible for British Gas customers".
Then he adds a personal note. The Director-General of Ofwat stated that his resolution was:
"To keep prices down for customers, quality up, and the water companies on their toes".
That is a public school phrase if ever I heard one. The resolution of the Director-General of Oftel was:
"To strive to ensure that more and more customers can choose telephone services that they want, and have the information on which to base their choice.
There is no contribution from the electricity regulator. He possibly had cold feet because he has received a bit of a caning recently. However, there are substitute remarks from the Electricity Association and Nuclear Electric with which I need not weary the House.
That range of remarks can at best be said to be populist and at the worst sycophantic to the customers because I always understood that the question of regulation was about balance. The customers should be taken into account but there are other matters to be considered. The investors in the industry, Britain's industrial base, and the economic well-being of the nation should be considered much more by the regulators.
There is a growing awareness of that issue. The chairman of British Telecom, Iain Vallance, recently predicted the breakdown of regulation. He stated that such was the complexity and sophistication of some industries now that the question of regulating them was getting well beyond comprehension. His view was that the structure would break down. If that view is correct, then it is an extremely serious matter that should be examined before it gets out of hand. Further evidence appears from a report which recently appeared from the European Policy Forum, dealing

771
with the question of the future of industry regulation in the United Kingdom. It reached the conclusion that there was,
"an urgent need for reform of the regulatory system in order to create a stable environment within which the management of the utilities could manage, the investors can invest without unexpected and unexplained reductions in their expected wealth and consumers could be protected from high prices and poor service".
The matter was further aired in an editorial in the Financial Times that was headed "Reviewing the Regulators". The article began by saying that the time is ripe for reviewing the British system of regulating privatised utilities. It mentioned various issues that needed attention and stated that the clearest issue is accountability; that too often the process by which regulators reach their decisions is opaque; and that they are insufficiently accountable. It called for a thorough review which needed to be carried out openly and independently.
Finally, I should like to say to the Government that this is an issue that will not go away. The opportunity to explore it during the passage of the Bill has been wasted. I hope that the Government will consider that it is an issue that requires urgent consideration before further Bills are presented.
6.30 p.m.
Lord Donoughue: My Lords, the Bill has provided a fascinating and educational experience for me, if I may be excused for opening on a personal note. It is the first time that I have taken a Bill, or part of it, from the Front Bench and I begin by thanking the House for its tolerance and forbearance whenever my inexperience showed.
It was fascinating for a number of reasons. First, it was a hybrid Bill. On that point I immediately support what was said by my noble friend Lord Clinton-Davis and the noble Lord, Lord Ezra. That was not a good idea. It caused us a lot of trouble, as I imagine it did all sides of the House. In fact, the proposed privatisations of coal and rail have little in common. One is a domestic service and the other an industry based on an internationally traded commodity. We saw different people with different experiences who were interested in and wished to contribute to totally different aspects of the Bill. It was quite a muddle. I trust that the Government will not repeat that exercise in confusion.
Secondly, the Bill was introduced without a White Paper on coal and proceeded before the imminent review and Select Committee reports. That did and still does astonish me. Is it perhaps because in a White Paper the Government would have to set out their energy policy, and perhaps they do not have one? From that policy vacuum many of the Government's problems in the coal area arose. We hope that the promised review will finally produce a statement of coherent energy strategy; but we wait to see.
Thirdly, the Bill became a trial run for the real privatisation Bill still to come. I felt that that produced an imbalance in our respective approaches across the Dispatch Box. To the Government it was a small, narrow, technical Bill simply paving the way forward. To the Opposition, naturally—and I believe to many
772
Cross-Benchers in this House and possibly to many people in the country—the Bill raised all the basic issues and principles concerned with privatisation. The Government tried to avoid and deflect those arguments at this stage. But I believe that it was right for us to raise those issues now, especially as there was no White Paper on coal. It should even prove helpful to the Government in marking out the nature and boundaries of the debate to come. However, we need more information from the Government; we need statements of their energy strategy and the role of coal within it. To conduct the passage of the Bill without that was ultimately indefensible.
A further striking aspect of the Bill's voyage, and to me the most curious—referred to by my noble friend Lord Mason—was the extent to which it was pushed through unchanged. All amendments were rejected. There was no modification in the approach or tone from the government side. They were totally unresponsive to, as though totally unaware of, the near-revolution of opinion occurring outside the walls of this House and indeed throughout the country.
Between the Second Reading of the Bill in July and today's Third Reading the Government have been forced to withdraw the Committee stage in this House and abandon or postpone their closure programme before the imminent threat of defeat in another place. They were heavily defeated in this House on coal policy. They have been forced to set up several reviews into virtually every aspect of their energy policy. They have effectively conceded that their electricity privatisation was disastrously misconceived and executed.
The Government's energy policy has been denounced as wrong by virtually all the media and industry commentators. The Secretary of State and British Coal have unprecedentedly been found guilty in a court of law of breaching the law, of acting ultra vires and acting irrationally. As my noble friend Lord Mason said, there has been a near-revolt in British non-violent style. In a way the earth has moved. Yet, the department and Ministers have not moved at all on the Bill. It is as though the House were totally blithely unaware of what was happening in the real world outside. The Bill was pushed ahead during all those eruptions but not a single word was changed; there was not the slightest modulation of tone. As we saw today, there were no concessions on due consultation or independent scrutiny as we and the courts demand. I find that striking and curious. I fear that it suggests a mixture of complacency and arrogance within the department which is not attractive and I suspect is politically dangerous for those making policies in their cocooned departmental bunker.
As the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, said, the Bill should have been postponed until the policy background was clear. Whether we shall ever see the two ill-begotten privatisation Bills for which this measure prepares the way, in whatever form, remains to be seen. I hope not. I believe that one can state with confidence that there is no widespread demand for them in the country or, I suspect, in the Conservative Party. What are they? They are the fag-ends of Thatcherism; the last least

773
rational, least justified gestures to the dying dogma. But if the Government obstinately persist, they should be in no doubt that we from this side will resist with the utmost vigour. We will scrutinise with the greatest vigour the Government's proposals on the specific points we raised at Committee stage, which were excellently summarised by the noble Lord, Lord Ezra. I refer to pensions, safety, consultation, environmental obligations, and so forth. We shall return to those again.
I conclude with one of many pleasant courtesies in this House; that is, thanking those who have helped us during the course of the Bill. My noble friend Lord Clinton-Davis has already mentioned some and I endorse his comments. I thank him personally for his kindness and wisdom in guiding a raw apprentice such as myself. I thank also Robert McGeachy, our research assistant, who worked enormously hard to provide briefing in what was a constantly-changing environment, and those within the coal industry who unstintingly gave of their time to provide facts and figures and briefing when they were heavily engaged elsewhere.
I thank the staff of the House who assisted us in drafting amendments, where sometimes much skill and imagination was required to relate them to the legislative text. I thank also my noble friends for supporting us in speeches and Divisions, and especially in the fine speeches we heard this evening from my noble friends Lord Mason, Lord Underhill, Lord Kirkhill and Lord Cocks. The same thanks go to noble Lords on the Liberal Democrat Benches for their support. I particularly thank the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, whose modesty and charm disguise immense expertise in this area. Working with him, as we occasionally do across the gangway, has been a particular pleasure. I thank those on the Cross-Benches and those Conservative supporters who expressed sympathy for our case and especially those who voted with us on 19th October to defeat the Government. It was not actually a legislative stage of the Bill, but surely historically it was a political part of it.
I am also most happy to thank the Minister handling the coal side, the noble Baroness, Lady Denton, for her courtesy and helpfulness, which made my first legislative experience a pleasure. I referred to the fact that occasionally on these Benches we stretched the discussion to the limits of the Bill, raising issues which linked to the privatisation still to come. It was characteristically courteous of the noble Baroness to accept that with such good humour and she did her best to answer our questions. Of course, it was not only polite, but it was also shrewd—what I might call the cushion of her courtesy blunts our swords.
This may not be an entirely bad Bill in itself but it is not a good one and it paves the way for worse things to come. Its passage unchanged demonstrates that the Government are not listening to what the British people want. On this Bill and on any future proposed privatisation I believe that we speak for the British people. They do not want the privatisation of coal or rail.
The Earl of Caithness: My Lords, many of your Lordships may be forgiven for forgetting that this is a short Bill with a simple purpose; that is, to confer on British Rail and British Coal powers to enable them to prepare for the implementation of government proposals for the restructuring and privatisation of their industries. That is one reason why the two were linked together. Although it is a short Bill, your Lordships have recognised that it represents an important first legislative step paving the way for the main privatisation legislation to come forward at a later date.
However, the actual provisions of this paving Bill have generated little debate in your Lordships' House. Rather, our debates have in large part had an eye on future legislation which will be necessary for the actual implementation of the Government's proposals. In this respect my noble friend Lady Denton and I have made every effort to answer the points that have been raised. Indeed many of the debates had absolutely nothing to do with the amendments tabled. But we certainly went out of our way to try to answer the points that were raised. It is characteristic of the nature of the noble Lords, Lord Donoughue and Lord Ezra, to have thanked us for that. Those thanks are gratefully received. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Ezra. We did not meet all his concerns but we certainly try to answer his questions.
Many of the issues raised by your Lordships are of direct relevance to the main legislation that will come to your Lordships' House for consideration in due course. Certainly, the 22-minute harangue of the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, against our proposals for privatisation falls into that category. Your Lordships will then have further opportunities to consider these matters when they are fully developed and in their proper contexts. The arguments of the noble Lord, Lord Donoughue, for separate Bills when we come to the main legislation have force. There will be separate Bills for each industry. But his arguments had little force for a paving Bill of two clauses.
I was interested to hear that my noble friend Lord Boyd-Carpenter, who has great experience in these matters, was in a state of some emotion. I hope it will not be long before he is in a state of something more than some emotion when we introduce the full privatisation Bill for British Rail.
On behalf of my noble friend Lady Denton I thank your Lordships for the contributions that have been made on the coal aspects of the Bill. There is an enormous amount of knowledge of the coal industry in this House which has been amply demonstrated in the discussions on the Bill. We have certainly benefited from the enormous experience of the noble Lord, Lord Ezra, and we have taken careful note of the points that he raised. The noble Lord, Lord Mason of Barnsley, will understand that now is perhaps not the time to have a general debate on the coal industry. I could not help but think when the noble Lord talked of pit closures that it was indeed Labour Governments which closed 313 pits, with a consequential reduction in manpower of 200,000.
On the rail industry too there is a great depth of knowledge which has contributed to some very

775
interesting debates on the Government's rail privatisation strategy as well as a number of more specific aspects of the Government's privatisation proposals. In this context I should like to mention my noble friend Lord Teviot. Indeed I will continue the policy of trying to answer all the questions put by your Lordships in these debates even though they go wide of the mark. In doing that I wish to answer two points raised by the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis. One related to the services procurement directive. I understand that the directive does not apply to concessions and would not therefore apply to franchises. Our policy of not allowing BR to bid for franchises would therefore not contravene the requirements of the directive. The noble Lord's second point concerned the acquired rights directive. He will of course recall that, contrary to what he said, I replied to him in letter form on 14th December answering the points that he raised on 30th November. I have a copy of the letter before me.
In all our deliberations the House has shown its usual courtesy to my noble friend and to me. For that we are grateful. We have much appreciated the constructive and knowledgeable contributions to the debates we have had. Our debates have provided ample demonstration of the interest in the future of the coal and rail industries and also the depth of experience in your Lordships' House. All those who have been following our proceedings will now have a clearer understanding of the issues.
I should like to thank all those who have helped us. I thank the noble Lords, Lord Clinton-Davis, Lord Donoughue and Lord Ezra, for their kindness and generosity. I look forward with great enthusiasm to the main rail privatisation Bill on which I can expect the same high quality of debate.
On Question, Bill passed.

