Sitting of 7 February 1994

Preamble
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
  NATIONAL HERITAGE

    Tourism (London)
    Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what initiatives his Department is taking to promote tourism in London.
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for National Heritage (Mr. Iain Sproat): Government support for tourism is channelled through the British Tourist Authority and the English tourist board. Through the English tourist board, support is also made available to the 11 regional boards, including the London tourist board.
    Only last week, my right hon. Friend co-hosted the reception to launch the inaugural London arts season. This ETB/BTA-led initiative, in conjunction with several of my Department's sponsor bodies, will help to boost tourism at a traditionally slack time of year.
    Mr. Hughes: I thank the Minister for that answer. Is not our greatest tourist asset our capital city? The people whose job it is to promote the capital and to guarantee the huge amounts of revenue that flow from tourism feel at a disadvantage because of the lack of coherence and structure that govern their ability to present London as a
    2
    city. Will the Minister look at ways to ensure that, in future, we can present the tourism potential of London strategically rather than piecemeal?
    Mr. Sproat: The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point, because 54 per cent. of foreigners who visit this country come to London and tourism is responsible for more than 200,000 jobs and £4·8 billion in revenue. He is entirely right to stress the importance of tourism. I also accept that bringing all the tourism effort together is an important consideration, but it is not always appropriate to have one body to deal with everything. London First has been launched to try to improve the quality of life for Londoners and the London tourist board is primarily responsible for tourists. Those organisations meet and we certainly try to achieve the maximum co-ordination.
    Mr. Jessell: As tourists come to London not for our weather but because London is one of the arts capitals of the world, with an unparalleled range of opera, ballet, concerts, museums, historic buildings and heritage, not to mention the monarchy and our royal family, are not those the things which we should continue most to promote among tourists?
    Mr. Sproat: Yes, my hon. Friend is entirely right: London is the arts capital of the world nowadays. I entirely accept what my hon. Friend has said and, through the British Tourist Authority, the English tourist board and the London tourist board, we shall do everything possible to do what he wishes.
    Mr. Cohen: Was not London so far behind in the race to host the Commonwealth games that it was humiliating? If London had won, that would have brought in a lot of tourists. That bid was put forward by a quango that had been set up by the Government, of which no one in London had ever heard. Is not it about time that the Government admitted their mistake and re-established a Londonwide authority to represent London properly?
    Mr. Sproat: I think that the whole House will congratulate Manchester, including even those hon.

    3
    Members who represent London and Sheffield, which did not win. We certainly do not want to return to one body like the former Greater London council.

    Competitive Sport
    Mr. Hawkins: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans he has to encourage greater participation by children in competitive sport; and if he will make a statement.
    Mr. Sproat: I am talking to a number of organisations and practitioners about ways of promoting competitive sport more widely, and will be holding a consultative seminar on this issue very shortly.
    Mr. Hawkins: I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Was not the positive response from many leading sports bodies to the report produced by the Conservative Back-Bench committee on sport extremely welcome? Will my hon. Friend be having further discussions with our ministerial colleagues at the Department for Education about enhancing the opportunities for competitive sports in our schools?
    Mr. Sproat: I congratulate my hon. Friend and all those who produced the report "Team Games and Competitive Sport in Schools". It is an extremely valuable contribution to an important debate. The Department for Education is well aware of the importance of team games and competitive sports. I hope that, together, we can produce a plan for even more team games and competitive sport in schools.
    Mr. Pendry: If the Minister genuinely wants to encourage more competitive team sport in schools, had not he better start winning some battles with the Department for Education? For instance, is there to be one hour a day for physical education in the national curriculum, as the Minister advocated to sports writers last month, or is there to be the totally inadequate time of one hour a week, as advocated by Sir Ron Dearing? Is the Minister battling with the Secretary of State for Education to scrap regulation 909, which resulted in £70,000-worth of playing fields being sold off every day of last year? Unless that regulation is scrapped, few playing fields for any sports will be left. Unless the Minister's tough words are matched by strong ministerial action, his credibility in the sporting world will decline even faster, and that is saying a lot.
    Mr. Sproat: I am having no battles with the Department for Education, just a series of friendly and genial conversations. I hope that, in the end, much more time will be given to physical education in schools, by which I mean not just lectures on the history of sport but team games and competitive sports.
    The point about playing fields is important. I hate to see playing fields sold off, but I understand the pressures. The hon. Gentleman will know that, since December, we have for the first time a register of all playing fields in the country. It is a good move forward, which I hope will help us with the problems that he described.
    Mr. John Carlisle: After England's magnificent and comprehensive victory against the Scots on Saturday, will my hon. Friend take time to consider encouraging the playing of rugby union in schools? Will he also support the many local junior clubs that encourage and coach the
    4
    youngsters, often in the parents' spare time and on a voluntary basis? If he encourages them, may not we hope for even more magnificent victories at Twickenham in the future?
    Mr. Sproat: Having seen the match, I thought that England was very lucky to win and it was a heart-breaking result. None the less, I congratulate rugby union on what it has done for those youth sports. It has made tremendous strides. All the home countries can learn from rugby union's promotion of rugby among young people.