Bankruptcy (Scotland) Bill
6.46 p.m.
Report received.
Clause 2 [Appointment and functions of interim trustee]:
The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Lord Fraser of Carmyllie)The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Lord Fraser of Carmyllie) moved Amendment No. 1:
Page 4, line 38, leave out from ("shall") to ("appoint") in line 40.
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, it will be noted that some of the amendments before the House are in identical terms to those tabled by noble Lords opposite. That is because they deal with the same points of concern which have recently been drawn to our attention by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland. It may be helpful if I outline the objectives behind the amendments I have tabled. In so doing I hope to persuade noble Lords opposite that there is no need to proceed with their amendments or a number of other amendments which appear on the Marshalled List in their name.
I have considered the representations that have been made to me regarding the potential difficulties that could arise for some categories of debtors, particularly those in business, by any delay in the
776
award of sequestration. I understand that a debtor in those circumstances may be constrained from carrying on his business as a going concern and would wish the early appointment of the interim trustee to safeguard his estate for the general body of creditors. An interim trustee would be able to carry on a business for that purpose. While in some cases this problem can be resolved by the debtor granting a trust deed, that solution is not suitable in every instance.
Accordingly, the first amendment proposed for Clause 4 would remove the potential difficulties I have outlined by ensuring that sequestration may be awarded forthwith after the presentation of a debtor's petition. I still consider it important, however, and consistent with the policy of the Bill, that, following a debtor's petition, the Accountant in Bankruptcy should have an early opportunity to apply for a certificate of summary administration. Accordingly, I propose an amendment to Clause 4(3), in respect of new Section 12(1A), which should have the effect of enabling the accountant to apply for a certificate of summary administration no later than seven days from the date of the award of sequestration.
The government amendments proposed for Clauses 2 and 6 within this grouping are purely consequential on those proposed for Clause 4. They recognise that in future the Accountant in Bankruptcy would not be able to apply for a certificate of summary administration prior to the award of sequestration following a debtor's petition and remove any reference thereto.
I urge your Lordships to support these amendments. With that brief explanation I hope that noble Lords opposite will feel able to withdraw the amendments they have tabled to cover what are essentially the same points.
Lord Macaulay of Bragar: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that explanation of the approach taken by the Government. He has my assurance that we shall adopt the line that he has suggested and accordingly withdraw the amendments.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Macaulay of Bragar Lord Macaulay of Bragar had given notice of his intention to move Amendment No. 2:
Page 5, line 24, leave out ("by a creditor or a trustee acting under a trust deed").
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, we have already debated this amendment and Amendment No. 16 in Committee when I explained that the Government agreed with the Scottish Law Commission that the requirements which may lead the court to appoint an interim trustee in advance of granting an award of sequestration arise only in creditor and trustee petitions. That remains our view.
The concerns expressed by the noble Lord were that under the Bill a debtor's petition was now to be considered after eight days and not dealt with forthwith as in the 1985 Act. There was therefore no means by which a debtor could secure the immediate appointment of a trustee to continue operating his business.

777
As I have explained in terms of the first group of amendments, I consider that the amendments are unnecessary. I hope that it may be possible for noble Lords opposite to signal their agreement to that.
[Amendment No. 2 not moved.]
Lord Lyell Lord Lyell moved Amendment No. 3:
Page 5, line 42, at end insert:
("(8) Where the petition for sequestration was presented by a creditor or a trustee acting under a trust deed, and the appointment of interim trustee is made under subsection (5) above, the petitioner shall effect service of the petition forthwith on the debtor." ").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, your Lordships will be aware that at an earlier stage in Committee I moved an amendment at this point in our consideration of the Bill. I hope that this evening's proposal will not be seen necessarily as a variation 0on this theme.
At the outset the first thing that I should like to ask your Lordships to do—and especially my noble and learned friend on the Front Bench—is to consult Section 12(2) of the original Act. I am referring to page 12 of the 1985 Act where one can find the details about the formal service of a petition which, as is stated in Section 12,
"shall be … not less than 6 nor more than 14 days after the date of the citation",
which I understand is called the "calling date" in a court.
The main thrust of my amendment comes in its last line which refers to the,
"service of the petition forthwith on the debtor".
I stress the word "forthwith". It is essential that your Lordships appreciate that when the court has made an early appointment under a trust deed it is very often the case that the interim trustee will immediately try to contact the debtor to inform him of the situation. However, I am advised that in many cases the interim trustee arrives on the debtor's doorstep (perhaps to assume control of the business for the benefit of all the creditors), but the debtor might not necessarily have received full notice that a trust deed has been signed and that the interim trustee has legitimate business on his premises. I am advised that there are provisions that cover the gist of what I am seeking in this amendment under the arrangements for corporate and company liquidations. I am not entirely clear whether they are covered under the acts of sederunt which we mentioned at an earlier stage but I think that there are precedents for this. I understand also that when sheriff court officers call upon a debtor they know the drill and exactly what procedure to carry out.
I hope that my noble and learned friend and the Government will be able to see that there is every reason why the minimum of six days, which is specified in Section 12 of the original Act, is perfectly legitimate, but that there are also very good reasons for having more than 14 days before the actual date when the petition is presented. There may be problems in particular courts and delays if a court takes petitions only on a certain day of the week. I am advised that the practitioners and others involved in this sad business often wish that there could be
778
notification by an interim trustee a little more than 14 days before the case is called and that this amendment would have some benefit. With that, I beg to move.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, I have listened carefully to what my noble friend has said. It was interesting to hear the circumstances that he outlined and the difficulties that he believes might occur. I am bound to say, however, that they are not difficulties that have been brought to my attention previously. I understand that his amendment seeks to ensure that, whenever an interim trustee is appointed prior to an award of sequestration, the debtor is informed of the existence of the petition as soon as possible thereafter. As my noble friend emphasised, the word "forthwith" appears in his amendment.
As my noble friend clearly appreciates, Section 12(2) of the existing Act provides that when a creditor or trustee presents a petition for a debtor's sequestration, the court grants a warrant to cite the debtor to appear before it at a date usually not less than six days or more than 14 days from the date of citation. What I must emphasise to my noble friend—I am sure that he appreciates this already —is that such a warrant has attached to it a copy of the petition itself. In this way the debtor receives notice of the petition and accordingly should have the time to prepare a defence against the petition and the appointment of the interim trustee, if necessary.
If for any reason the petitioner fails properly to serve the warrant on the debtor then the sequestration will not proceed. I agree with my noble friend that from time to time it may prove impossible to serve the original warrant to cite in time and a fresh warrant is obtained. However, this does not affect the fact that until such a warrant is properly served, the case cannot proceed.
Present procedures should ensure that the debtor receives a copy of the petition before the court hearing. I venture to suggest that that is the critical feature. I can see that there may be circumstances where, if someone acting on behalf of the interim trustee (or the interim trustee himself) should appear before the debtor has any knowledge of it, there might be some difficulty. However, what appears to me to be more critical is that the service of the petition should have been secured. That is necessary before there can be any court hearing.
If we were to introduce yet a further complication I should be anxious if there had to be an earlier service of the petition. As I think that my noble friend will appreciate, it might be difficult if "forthwith" had to be given a precise legal definition and if procedures had to be repeated unnecessarily. I hope that that explains the position to my noble friend and that he might consider withdrawing his amendment.
Lord Lyell: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble and learned friend for spelling out the complications on his side and in the statute. He is right that there could be serious problems in precisely defining the meaning of "forthwith".
My noble and learned friend took on board one of my points and said that there might be "difficulties" where the interim trustee appeared before the warrant

779
had been served. I am advised that on one particular occasion a young lady attended a farm—not in the area that is known to my noble and learned friend and myself—to he met by the farmer with a shotgun, saying that the interim trustee had no business there and would she kindly clear his land—or words to that effect. That was in the nature of the "difficulty" that was so tactfully referred to by my noble and learned friend.
I appreciate that there will be "difficulties" (as my noble and learned friend put it), but I wonder whether I might study what he has said, especially as he might have said that there was a chance of having a second presentation. Did he say that there would be a repeat warrant? Therefore, I wonder whether the gap might be longer than 14 days and whether the hearing could he held anything up to 28 days later because of the pressure on the court.
That was the main thrust of my amendment. I wondered whether there might be some slight relaxation of the 14-day limit. My noble and learned friend has given me an explanation and I should like to read it. I thank him for what he has said and at this stage I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
7 p.m.
Clause 3 [Petitions for sequestration]:
Lord Macaulay of Bragar Lord Macaulay of Bragar moved Amendment No. 4:
Page 6, line 26, leave out from ("that") to end of line 28 and insert:

("(i) he has granted a trust deed; or

(ii) he has given notice to his creditors as mentioned in paragraph (b) of section 7(1) of this Act, other than if the debtor has been in "business" as defined by section 73 of this Act.").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, before I say anything about the content of the amendment, perhaps I may say that it is unhappily drafted. Nonetheless, there is a point to be made. The purpose behind the amendment is to allow a trading debtor to present his own petition for sequestration even if his apparent insolvency, as defined by the principal Act, is attributed solely to him giving written notice to his creditors that he has ceased to pay his debts in the ordinary course of business.
The view of insolvency practitioners is that the Bill has been formulated to prevent a consumer debtor being in a position to secure an award of sequestration, with the consequent discharge from his liabilities, without there being any notification to or involvement of the creditors. The question is whether a trading debtor who realises his own position should be given the option of going for his own sequestration. In other words, should a debtor be entitled to self-certify his, or her, own apparent insolvency? The amendment seeks to distinguish the position of the trading debtor from that of the consumer debtor. It is believed that the definition of "business" contained in Section 73 of the 1985 Act is a clear and simple test to distinguish the category of a debtor who is presenting his own petition.
The honest debtor, and most trading debtors are honest—it is all a question of percentages, so let us say
780
that 80 per cent. of trading debtors are honest debtors —cannot have his or her business wound up in an orderly manner by trust deed. If a person running a business realises that he is not running it profitably, then he may be guilty of fraud; for example, by trading when he knows that he cannot meet his debts. That has various consequences. In particular, if the trading debtor cannot go to the court and say, "It is hands up time, my business is not doing well", he loses, among other things, the goodwill of the business. That disappears as he waits for a creditor-led sequestration. That has other knock-on effects.
I am advised by insolvency practitioners that the insolvency provisions of the Employment Protection Act afford protection to employees in the event of a formal insolvency —for example, sequestration—but not if the business merely ceases to trade. There are factors such as arrears of wages, accrued holiday pay, redundancy and so forth. The Minister has been given notice of this matter. The amendment has been included to protect the position not just of the trading debtor who wants to put his affairs in order but that of creditors and to give them the benefit of the position in which the trader might unfortunately find himself in the present economic climate. For example, if a major company goes into liquidation, as happened last week, the trading debtor further down the line may find himself out of business because the major trader has gone. The joiner, the plumber and others may be left waiting for money from the major firm to pay their own debts. They may find themselves in a position which will lead only to insolvency. The amendment has a social purpose behind it. It is designed to assist the trading debtor and the creditor. I beg to move.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, the amendment seeks to reverse an amendment to the Bill which the Government introduced at a comparable stage in another place. It was an amendment which, I understand, was accepted without division or opposition. Having said that, it may he useful to take the opportunity to explain more fully what lies behind the government amendment. It is to make it clear that a debtor who was in business could not simply rely on sending a written notice to his creditors that he had ceased to pay his debts, as the means of establishing his apparent insolvency for the purposes of a petition being made by him. The Government's view is that some more objective criterion of his financial position is required, such as his failure to meet a statutory demand for payment, before a debtor could bring a petition for sequestration without the consent of a creditor.
It is worth recalling that under the 1985 Act a business debtor may petition for sequestration only if a qualifying creditor agrees to the petition. The only other remedy available to the insolvent business debtor is to grant a trust deed and secure the appointment of a trustee to run the business for creditors.
Both such remedies still remain under the Bill. A business debtor can either seek the agreement of his creditors to his sequestration or he can grant a trust deed. However, in addition he can bring a petition without the agreement of his creditors if he can

781
demonstrate his apparent insolvency, other than by having given a notice to his creditors that he has ceased to pay his debts, or if he has granted a trust deed, but sufficient creditors have objected so as to prevent it becoming a protected trust deed. This widens the options available to the debtor, rather than restricts them as the noble Lord suggests.
As I understand it, the central point of the noble Lord's argument is that it is in the interests of creditors generally to allow a business debtor to proceed quickly to sequestration. If the creditors agree with that assessment in any individual case, then there is nothing to stop one or more qualified creditors concurring in the debtor's petition and the result sought by the noble Lord can be achieved. If, however, the creditors are not prepared to concur in the petition, then one must assume that they have not accepted the argument that the sequestration of that debtor is in their overall interest, or indeed his or her overall interest.
I do not believe that it is appropriate or practical to try to draw a distinction between "business" and "consumer" debtors as the noble Lord seeks to do in the amendment. Such a distinction could rapidly become blurred and, in any event, runs contrary to the approach taken in the 1985 Act that all individual debtors are subject to the same procedures.
The Bill provides a business debtor with the means to reorganise his financial affairs for the benefit of his creditors. It retains the rights which such debtors presently have under the 1985 Act, but builds on them in certain respects, subject to safeguards to protect the interests of creditors.
I believe that the Bill, as amended in another place, strikes the right balance between debtor and creditors' interests. It is always a difficult balance to strike, but I believe that it has been struck. With that explanation, I hope that the noble Lord will consider withdrawing the amendment.
Lord Macaulay of Bragar: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for giving that explanation of the Government's approach to this aspect of insolvency and sequestration. I am not sure that I agree with everything that he has said, but no doubt those involved in these matters will read his words with interest. In the meantime, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Lockwood): My Lords, if Amendment No. 5 is agreed to, I cannot call Amendment No. 6 because it will have been pre-empted.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendment No. 5:
Page 7, line 8, leave out from first ("a") to ("and") in line 10 and insert ("statement of assets and liabilities").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I appreciate that the provisions in this group of amendments may seem substantive and daunting. I apologise for not giving a longer period in which to examine them. I assure your Lordships that they contain only three matters of a technical nature. A
782
number of them were urged on me at an earlier stage in the Bill not least by my noble friend Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish. However, the changes have led to a considerable number of consequential amendments.
The first point of note to which I draw your Lordships' attention arises in the new Section 19(1), which is substituted in paragraph 6 of Schedule 1 to the Bill. That now places an obligation on the debtor petitioner who has nominated an interim trustee to send to such trustee a statement of his assets and liabilities within seven days of the trustee's appointments. Under the 1985 Act a debtor petitioner is required to send this information to the interim trustee. That was omitted from the Bill because it was anticipated that the Accountant in Bankruptcy would be appointed interim trustee in all cases. However, noble Lords who have followed the passage of the Bill through both Houses will appreciate that that original assumption no longer applies. The position is rectified in new Section 19(i), as provided in the amendment.
The second point of significance is the definition of the statement of assets and liabilities, which appears in the amendment relating to page 25 line 17. That is now defined as containing a list of the debtor's assets and liabilities, a list of his income and expenditure and such other information as may be prescribed. In particular, I draw your Lordships' attention to the second item. As I have indicated, on an earlier occasion my noble friend Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish tabled an amendment to Clause 3 which had a similar effect. He again tables that amendment at this stage. The amendment which I propose includes a list of the debtor's income and expenditure as an item which must be provided in the statement of assets and liabilities. Moreover, the amendment provides a general definition for application throughout the Bill.
Many of the textual amendments in the group are consequential on the insertion of the new term as defined. I am sure that my noble friend will appreciate that often what at first blush appears to be a short, simple and sensible amendment requires in its train a considerable number of consequential amendments. The amendment is a clear example of that phenomenon.
Finally, the amendments recast the offence provisions which relate to any failure by the debtor to comply with his obligations to supply a statement of assets and liabilities or to supply accurate information. The provisions also set up more appropriately the defences which would be available to the debtor in any criminal proceedings raised against him in respect of the statement of assets and liabilities. Offence provisions in the same terms as those contained in the new Section 19 are also provided under the amendments to Clause 3 in respect of the statement of assets and liabilities, which is to be provided to the Accountant in Bankruptcy. That presentation ensures that petitioners are fully aware of the position on offences at the outset.
Amendment is also made to Section 68 of the 1985 Act to bring the time limits for commencement of summary proceedings into line with those normally available for such proceedings in Scotland. I

783
appreciate that is a technical explanation of the amendments, but I believe that in principle they will assist debtors and those advising them fully to understand the scope of their obligations and the related offence provisions which will apply if they fail to observe them. I trust that the way in which the Government have presented them will be acceptable to the House and will allow some noble Lords to withdraw their amendments, in particular Amendment No. 6 standing in the name of my noble friend Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish.
7.15 p.m.
Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble and learned friend for accepting, as he did in Committee, my argument about the need to include the words "income and expenditure" on the face of the Bill. I apologise for the fact that my three simple words have been expanded to a fair number of words and amendments. However, my noble and learned friend has explained the position and I am grateful to him.
It is sensible that in devising legislation the Government should pat as much material as possible on the face of the Bill and as little as possible in the rules and regulations, which are "extra-parliamentary". I warmly welcome my noble and learned friend's amendments and I shall not move my Amendment No. 6.
Baroness Carnegy of Lour: My Lords, I add my thanks because I too raised the points referred to by my noble friend Lord Mackay. The Government appear to have proceeded in a complicated way; but I take my noble and learned friend's word that it is the simplest way which he could devise and that my noble friend's easier-to-understand amendment is not correct.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
[Amendment No. 6 not moved.]
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendments Nos. 7 and 8:
Page 7, line 12, leave out from ("Bankruptcy") to end of line 13 and insert ("such statement of assets and liabilities as was lodged in court in pursuance of paragraph (a) above").
Page 7, line 13, at end insert:
("( ) After subsection (8) there shall be inserted the following subsections—
"(9) If the debtor—

(a) fails to send to the Accountant in Bankruptcy in accordance with subsection (6A) (b) above such statement of assets and liabilities; or

(b) fails to disclose any material fact in such statement of assets and liabilities; or

(c) makes a material misstatement in such statement of assets and liabilities,

he shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 months or to both such fine and imprisonment.
(10) In any proceedings for an offence under subsection (9) above, it shall be a defence for the accused to show that he had a reasonable excuse for—

(a) failing to send to the Accountant in Bankruptcy in accordance with subsection (6A) (b) above such statement of assets and liabilities; or

(b) failing to disclose a material fact; or

(c) making a material misstatement."").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I spoke to Amendments Nos. 7 and 8 when moving Amendment No. 5. I beg to move.
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Lord Lyell Lord Lyell moved Amendment No. 9:
After Clause 3, insert the following new clause:
("Sequestration of other estates: amendment
.—(1) Section 6 of the 1985 Act (sequestration of other estates) shall be amended as follows.
(2) For subsection (4) there shall be substituted the following subsections—
"(4) The sequestration of the estate of a partnership shall be on the petition of—

(a) the partnership, if either subsection (4A) or 4B) below applies to the partnership;

(b) a qualified creditor or qualified creditors, if the partnership is apparently insolvent; or

(c) the trustee acting under a trust deed granted by the partnership if, and only if, one or more of the conditions in subsection (4C) below is satisfied.