    "News At Ten"
    Mr. Patchett: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what recent discussions he has had with the ITV Association over proposals to move the timing of "News at Ten".
    The Secretary of State for National Heritage (Mr. Peter Brooke: None. The scheduling of news programmes is a matter for the ITV companies and the Independent Television Commission.
    Mr. Patchett: Does the Minister recall the Government's stated commitment in the Broadcasting Act 1990 to the importance of national and world news? Will he now make it clear that he backs the Prime Minister in objecting to plans to move "News at Ten" to a much earlier time slot?
    Mr. Brooke: The matter that the hon. Gentleman raises has latterly gone on the back burner. Following the exchanges between the ITC and Channel 3 licensees, the ITC has made it clear that "News at Ten" will continue to be broadcast at 10 o'clock.
    Mr. Fabricant: I welcome my right hon. Friend's comments and am glad that he accepts that it is primarily a matter for the independent television contractors. Does he agree that, were it not for a Conservative Government, we would have neither ITV nor "Sky News", because the Labour party voted against the formation of independent television and the implementation of satellite television?
    Mr. Brooke: As a Conservative, I pay close attention to history, and I share my hon. Friend's view that the Opposition occasionally suffer from amnesia about what has gone before.
    Mr. Corbett: Is not it clear that ITV beat only a tactical withdrawal from its plans to move "News at Ten" to an earlier slot last year, the better to counter the livelier scheduling of Channel 4—which runs its news between 7 and 8 pm and which can therefore get its evening film on earlier—and the better to attract the audience that it needs? Is the Secretary of State simply going to let the provisions of the Broadcasting Act be tinkered with in a piecemeal way, as he did with ownership? Would not it make more sense to announce a review of the Act, to sort out the sorry mess that it is creating?
    Mr. Brooke: The hon. Gentleman speaks of a "tactical withdrawal". The fact remains that the rescheduling of "News at Ten" would require the ITC's approval if all the regional licensees are to remain in compliance with their general licence conditions. Given that that is how the Act stands, it sounds to me as though we are better off with the Act than with what the hon. Gentleman suggests.

    Rugby
    Mr. McCartney: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage when he last met representatives of the Rugby Football League to discuss rugby matters.
    Mr. Sproat: I met representatives of the Rugby Football League on 22 November 1993 and discussed a number of issues with them. I was also pleased to attend the annual dinner of the all-party rugby league group on 13 December.
    Mr. McCartney: I thank the Minister for that answer. I am also pleased that he did not give us a detailed report of what went on at the dinner of the all-party rugby league group.
    What negotiations and discussions has the hon. Gentleman had with the Ministry of Defence about that Ministry's continued determination, which has lasted for 99 years, to exclude the playing of rugby league by the armed forces? Last time the matter was raised in the House, the Minister gave us a commitment that he would hold discussions and said that he hoped to produce a report which would mean that, for the first time in nearly a century, the game could be played without the interference of civil servants or senior officers in the affairs of those squaddies and others who want to play the game.
    Mr. Sproat: I had a meeting with the Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence on 16 December and wrote him a letter following up the meeting. I told him that I wanted a new and fair deal for rugby league in the armed services. He gave me what I thought was an extremely positive and helpful reply. He is now conducting a review of the way in which not just rugby league but all sports are financed and dealt with in the armed services. I very much hope to have an answer on the results of that review by Easter.
    Mr. Waller: That is a helpful reply. I welcome my hon. Friend's sustained efforts to reconcile the two codes of rugby—at the local level, co-operation, not conflict, is generally the rule.
    Can my hon. Friend report any progress in his efforts to ensure that the stringent regulations governing safety at sports grounds do not unduly hamper rugby league clubs, given that the crowds at such games tend to be very disciplined and well behaved?
    Mr. Sproat: My hon. Friend makes an extremely important point. Although all sports grounds, whatever sports are played on them, need to be safe, most of the regulations that have to be observed came about as a result of the fact that soccer grounds generally have much larger and occasionally much more obstreperous crowds than do rugby league grounds, where people are well behaved and average crowds tend to be much smaller. So the rugby league grounds are paying the price of that. I am trying to find new ways to avoid financially disadvantaging rugby league as a result of what happens at soccer grounds.