(4A) This subsection applies to the partnership if a qualified creditor or qualified creditors concur in the petition.
(4B) This subsection applies to the partnership where—

(a) the total amount of the debts of the partnership (including interest) at the date of presentation of the petition is not less than £1,500;

(b) the partnership either—

(i) is apparently insolvent; or

(ii) has granted a trust deed and the trustee has complied with the requirements of sub-sub-paragraphs (a) to (c) of paragraph 5(1) of Schedule 5 to this Act but has received notification as mentioned in sub-sub-paragraph (d) of that paragraph;

and for the purposes of this paragraph a partnership shall not be apparently insolvent by reason only that the partnership has granted a trust deed.

(4C) The conditions mentioned in subsection (4)(c) above are—

(a) that the partnership has failed to comply—

(i) with any obligation imposed on the partnership under the trust deed with which the partnership could reasonably have complied; or

(ii) with any instruction or requirement reasonably given to or made of the partnership by the trustee for the purposes of the trust deed; or

(b) that the trustee avers in his petition that it would be in the best interests of the creditors that an award of sequestration be made." ").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I hope that my noble and learned friend will not be too worried—knowing me, he probably will not—when he sees that I seek to insert a new clause. I hasten to assure him and your Lordships that the clause raises no complications. I seek to place partnerships on the same basis as sole traders as set out in Clause 3.
The measures contained in the Bill allow an individual debtor, which includes a sole trader, to present a petition to the court for his own sequestration without the need for a concurring creditor. Your Lordships will see that that is provided for in Clause 3(2B).
I propose the new clause because I wonder whether there is any reason why other trading entities and forms of corporate bodies—I am thinking of the husband and wife partnership and other small

785
partnerships which could be sequestrated—are not entitled to the same relaxation of the provisions for self-sequestration. It is equally important to a partnership with a trade which one would hope would continue to be allowed to protect the assets of the going concern for the benefit of all the creditors by having the ability to petition for sequestration if the partnership is insolvent.
Secondly, I wish to introduce the provision which was not incorporated in the 1985 Act. It has not been possible for a trustee under a partnership trust deed to petition on any grounds for the sequestration of the partnership. I am advised that that has caused problems since the passing of the 1985 Act. There have been occasions on which one creditor has been able to effect what we call "diligence" against the partnership in order to obtain a preference and a higher place in the queue perhaps over other equally qualified creditors. I am advised that sequestration cuts down on diligence. That may be one of the intentions. However, the Scottish Law Commission report on bankruptcy and related aspects of insolvency and liquidation suggested that cutting down on diligence should be the main reason for a trustee to be converted to sequestration.
The main thrust of the amendment is that there appears to be no reason why the partnership's assets should not be protected from diligence in the same way as the assets of a sole trader. For that reason, we believe that a trustee under a partnership trust deed should be able to petition for the sequestration of the partnership subject to the criteria which your Lordships will see in subsection (4C). Those are fairly severe and replicate what we have in Clause 3. This appears to be a fairly lengthy and complicated new clause but I hope that I have simplified matters as far as possible. I beg to move.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, I have listened with great interest to what my noble friend said. I acknowledge immediately that there is some force behind the argument that the petition rights in respect of a business which is a partnership should, in general terms, be equivalent to those available in respect of a business run by an individual debtor. Although the proposed new clause is fairly lengthy and complicated, I should say to my noble friend that he has explained the situation with great clarity and I acknowledge what he wishes to say. However, there is one important aspect of the noble Lord's new clause which would create a disparity between the circumstances in which an individual debtor could petition for his sequestration and the circumstances in which a partnership could do so. For that reason, I regret to say that I cannot accept the amendment. I refer to the tailpiece to new Section 5(2B) (c), as inserted by Clause 3(2) of the Bill which provides that, for the purposes of a debtor's petition the debtor shall not be apparently insolvent by reason only that he has given notice to his creditors, under Section 7(1) (b) of the 1985 Act, that he has ceased to pay his debts.
I have no doubt that my noble friend listened to the exchange on Amendment No. 4 when I explained to the noble Lord, Lord Macaulay of Bragar, why the
786
Government felt it to be inappropriate to allow such notice to be the cause of the presentation of a petition. Such a qualification is not present, however, in the equivalent provision of new subsection (4B) of Section 6 as inserted by the new clause. I am sure that my noble friend will accept that government policy is important as regards this matter. I cannot accept the new clause. It is a complicated clause but, as I say, I understand the force of my noble friend's argument. However, because of that very important point, I cannot accept the amendment.
Lord Lyell: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble and learned friend. Perhaps I may ask him whether Section 7(1) (b) of the 1985 Act is the only reason he cannot accept the amendment.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, that is an objection of such an overwhelming character that I must indicate that I cannot accept the amendment. I repeat that there is some force behind my noble friend's argument, but I am not anxious to indicate that, if that point alone were to be removed, the amendment would then be wholly acceptable. I must found my refusal to accept the amendment on that single objection. Perhaps my noble friend will reflect on that point.
Lord Lyell: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble and learned friend. I listened carefully to what he said and I am gratified that he believes that there is some force behind the arguments which I have put forward. I shall reflect on what he said and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Lord Macaulay of Bragar Lord Macaulay of Bragar moved Amendment No. 10:
After Clause 3, insert the following new clause:
("Meaning of apparent insolvency
.—(1) Section 7 of the 1985 Act (meaning of apparent insolvency) shall be amended as follows.
(2) In subsection (1) delete "£750" and substitute "£1,500".").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, this is a technical amendment to delete the figure of £750 in Section 7(1) (d) and to substitute the figure of £1,500. The amendment is presented to your Lordships to seek to increase the limit of debt in respect of which a creditor can serve a statutory demand and is consequent upon the amendments made to Section 5 of the Act in Clause 3 of the Bill.
At present a creditor can petition for sequestration only if the debt due to him is not less than £750. That is increased by the amendments made in Clause 3 to £1,500. It appears that the Bill does not similarly increase the limit of debt in respect of which a creditor is entitled to serve a statutory demand. If that view is correct, the effect would be that a creditor having a debt of between £750 and £1,500 might serve a statutory demand in the prescribed form on the debtor and that would threaten sequestration when that creditor would have no entitlement by virtue only of the service of the statutory demand to present a petition for sequestration. On one reading of the matter, it appears that something has gone wrong. The

787
amendment is tabled to achieve a measure of consistency in the application of the upper limit of £1,500. I beg to move.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, the noble Lord has a pleasingly tidy mind on these matters. He is quite correct to draw your Lordships' attention to the fact that under the 1985 Act the same limit of £750 applies to both the statutory demand procedure and to the definition of a qualifying creditor for the purpose of presenting a petition for a debtor's sequestration.
I would, however, invite the noble Lord to consider the differences between the two procedures. Under Section 5(4) of the 1985 Act, as amended by Clause 3(3) of the Bill, two or more creditors may combine together to meet the now £1,500 limit of debt required before a petition for sequestration can be brought by them as "qualified creditors". Thus two creditors, each owed £800, will be able to act together to secure the debtor's sequestration.
However, the statutory demand procedure is restricted to a single creditor. In the example to which I have referred, if the amendment were accepted, neither creditor could take advantage of the statutory demand procedure to establish the debtor's apparent insolvency. They would be forced either to wait until one or other of their debts increased to £1,500, or take the more expensive option of raising a court action to establish the debtor's apparent insolvency. This could significantly limit the options available to a small creditor.
I do not think that a strong case has been made for such a limitation to be imposed on creditors. However, should such a change appear necessary in the future, then my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Scotland has the option of increasing the present £750 limit by regulations made under new Section 72A.
I hope that my arithmetic is sufficiently accurate for the noble Lord to be able to understand the point that I make. With that explanation, I hope that he will feel able to withdraw the amendment.
7.30 p.m.
Lord Macaulay of Bragar: My Lords, I am obliged to the Minister for his complimentary remarks towards me. Of course I would never accuse any Minister in your Lordships' House of being devious, but what I could say is that the argument is ingenious. I shall look with interest as time goes on at how this particular clause works. I am not quite convinced by the argument. Nevertheless, in view of the undertaking given by the noble and learned Lord as to a review in future as the Act comes into practice, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
The Deputy Speaker (Baroness Lockwood): My Lords, I must point out that, under the pre-emption rule, if Amendment No. 11 is agreed to, I cannot call Amendment No. 12.
[Amendment No. 11 not moved.]
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendment No. 12:
Page 7, line 20, leave out from ("shall") to ("award") in line 21.
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I spoke to Amendment No. 12 with Amendment No. 1. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
[Amendment No. 13 not moved.]
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendment No. 14:
Page 7, line 33, leave out ("of presentation of the petition") and insert ("on which sequestration is awarded").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, again when I spoke to Amendment No. 1 I spoke to Amendment No. 14. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Macaulay of Bragar Lord Macaulay of Bragar moved Amendment No. 15:
Page 8, line 16, at end insert:
("(3B) Where sequestration is not awarded in pursuance of subsection (3) above, the court shall recall the appointment of an interim trustee appointed under section 2(5) of this Act and may grant such interim trustee a certificate of discharge which certificate of discharge shall have the same effect as if granted under section 27(5) of this Act." ").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, this amendment has been suggested by the insolvency practitioners. It seeks to provide that, where a sequestration petition is dismissed prior to the award of sequestration, an interim trustee previously appointed by the court will have his appointment formally recalled and a certificate of discharge granted. The position appears to be that, where a creditor presents a petition for sequestration, it is competent for the court, prior to sequestration, to appoint an interim trustee on cause shown.
In many cases the appointment of an interim trustee on warrant to cite will have the effect of prompting the debtor, in order to avoid sequestration, to make arrangements to pay the creditors' debt. If that is done the petitioning creditor will simply move at the sequestration hearing for the petition to be dismissed. However, one of the apparent deficiencies in the 1985 Act is that in this situation, which can also occur where a debtor puts forward a successful defence to a petition under the Act, there is no formal provision for recall of the interim trustee's appointment and for the interim trustee's discharge.
As the Act presently stands, an interim trustee can only get a discharge if sequestration is awarded and a permanent trustee is subsequently elected or appointed. It is pointed out that, in the absence of a nominated trustee who has submitted a letter of undertaking, the provisions of the Bill in Clause 2(6) (b) allow the Accountant in Bankruptcy to be appointed as interim trustee. This amendment would also apply to that particular event. I beg to move.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, the noble Lord has indicated that an interim trustee can be discharged from liability only if sequestration is awarded and a permanent trustee is subsequently elected or appointed. While I accept that this is true, I am not aware of difficulties having emerged in practice as a consequence of the lack of any specific provision.

789
Furthermore, the amendment would require the court to grant the interim trustee a certificate of discharge if it dismissed a petition for an award of sequestration without any opportunity for objections to be considered in Section 27 of the 1985 Act, which contains the provisions relating to the discharge of an interim trustee. Where sequestration has been awarded, the interim trustee applies to the Accountant in Bankruptcy for a certificate of discharge. The debtor and creditors have the opportunity to lodge objections to the discharge and the Accountant has discretion whether or not to grant such discharge. I consider that any amendment would have to allow the court the right not to grant a certificate of discharge if the circumstances of a particular case warranted such a decision.
The amendment also does not address other issues which may be appropriate if specific statutory provision were to be made on the termination of the interim trustee's functions in these circumstances, including how the interim trustee's remuneration should be determined and what rights other interested parties should have to challenge the award of discharge to the trustee. Provision of that kind is made in Sections 26 and 27 of the 1985 Act.
The problem that the amendment seeks to address does not arise out of the Bill, but rather from an alleged deficiency in the 1985 Act. If this amendment had been brought to our attention at an earlier stage it may have been possible to consider amendment to the Bill in order to achieve the aim desired by the noble Lord. However, the issue raises other potentially complex matters, which frankly I doubt that we could resolve in the time remaining to us. In those circumstances, I hope that the noble Lord can withdrawn his amendment.
Lord Macaulay of Bragar: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble and learned Lord for his explanation. It seems extraordinary that we have reached this stage in the Bill and looking through the Marshalled List we find that the Government have put down Amendments 24 to 39, no doubt having had a rethink about the matters that have been raised. I see no justification for the Government not taking this particular issue on board with a view to making amendments before the Third Reading of the Bill.
It appears from what the noble and learned Lord has said that he accepts that the interim trustee is really being left in an administrative limbo over which he has no control. If that is so, it would be helpful if the Minister would at least give an undertaking that he will take it away and think about it in principle and, if possible, come back with an amendment that no doubt can be agreed with those interested in this type of activity. In the meantime, having heard what the noble and learned Lord has to say, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 16 not moved.]
Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove moved Amendment No. 17:
After Clause 4, insert the following new clause:
("Amendment ofs. 16 of 1985 Act
.—(1) Section 16 of the 1985 Act (petition for recall of sequestration) shall be amended as follows.
(2) After subsection (3) there shall he inserted the following subsection—
"(3A) Where a copy of the petition is served in accordance with paragraph (2) above, the interim trustee or permanent trustee shall forthwith notify every creditor known to him, stating that a petition has been presented under this section and that any creditor may lodge answers to the petition within 14 days of the date of the notice from the interim trustee or permanent trustee.")
(3) In subsection (4), paragraph (a) after "of" there shall be inserted "the award of.").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, Amendment No. 17 is a highly complicated amendment. As those of your Lordships who have been listening will have realised, most of the procedures under this Bill have been rather complicated and specialised. There is no complaint about that. I believe that it is the only way we can get a full understanding into the Bill.
In this particular case I have another worry. I am sure that it is my fault and no one else's. In this amendment I would have preferred that the new clause had been divided, and that there was a new clause taking in subsections (1) and (2), and a second new clause, perhaps Amendment No. 17A, taking in subsection (3). I think it was probably my fault, or the fault of someone acting on my behalf, that that was not done. Unfortunately, I therefore find it necessary to take longer than I am sure the House would like me to at this time, but it is a complicated business and very important.
Although I understand its broad outline, it is too technical, without my reading it out, for me to give a clear explanation that would help the Minister to make his reply. The new clause sets out a requirement to advise all known creditors of the presentation of a petition for recall of sequestration. At present Section 16(3) of the 1985 Act requires the petitioner for recall to publish a notice in the Edinburgh Gazette stating that a petition has been presented and that any person having an interest may lodge answers within 14 days of the publication of the notice in the Gazette. A petition for recall is of such significance that there should be a statutory requirement for all known creditors to be notified of the presentation of such a petition.
The insertion of a notice in the Edinburgh Gazette cannot really be regarded on its own as sufficient notification. There have in the past been several instances of recall petitions being granted by the court outwith the knowledge of the creditors. Very often the creditors remain unpaid and will not know their future payment prospects. That outcome must be quite unjust to creditors who may otherwise have lodged an objection to the recall petition, unless they have been assured of repayment.
In practice the interim or permanent trustee is the only party who is aware of the names and addresses of all known creditors. It is known that some trustees will at present notify creditors merely as a courtesy, but this is neither a statutory requirement nor are there any guidance notes to this effect. In Committee a similar amendment was tabled which required the petitioner to ensure that all creditors are advised of the

791
petition for recall. One of the answers given by the Government was that the persons most likely to have an interest in lodging answers would be the petitioning creditor, the interim or permanent trustee and the Accountant in Bankruptcy. It is difficult to know why the Government made that assumption. All creditors are surely interested to know whether their interests are being protected by a continuing sequestration or whether they will remain an unpaid creditor after recall is granted.
The second point made by the Government was that the whole procedure for the recall of an award of sequestration could be held up by additional notification requirements. This fresh amendment attempts to achieve the same result but to impose the obligation on the interim or permanent trustee who will be in possession of the names and addresses of creditors. If a debtor has allowed himself to be sequestrated, there is a strong argument that any small delay to allow all creditors to be notified, and any additional time costs incurred by the trustee, should have to be accepted by the debtor as a necessary part of the proceedings. It is only the debtor who is being disadvantaged, whereas at present the creditors are being disadvantaged.
It has also been suggested by the Government that the responsibility lies on the interim or permanent trustee to lodge answers on behalf of the general body of creditors if he considers that they are to be disadvantaged. It is believed that recall of sequestration is of sufficient importance not to rely on a trustee to act for individual creditors and for individual creditors each to have their individual right to lodge answers, if appropriate. Consideration would have to be given as to the procedure or means by which the interim or permanent trustee could certify that the notice had been issued to creditors since the petition for recall may be by the debtor or a creditor. There is also the necessity for the trustee to comply rigidly with the term "forthwith" or unnecessary delays may be incurred. The third point is whether the period of 14 days is realistic; perhaps 21 would be more appropriate. I hope the Minister will consider that.
It is therefore acknowledged that this amendment can produce procedural problems as regards implementation. It is, however, considered necessary to overcome these minor problems in order to ensure that all creditors in a sequestration are given an individual right to lodge answers by being made aware of the recall petition. Again it is emphasised that the creditors should be given notice of the recall petition and the availability to lodge answers, if appropriate. With such an important issue this responsibility should not be delegated to a trustee who may from a cost point of view be unwilling to incur costs to lodge answers. Legislation at present protects the debtor to the detriment of the creditor and this amendment seeks to redress the balance.
I again apologise to the House for the length of my speech. However, this is rather an important amendment. Perhaps it may be possible to return to this matter at a later stage of the Bill. The effect of new subsection (3) of the proposed new clause is to increase the time limit given to a debtor wishing to present a
792
petition for recall of sequestration on certain grounds from 10 weeks from the date of sequestration to 10 weeks from the date of the award of sequestration.
A debtor may present a petition for recall of sequestration at any time if he brings it on grounds that, first, he has paid his debts in full or has given sufficient security for their payment; or, secondly, a majority in value of creditors reside in a country other than Scotland and it is more appropriate for the estate to be administered in that other country; or, thirdly, that one or more other awards of sequestration of the estate or analogous remedies (as defined in Section 10(5) of the Bankruptcy (Scotland) Act 1985) has been granted.
Where, however, the debtor wishes to bring a petition for recall of sequestration on other grounds a time limit applies. Such other grounds might include challenging jurisdiction, the regularity of service or otherwise the competency of the petition. The present time limit is 10 weeks from the date of sequestration. However, running time forward from the date of sequestration creates problems. In a creditor's petition the date of sequestration is the date when the court grants authority to serve a petition for sequestration on the debtor. Thereafter there will be a sequestration hearing which could be as much as four to six weeks after that date. If for some reason the petitioner was not able to serve the petition on the debtor, he would require to ask for warrant for re-service and a fresh sequestration hearing date would be fixed. In that situation the 10 weeks could easily have elapsed before the debtor even had a chance to challenge the petition in court.
In addition, if the debtor is served with the petition in time for the sequestration first fixed by the court and challenges the petition there could he sundry procedure before the court makes a decision. In that situation the time limit could also have elapsed. What is the debtor to do? This situation arose in a case which I am sure will be familiar to the noble and learned Lord, that is the case of Wright v Tennent Caledonian Breweries Limited 1991 SLT823. The result was that a petition had to be made to the three judges of the Inner House of the Court of Session for, in effect, leave to bring the petition late, there being no other remedy under the Act. The court granted the petition, but it is a time-consuming, expensive and unnecessary procedure for a debtor to have to present a petition to the nobile officium in such circumstances. I and my noble friends believe it makes more sense for the time limit to run from the date when sequestration is actually awarded rather than an earlier date.
As I said earlier, I am sorry I have taken so long to explain the amendment. I take full responsibility for the mix-up to which I have already referred. I feel the Minister will accept the second part of my argument concerning new subsection (3). I beg to move.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, as the noble Lord has reminded us, we had a useful discussion on the procedures leading to the recall of a petition for sequestration during the Bill's Committee stage. I acknowledge that the amendment before your Lordships reflects some of the criticisms I voiced on that occasion. The noble Lord will accordingly

793
appreciate that I have some sympathy with the idea that the interim or permanent trustee should alert creditors to the existence of a petition for recall. I have greater difficulty, however, in accepting that such notification should become a formal part of the recall procedures.
A particular difficulty raised by the amendment is that it would force the petitioner seeking a recall to be dependent on the actions of a third party, namely the interim or permanent trustee, to notify all the creditors known to him. If for any reason that interim or permanent trustee failed to notify creditors promptly and in the permitted timescale, or, worse, by some accidental error failed to send a notice to a creditor, then the petitioner could find his case delayed or, worse still, dismissed as incompetent because there had been a flaw in the procedure caused by a third party over whom he had no control. The noble Lord will appreciate that such a result would be extremely unfair to the petitioner and could have serious consequences. I do not believe that it is necessary or desirable to run such a risk. Instead, I suggest that the objective sought by the noble Lord might be achieved by less formal means.
As I mentioned at the outset, I have some sympathy with the proposal that the interim or permanent trustees should alert creditors to the existence of such a petition. I understand that some practitioners already notify creditors as a matter of courtesy and good sense. If the relevant professional bodies feel that that practice should be further encouraged, then I would be happy to invite the Accountant in Bankruptcy to address this matter in the notes for guidance which he provides to all interim and permanent trustees. In that way we can ensure that creditors have an alternative route by which they can be made aware of their right to lodge answers to the petition for recall without further complicating the procedures for the petitioner.
I have to take responsibility for a number of matters but I do not take responsibility for the form in which amendments are tabled by the Opposition Front Bench. Within the amendment the noble Lord has included a minor technical change to Section 16(4) of the 1985 Act to allow the period during which a petitioner may bring a petition for the recall of the sequestration to run from the date of the award of sequestration. For the reasons which I have spelt out, I have either to accept or reject the amendment which has been tabled in its entirety. I have to invite the House to reject the amendment in its totality, although I understand the logic which lies behind the noble Lord's approach to that minor tailpiece to his larger amendment.
With that slightly cryptic end to my explanation, I hope that the noble Lord will withdraw the amendment.
Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble and learned Lord for indicating that he is willing to consider the possibility of notifying the appropriate bodies in Scotland of the
794
advantages and good practice of notifying people individually in the circumstances which we have discussed.
I keep returning to the matter of the Edinburgh Gazette. I cannot help feeling in relation to the recent tragic apparent bankruptcy in Scotland of Lilley that few of the company's creditors, perhaps sitting in Portakabins, would have the Edinburgh Gazette delivered to them every morning to let them know how Lilley was doing. Some of those firms had probably been dealing with Lilley for three generations at least and had no idea that that would happen.
However, I can understand some of the problems which the Minister has mentioned and accept that the matter will be considered by the appropriate bodies. I am sorry that it took so long but it was important to place the issue on the record.
As to the last part of the Minister's remarks, I am trying to make some sense of his cryptic comment and wondering whether there is some other meaning in it. I shall certainly consider the matter with great care before the next stage of the Bill to see how we can deal with it, either in this House or in another place.
I am grateful to the Minister for the time he has given to the matter and for his understanding of my rather longwinded presentation. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Lord Macaulay of Bragar Lord Macaulay of Bragar moved Amendment No. 18:
After Clause 4, insert the following new clause:
("Amendment of s. 17 of 1985 Act
.—(1) Section 17 of the 1985 Act (recall of sequestration) shall be amended as follows—
(2) In subsection (3) after paragraph (b) there shall be inserted—
"(bb) shall recall the appointment of the interim or permanent trustee as the case may be and shall grant a certificate of discharge to the interim or permanent trustee as the case may be which certificate of discharge shall have the effect of discharging the interim trustee or permanent trustee as the case may be from all liability (other than any liability arising from fraud) to the creditors or to the debtor in respect of any act or omission of the interim trustee or permanent trustee as the case may be in exercising the functions conferred on him by this Act"").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, this is a rather technical amendment which is intended to enable the court to make specific provision where sequestration is recalled for the recall of the appointment of the interim trustee or the permanent trustee, as the case may be, and to grant such trustee a discharge.
It appears that as matters presently stand, while the Court of Session may do a great many things, there is no specific provision for the recall of the appointment of the trustee or for him to be granted a discharge. It has been suggested that the Court of Session should be requested to make reference to the discharge of a trustee when recalling the interlocutor, but there is no provision for that in primary legislation. It is suggested that if the court did so it might be acting outwith its powers. Therefore the amendment has been tabled in order to give the court the power in legislation to deal with the matter specifically. I beg to move.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, I am going through a sympathetic phase at the moment because again I have sympathy with the motives behind the amendment. However, I do not believe that it is necessary to introduce a provision which specifically requires the Court of Session to recall the appointment of an interim or permanent trustee and to grant an automatic certificate of discharge to the interim or permanent trustee on the recall of an award of sequestration.
A power enabling the court to grant a discharge already exists and has its statutory basis in Section 17(3)(c) of the 1985 Act. That provides that the court may make any such orders as it considers necessary or reasonable in all the circumstances of the case. I would advance the proposition that that power is sufficiently widely drawn to deal with the problem which the noble Lord has correctly identified. Moreover, it avoids the difficulty inherent in the amendment which obliges the court to grant a discharge without considering whether it is warranted. The substantive provisions in the 1985 Act relating to the discharge of the interim and permanent trustees provide for objections to the discharge to be considered and, if upheld, a discharge may not be granted. It would seem unreasonable, in contrast, to deny any discretion at all to our supreme court, the Court of Session, having heard representations from interested parties as to the discharge, as the amendment would provide.
I agree with the noble Lord that the power in Section 17(3) (c) may not be utilised as much as it could be in this context. I say to the noble Lord, echoing somewhat what I said in relation to Amendment No. 17, that the Accountant in Bankruptcy has indicated his willingness to draw practitioners' concerns to the attention of the supreme court and to invite it to consider how greater use might be made of Section 17(3) (c) in order to provide a discharge for the trustee in recalled sequestrations.
I believe that that is a more appropriate response to the problem than the amendment proposed, and therefore invite the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment.
Lord Macaulay of Bragar: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister. We are in danger of being submerged by waves of sympathy. I have no doubt that the words of the noble and learned Lord will be considered with care by those who work in the field of insolvency. Having heard his full explanation, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
8 p.m.
Lord Lyell Lord Lyell moved Amendment No. 19:
After Clause 4, insert the following new clause:
("Amendment of s. 21 of 1985 Act
.In section 21 of the 1985 Act (calling of statutory meeting) for subsection (1) there shall be substituted the following subsection—
"(1) The interim trustee shall call a meeting of creditors (in this Act referred to as "the statutory meeting") to be held within 60 days, or such longer period as the Sheriff on cause shown may allow, after the date of the award of sequestration." ").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the proposed new clause is set out with commendable brevity. My noble and learned friend and practitioners will be aware that at present under Section 21 of the 1985 Act the interim trustee has only 28 days after the date of the award to hold the statutory meeting. Under the terms of Section 21 of the 1985 Act he has to give not less than seven days' notice to the creditors. That reduces the timescale to 20 days. With weekends or a bank holiday, it is reduced to about 18 days.
The appointment of the interim trustee is normally made at the same time as the award of sequestration is granted. My noble and learned friend will be aware that I touched on the matter in an earlier amendment at Committee stage. The appointment is often not notified to the interim trustee until several days after the event, in particular in the case of a creditor's petition. My noble and learned friend replied mildly at the last stage. However, he will appreciate that by a reduction to 18 days the entire process involves a short timescale in which to obtain all the names and addresses of creditors and to give them not less than seven days' notice of the statutory meeting.
Section 23 of the 1985 Act requires that the interim trustee shall chair that meeting. The difficulties of timescale that I have sought to point out cause problems for the interim trustee who may have congestion of time through his own activities, let alone those of the courts.
In the present Bill, where the Accountant in Bankruptcy is the trustee, Clause 5 allows him not 28 days but 60 days—88 days in all—after the date of sequestration in which to hold the statutory meeting. In the majority of his cases the Accountancy in Bankruptcy would have full knowledge of names and addresses of creditors since the majority of the cases will be debtors' petitions. The debtor will have lodged with the petition a copy of the list of his assets and liabilities.
I hope that I can persuade my noble and learned friend that, while it is reasonable for the Accountant in Bankruptcy to be allowed a fairly long period, it is also reasonable that the private practitioner should be allowed at least equal opportunity. The Accountant in Bankruptcy will already have available to him the addresses of creditors.
If the amendment were to be considered favourably by my noble and learned friend, we do not believe that the extension from 28 to 60 days would prejudice the position of any creditors. For many reasons the interim trustee would wish to assume the role of the permanent trustee as soon as possible. That would be in his own interests and in the interests of the creditors and the debtors. We do not believe that advantage would be taken of the 60-day period. It would be a valuable buffer and of considerable help to many of the private insolvency practitioners, in particular in the event of problems in obtaining names and addresses of creditors. There is also the problem of the chairing of the statutory meeting by the interim trustee due to congestion in his own affairs, in those of the courts and of the creditors and debtors.
I hope that my noble and learned friend will consider the extension of 28 days to 60 days. I do not

797
propose the full 88 days that the Accountant in Bankruptcy needs. We believe that 60 days would provide a valuable benefit to the private practitioner. I beg to move.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, there is no limit to my receptiveness to reasoned argument. Indeed, I entirely accept the contention that the time limit allowed to insolvency practitioners before a statutory meeting must be held should be increased to avoid burdening the courts with applications to extend the present 28 days. I have no objections in principle to his suggestion—he has argued it carefully—that the limit should be extended to 60 days.
However, I am afraid I cannot accept the amendment tabled. While my noble friend has used Section 21 of the present 1985 Act as the model for the amendment, I regret to say that paragraph 9 of Schedule 1 to the Bill amends that provision in a way which is incompatible with my noble friend's amendment.
However, I accept the merits of the amendment in principle. My noble friend will be aware that new Section 72A provides my right honourable friend the Secretary of State with powers to amend by regulation any reference in the Act to periods of time. I am therefore happy to give to my noble friend an undertaking that the Government will amend the time limit by regulation in early course.
I hope that that is a sufficient degree of victory for my noble friend, and that with that explanation he will agree to withdraw the amendment.
Lord Lyell: My Lords, my noble and learned friend was kind enough to refer to victory. As a long-time supporter of Forfar Athletic, the victory is marvellous. I am grateful to accept my noble and learned friend's assurance. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 6 [Summary administration]:
[Amendment No. 20 not moved.]
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendment No. 21:
Page 11, line 15, leave out from ("Bankruptcy") to ("as") in line 19 and insert ("and the court has appointed").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I spoke to this amendment with Amendment No. 1. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
[Amendment No. 22 not moved.]
Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish moved Amendment No. 23:
After Clause 7, insert the following new clause:
("Amendment of s. 39 of 1985 Act
.In section 39 of the 1985 Act (management and realisation of estate), after subsection (8), there shall be inserted the following subsection—
"(9) The permanent trustee shall, until the debtor is discharged under this Act, at the end of—

(a) the period of six months beginning with the date of sequestration; and

(b) each subsequent period of six months,

require the debtor to give an account in writing of his current state of affairs."").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, Clause 6 of the Bill introduces the summary administration procedure where the duties of the permanent trustee are modified by the new Schedule 2A. The modified duty in Schedule 2A(2) is an additional statutory obligation to what is the present position; namely, to require the debtor to give an account in writing every six months of his current state of affairs. There has never before been a statutory obligation on any permanent trustee to write to the debtor to request a current state of affairs.
It appears somewhat peculiar that the Bill places an obligation on permanent trustees under the modified procedure but that this obligation does not extend to permanent trustees in sequestrations where the summary procedure does not apply. It would seem that there is more justification for that obligation to be applied in non-summary cases. There would almost certainly be more likelihood of income from employment in non-summary cases.
Although many permanent trustees are quite assiduous regarding the question of contributions from income, it is very much left to the discretion of the individual permanent trustee. Recent statistics from the Accountant in Bankruptcy's department indicate that 35 per cent. of debtors are in employment but that only 5 per cent. are contributing from the income of that employment. That would suggest that certain insolvency practitioners may not be addressing the question of contributions and may not even know the current employment status of the debtor. While the debtor is normally advised to inform the permanent trustee of any change in income circumstances, there is no formal mechanism at present to overcome either the lack of knowledge by the permanent trustee or lack of communication by the debtor. That problem has been tackled in the Bill in the modified procedures. My amendment would extend that requirement to all sequestrations. I beg to move.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, I have listened to the argument that has been impressed upon the House by my noble friend. I accept his argument that there is no reason why this obligation should be incumbent on a permanent trustee and a debtor in a summary case, but not in a non-summary sequestration. Indeed, the Government had expected that it would already be the norm for permanent trustees to invite debtors to provide them with details of their current state of affairs periodically.
I find it difficult to understand how a permanent trustee is able to perform his existing function of recovering, managing and realising the debtor's estate without routinely monitoring the debtor's circumstances. I presume some trustees simply rely on the obligation on the debtor in Section 32(7) to inform them of any new assets or significant change in the debtor's financial circumstances, while others I expect take a more pro-active role. Whichever approach is adopted, I would agree that some monitoring is needed even in summary cases, which is why the Bill allows the permanent trustee no discretion in that instance.

799
If the relevant professional bodies feel that it is necessary to spell this out as a duty of the permanent trustee, then I am willing to invite the Accountant in Bankruptcy to deal with it as I have suggested in relation to another matter, in his notes for guidance.
I hope that that is helpful to my noble friend and that what I have said will be studied by those relevant professional bodies which have concerned themselves with the Bill.
Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: My Lords, I thank my noble and learned friend for his response to my amendment and to the points that I made in introducing it. I very much appreciate that it is good practice to do exactly what my amendment seeks to enshrine in legislation. I am pleased to hear that he is prepared to listen to the relevant professional bodies on the matter. If he feels that further action is required, then that could be incorporated in the notes for guidance. With that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
8.15 p.m.
Clause 11 [Amendments and repeals]:
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendment No. 24:
Page 14, line 6, leave out ("subsection") and insert ("section").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, this is a very important, if apparently minor, amendment which is required to cure a defect in Clause 11 of the Bill. I can elaborate if anyone wishes me to do so, but with the assurance that it is important, if minor, I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 12 [Short title, interpretation, commencement and extent]:
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendment No. 25:
Page 14, line 23, at end insert ("section 8").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, this is a technical amendment, with the simple purpose of enabling Clause 8 of the Bill to come into force on Royal Assent. This is necessary to ensure that there is a continuation of the underlying power for the Secretary of State to prescribe fees payable to the Accountant in Bankruptcy in respect of functions performed by him under the bankruptcy legislation. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Schedule 1 [Miscellaneous amendments of the 1985 Act]:
Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish moved Amendment No. 26:
Page 15, line 4, at end insert:
(".In section 3 (duties of the permanent trustee), there shall be inserted at the end of subsection (1) (d)—
"and to report to the debtor's creditors on the debtor's current state of affairs."").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, there have been representations from many creditor bodies resulting in
800
amendments in this House and in the other place with a view to the creditors having an opportunity to apply to court for a contribution order against the debtor.
To date, the Government have not been inclined to accept such amendments, believing that the permanent trustee alone is in a position to determine, on behalf of the general body of creditors, whether or not a contribution is appropriate.
The amendment sets out to impose a statutory obligation on the permanent trustee to report to creditors on whether the debtor is in a position to contribute to the sequestrated estate. While the Government may not accept that a creditor has an entitlement to apply to the court for a contribution order, this amendment will at least require the permanent trustee to keep the creditors advised of the situation regarding the debtor's ability to contribute to the sequestrated estate.
In some ways, the amendment can be read in conjunction with my Amendment No. 23 which we discussed a few minutes ago and the new proposals on page 11 of the Bill for modified procedures dealing with the debtor being required to tell the trustee every six months what his present position is. It seems to me that even though my noble and learned friend persuaded me to withdraw my amendment, we shall have good practice in addition to what is in the summary procedure which will mean that permanent trustees will know of the debtors' situation every six months or so. They will be in a position to tell the creditors what is the current situation.
My amendment makes it obligatory that such information should be reported to the creditors by the permanent trustee, as he deems it appropriate. As the creditor is a very interested party in any sequestration, it seems only correct that he be kept informed of the debtor's position. That is the objective of my amendment. I beg to move.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie: My Lords, I entirely agree with my noble friend that creditors should be kept informed of any significant developments in relation to the debtor's financial circumstances. However, I do not consider that the amendment now before the House is the most appropriate means by which to achieve that objective. I hope that my noble friend will allow me a moment in which to explain my anxieties.
If the debtor's circumstances change in the six months between his previous report and the latest one, then it seems reasonable that the permanent trustee should convey this information on to the creditors. If there is no such change in the debtor's circumstances, however, then such a requirement becomes a costly and valueless burden. My worry would be that the wording of the amendment, rather than allowing a discretion, would in fact require the permanent trustee to report to creditors, whether or not there was anything of value to report. Indeed, this obligation may be imposed more often than every six months, since the amendment refers to the "current" state of affairs. Whenever there was any change in the debtor's current state of affairs, it would be a function, and thus duty, of the permanent trustee to inform creditors of that change, if he had knowledge of it.

801
I would be anxious that we would thereby increase the cost of administering sequestrations in this way. I consider it more appropriate to encourage permanent trustees to inform creditors of the debtor's current state of affairs when there is something relevant to report. In deciding whether a change in circumstances should be reported—and I am sure my noble friend would agree - flexibility and discretion are vital. I believe that these objectives can best be achieved by encouraging good practice, as he said. I believe that, as I said in relation to earlier amendments, good practice could be best encouraged through guidance from the Accountant in Bankruptcy, offering a greater degree of flexibility than a provision on the face of the statute.
I am happy to give to my noble friend and to the House the undertaking that I shall ask the Accountant in Bankruptcy to consider the circumstances where a permanent trustee should or should not be required to report the debtor's latest state of affairs to the creditors and to issue notes of guidance to permanent trustees accordingly.
With that undertaking and the brief explanation of what I see to be the defects in the amendment, I hope that my noble friend will feel that he can withdraw it.
Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: My Lords, I thank my noble and learned friend for his response to my amendment. I fully accept and understand the defects in it that he has highlighted. I am grateful to him for the point that he has taken on board that when circumstances change, it is only right and proper that the creditors be informed.
I am delighted that this short debate has led at least to the assurance that the Accountant in Bankruptcy will be asked to look at this, and if necessary put some wording into the notes for guidance which will bring about this good practice. With that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendment No. 27:
Page 16, line 1, after ("one") insert ("(other than the Accountant in Bankruptcy)").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, this amendment seeks to cure a defect in new Section 13 which would disqualify the Accountant in Bankruptcy from acting as an interim trustee in a sequestration. Subsection (6) of Section 13 currently prohibits any person from acting as interim trustee who would be disqualified from acting as permanent trustee by virtue of subsection (2) of Section 24. That provision in Section 24 is itself amended by paragraph 11(3) of Schedule 1 to the Bill to prevent the Accountant in Bankruptcy from being eligible for election by creditors as permanent trustee. The Government believe that where there are sufficient assets in a case to allow creditors to proceed to an election it is right and proper that private sector insolvency practitioners should undertake the work rather than a public official.
While it is, therefore, appropriate that the accountant should be ineligible for election as permanent trustee and should be appointed to that
802
position only in those cases where a permanent trustee is not elected by a meeting of creditors, it is a fundamental tenet of this Bill that the accountant should be empowered to act as interim trustee. As presently drafted, Section 13(6) flies in the face of this principle. This amendment, though small, is central to the essence of the Bill and I commend it to the House. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendments Nos. 28 to 33:
Page 16, line 35, leave out from beginning to end of line 8 on page 17 and insert:
("Statement of assets and liabilities
.—(1) For section 19 (requirement on debtor to deliver list of assets and liabilities) there shall be substituted the following section—
"Statement of assets and liabilities etc.
19.—(1) Where the petitioner for sequestration is the debtor he shall, not later than 7 days after the appointment of the interim trustee (where he is not the Accountant in Bankruptcy), send to the interim trustee such statement of assets and liabilities as was lodged in court in pursuance of section 5(6A) (a) of this Act.
(2) Where the petitioner for sequestration is a creditor or a trustee acting under a trust deed, the debtor shall, not later than 7 days after having been notified by the interim trustee as mentioned in section 2(7) of this Act, send to the interim trustee a statement of assets and liabilities.
(3) If the debtor—

(a) fails to send to the interim trustee in accordance with subsection (1) or (2) above such statement of assets and liabilities; or

(b) fails to disclose any material fact in such statement of assets and liabilities; or

(c) makes a material misstatement in such statement of assets and liabilities,

he shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 months or to both such fine and imprisonment.
(4) In any proceedings for an offence under subsection (3) above, it shall be a defence for the accused to show that he had a reasonable excuse for—

(a) failing to send to the interim trustee in accordance with subsection (1) or (2) above such statement of assets and liabilities; or

(b) failing to disclose a material fact; or

(c) making a material misstatement."").

Page 17, line 10, leave out from beginning to ("after") in line 19 and insert:
(".—(1) Section 20 (duty to prepare statement of debtor's affairs) shall be amended as follows.
(2) For subsection (1) there shall be substituted the following subsection—
"(1) When the interim trustee has received the statement of assets and liabilities, he shall, as soon as practicable, prepare a statement of the debtor's affairs so far as within the knowledge of the interim trustee and shall indicate in the statement of the debtor's affairs whether, in his opinion, the debtor's assets are unlikely to be sufficient to pay any dividend whatsoever in respect of the debts mentioned in paragraphs (e) to (h) of section 51(1) of this Act."
(3) In paragraph (a) of subsection (2) for the words "a copy of the debtor's list" there shall be substituted the words "the statement".
(4)").
Page 17, line 44, leave out from ("the") to ("his") in line 1 on page 18, and insert ("statement of assets and liabilities; and (ii)").
Page 19, line 8, at end insert:
("( ) In subsection (1) for the words from "a" to "liabilities" there shall be substituted the words "the statement of assets and liabilities, and a copy".").
Page 19, line 24, leave out from ("including") to end of line 26 and insert ("the statement of assets and liabilities").
Page 24, line 47, at end insert:
("Commencement of summary proceedings
.—(1) Section 68 (summary proceedings) shall be amended as follows.
(2) In subsection (1)—

(a) at the beginning there shall be inserted the words "Subject to subsection (1A) below,"; and

(b) for the word "6" there shall be substituted the word "12".

(3) After subsection (1) there shall be inserted the following subsection—
"(1A) No such proceedings shall be commenced by virtue of this section more than three years after the commission of the offence."
(4) In subsection (2) for the words "subsection (1) above" there shall be substituted the words "this section".").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 1, I spoke also to Amendments Nos. 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33. I beg to move these amendments en bloc.
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendment No. 34:
Page 24, leave out lines 48 to 50.
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, this is a simple technical amendment removing from the Bill paragraph 26 of Schedule 1. The provision is no longer relevant as a consequence of the introduction to the Bill in another place of a right for a petitioner to nominate an insolvency practitioner to act as interim trustee in a sequestration in place of the Accountant in Bankruptcy. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendment No. 35:
Page 25, line 16, after ("(4)") insert ("In subsection (1) in the definition of "statutory meeting"").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, this again is a technical amendment required to clarify paragraph 28(4) of Schedule 1 to the Bill. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie moved Amendment No. 36:
Page 25, line 17, at end insert:
("( ) In subsection (1) after the definition of "standard scale" there shall be inserted the following—
""statement of assets and liabilities" means a document (including a copy of a document) in such form as may be prescribed containing—

(i) a list of the debtor's assets and liabilities;

(ii) a list of his income and expenditure; and

(iii) such other information as may be prescribed"").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, in moving an earlier set of amendments I indicated that spoke to them in relation to Amendment No. 1. I
804
should have said that I spoke to them in relation to Amendment No. 5. I also spoke to Amendment No. 36 when I moved Amendment No. 5. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Fraser of Carmyllie Lord Fraser of Carmyllie had given notice of his intention to move Amendment No. 37:
Page 29, line 16, at end insert:
("( ) After paragraph 5 there shall be inserted the following paragraph—
"5A.—(1) A person is not qualified to act as trustee under a trust deed at any time unless at that time—

(a) he would be qualified under Part XIII of the Insolvency Act 1986 to act as permanent or interim trustee in the sequestration of the estate of the debtor who granted the trust deed; or

(b) he belongs to such class or classes of persons as may be prescribed,

and he satisfies such conditions as may be prescribed; and different conditions may be prescribed for different classes of persons.
(2) A person who acts as trustee under a trust deed at a time when he is not qualified as mentioned in sub-paragraph (1) above shall be guilty of an offence and liable—

(a) on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or to both such fine and imprisonment;

(b) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both such fine and imprisonment."").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, as noble Lords will know, it has been a constant theme of the Government in the Bill to encourage the greater use of trust deeds as an alternative to sequestration. Wherever possible we have sought to remove any barriers which might artificially restrict their use. The amendments before your Lordships (Amendments Nos. 37 to 39) follow that theme and would enable my right honourable friend to take action it the present limitations on who may act as a trustee under a trust deed prove to be a restriction of choice in practice rather than an assurance of equality. They would also permit the introduction of greater competition if the costs of operating trust deeds proved excessive.
I am, however, very conscious that there has been very little time available to those most concerned to consider these proposals. While even in that brief time they have gathered some support, I am also conscious that reservations have been expressed as to whether the Government may be proceeding too quickly. Although I have tabled these amendments, on reflection I believe that further consideration of this matter would be beneficial. I do not therefore propose to move the amendments at this time, nor, indeed, when the Bill returns to the House at Third Reading. I wish to place that on the record.
If we find in practice that problems arise from this source I will not hesitate to return to the matter when a suitable opportunity arises.
[Amendment No. 37 not moved.]
Schedule 2 [Repeals]:
[Amendments Nos. 38 and 39 not moved.]

Royal Assent
8.24 p.m.
The Chairman of Committees (Lord Ampthill): 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:
806
Gas (Exempt Supplies) Act,
British Coal and British Rail (Transfer Proposals) Act.

Gas (Exempt Supplies) Bill [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons earlier this day agreed to.
House adjourned at twenty-five minutes past eight o'clock.

  AUNG SAN SUU KYI
  AUNG SAN SUU KYI
  JOHN FRU NDI
  JOHN FRU NDI
  INDIA: HEALTH AND EDUCATION EXPENDITURE
  INDIA: HEALTH AND EDUCATION EXPENDITURE
  SOMALIA: US FORCES' OPERATING COSTS
  SOMALIA: US FORCES' OPERATING COSTS
  ISRAEL: NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY
  ISRAEL: NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY
  NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY: GUARANTEES
  NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY: GUARANTEES
  NATO SECRETARY-GENERAL
  NATO SECRETARY-GENERAL
  MACEDONIA: APPLICATION FOR UN MEMBERSHIP
  MACEDONIA: APPLICATION FOR UN MEMBERSHIP
  BOSNIA-HERCEGOVINA: RAPE ALLEGATIONS
  BOSNIA-HERCEGOVINA: RAPE ALLEGATIONS
  BOSNIA-HERCEGOVINA: DEATHS
  BOSNIA-HERCEGOVINA: DEATHS
  BOSNIA-HERCEGOVINA: INCURSIONS OF TANKS AND ARTILLERY
  BOSNIA-HERCEGOVINA: INCURSIONS OF TANKS AND ARTILLERY
  EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: CONSTITUENCY SIZES
  EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: CONSTITUENCY SIZES
  FALKLAND ISLANDS: FISHING LICENCES
  FALKLAND ISLANDS: FISHING LICENCES
  XANANA GUSMAO
  XANANA GUSMAO
  EC LEGISLATION AND SUBSIDIARITY
  EC LEGISLATION AND SUBSIDIARITY
  SOMALIA: US FORCES' RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
  SOMALIA: US FORCES' RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
  ISRAEL: INFORMATION ON NUCLEAR PROGRAMME
  ISRAEL: INFORMATION ON NUCLEAR PROGRAMME
  SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATIONS: DOCUMENTS RETURNED WITHOUT DISCLOSURE
  SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATIONS: DOCUMENTS RETURNED WITHOUT DISCLOSURE
  SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE INVESTIGATIONS
  SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE INVESTIGATIONS
  SUNDAY TRADING ENFORCEMENT: ADJOURNED PROCEEDINGS
  SUNDAY TRADING ENFORCEMENT: ADJOURNED PROCEEDINGS
  SELF-INCRIMINATION PRIVILEGE
  SELF-INCRIMINATION PRIVILEGE
  CUSTOMS AGENTS AND THE SINGLE MARKET
  CUSTOMS AGENTS AND THE SINGLE MARKET
  PARLIAMENTARY COSTS
  PARLIAMENTARY COSTS
  LEGISLATION: SOURCE OF POWERS
  LEGISLATION: SOURCE OF POWERS
  MR. ANTHONY GILBEY
  MR. ANTHONY GILBEY
  WOLDS REMAND PRISON: PRISONER/STAFF RATIO
  WOLDS REMAND PRISON: PRISONER/STAFF RATIO
  CHARITIES ACT 1992: GUIDANCE TO TRUSTEES
  CHARITIES ACT 1992: GUIDANCE TO TRUSTEES
  MRC: HUMAN GENE SEQUENCES
  MRC: HUMAN GENE SEQUENCES
  STUDENT GRANTS, BRENT
  STUDENT GRANTS, BRENT
  STUDENT GRANTS AND FEES: LATE PAYMENT
  STUDENT GRANTS AND FEES: LATE PAYMENT
  STUDENTS: EMPLOYMENT DURING TERM
  STUDENTS: EMPLOYMENT DURING TERM
  SCHOOLS' LEAGUE TABLES: ERRORS
  SCHOOLS' LEAGUE TABLES: ERRORS
  INCOME SUPPORT DEDUCTIONS
  INCOME SUPPORT DEDUCTIONS
  INCOME SUPPORT REGULATIONS: CONSULTATIONS
  INCOME SUPPORT REGULATIONS: CONSULTATIONS
  DEFENCE EQUIPMENT: ISRAELI TENDERS
  DEFENCE EQUIPMENT: ISRAELI TENDERS
  ABM SYSTEMS: DISCUSSIONS WITH US
  ABM SYSTEMS: DISCUSSIONS WITH US
  ARMY PERSONNEL CENTRE
  ARMY PERSONNEL CENTRE
  DEFENCE RESEARCH AGENCY
  DEFENCE RESEARCH AGENCY
  33 ENGINEER REGIMENT
  33 ENGINEER REGIMENT
  PUBLIC BUILDINGS: FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING
  PUBLIC BUILDINGS: FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING
  PROTECTION OF WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE: UNESCO CONVENTION
  PROTECTION OF WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE: UNESCO CONVENTION
  NHS COMPUTER EXPENDITURE
  NHS COMPUTER EXPENDITURE
  ELECTRICITY AT WORK REGULATIONS 1989
  ELECTRICITY AT WORK REGULATIONS 1989
  URBAN REGENERATION AGENCY: PROGRAMME
  URBAN REGENERATION AGENCY: PROGRAMME
  POWER STATION EMISSIONS: CONTROL PROPOSALS
  POWER STATION EMISSIONS: CONTROL PROPOSALS
  PEAT: COMPOSITION OF WORKING GROUP
  PEAT: COMPOSITION OF WORKING GROUP
  FORESTRY STRATEGIES CIRCULAR
  FORESTRY STRATEGIES CIRCULAR