    National Lottery
    Mr. Tyler: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what criteria he would expect to be used in deciding the location of the national lottery operation.
    Mr. Brooke: The location of the national lottery operation is a matter for the applicants for the main licence
    6
    to operate the lottery to consider in making their applications to the director general. I cannot comment on the criteria that they might use in making their decision.
    Mr. Tyler: Does the Secretary of State agree that the national lottery will be a success only if, as well as distributing its funds to good causes, national economic and employment objectives are met? Does he agree with the view of the Minister at the Department of Employment, who said this week that there are sound labour market reasons for locating the headquarters of the lottery in Cornwall? Does he accept the view of all the people of Cornwall, of all parties, backed by the county council which took the initiative, that this should be a case of Cornwall first?
    Mr. Brooke: Some of my hon. Friends might think that the hon. Gentleman was leading with his chin by asking that question, as his party and his colleagues voted against the Bill on Second and Third Readings. Having said that, I recognise that he has joined my hon. Friend the Member for Falmouth and Camborne (Mr. Coe) to press Cornwall's cause.
    I have issued directions to the director general that, consistent with his duties under section 4 of the National Lottery etc. Act 1993, location must be taken into account in assessing any bids. I dare say that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary would have sound labour reasons for the lottery being located in a number of different places in the kingdom.
    Mr. Waterson: Will not many new jobs be created by the establishment of the national lottery headquarters? When making recommendations about the relevant criteria, will my right hon. Friend be able to suggest that they entirely exclude the constituencies of Members such as the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler), who asked the question and is a member of a party which was against the idea? Also, will he consider including Eastbourne in the list of potential sites?
    Mr. Brooke: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for drawing attention to the contribution that the national lottery will make to the economy. To be fair to the hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler), he avoided voting on the matter on Second and Third Readings. His is yet another of those cases to which I have referred of running with the hare and then apologising to the hounds when they catch up.
    Ms Eagle: Will the Secretary of State consider carefully Merseyside's claims to be the home for the national lottery, in recognition of the high unemployment rates in the region and especially as the House had long and important debates about the effect that the lottery will have on employment in the football pools industry?
    Mr. Brooke: The case that the hon. Lady raises was mentioned frequently during our debates. The Act states that it is for the director general to decide on the site, but contractors who are bidding to run the lottery will no doubt take the considerations that she mentioned into account when formulating their bids.
    Mr. Simon Coombs: Besides excluding the constituencies of hon. Members who have demonstrated their opposition to the national lottery, would not it be sensible to consider areas of the country where there is a reasonable chance of finding staff trained in information technology

    7
    and which have good communication links with London? Can he think of any other criteria that I might suggest to help with Swindon's bid?
    Mr. Brooke: I said in my original answer that it was for the bidders to make their decisions, but my hon. Friend is right about the scale of the opportunity. I have been criticised for making conservative forecasts of how successful the lottery will be and I am delighted that other people think that it will be still more successful.
    Ms Mowlam: As the Secretary of State has made it clear that he will abdicate on the criteria for the location of the lottery and as he is clearly going to abdicate on the criteria under which the five funds that have been set up will allocate the money, will he at least assure the House that, when the announcements are made for the Millennium Commission in the near future, we will not get the sort of sleaze that we have had with other quangos and that the commission will not have a majority of Tory sympathisers?
    Mr. Brooke: I found the language in the first part of the hon. Lady's question slightly curious, given the way in which the Act is drawn. It is all very well for the hon. Lady to say that I am abdicating my responsibility. The Act makes it perfectly clear where the responsibility lies and that is with the director general.
    Mr. John Marshall: Does my right hon. Friend accept that those who work for the national lottery will tend to be doing office jobs and that London is the part of the country where people have the greatest experience of office work? The logical place for the headquarters of the national lottery is therefore London.
    Mr. Brooke: It is difficult for me to find another form of words to say that those matters are not my responsibility. The invitation to apply reflects the intent of the directions that I have issued to the director general, by drawing attention to the importance of location because of its effect on operating costs and therefore on the contributions to the national lottery distribution fund.

    Departmental Efficiency
    Mr. Thurnham: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what steps he is taking to improve the efficiency of his Department.
    Mr. Brooke: My Department has contracted out nearly all its new central services and installed a departmental-wide computer network. Those and other arrangements will support improvements in departmental efficiency.
    Mr. Thurnham: I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the steps that he has taken. Will he ensure that the national lottery is run efficiently and effectively? Does not the country expect the highest standards of efficiency from its public services?
    Mr. Brooke: Section 4 of the National Lottery etc. Act 1993 makes clear the responsibilities that fall to the director general. I am confident that he will fulfil them in making the lottery a tremendous success. I share the view that my hon. Friend expressed in the second half of his question.
    Mr. Callaghan: In terms of the efficiency of his Department, will the Secretary of State tell the House when
    8
    he will reply to the two submissions from the Select Committee on National Heritage—one on the BBC and one on the invasion of privacy by the press? Those reports have been with him for some considerable time. When will he report to the House?
    Mr. Brooke: The hon. Gentleman has asked two fair questions. I hope to issue a White Paper on the press shortly, in response to the Select Committee's report. The Select Committee will recall that it asked me to delay any action on my side until it had a chance of reporting. As to the BBC, my duties flow out of a consultation paper that we issued last year. It has been helpful to have the Select Committee's observations on that as well. It might be a bit later before I reply to the report on the BBC.
    Sir Thomas Arnold: Has not the time come for my right hon. Friend to exercise closer supervision over the activities of the Arts Council?
    Mr. Brooke: The examination that Price Waterhouse conducted of the Arts Council last year, at my suggestion, made a number of suggestions on how the Department and the Arts Council might behave. One of the matters to which my hon. Friend may have been referring was increasing the sense of accountability of the Arts Council. The Arts Council has come forward with suggestions of ways in which that accountability might be made more public.

    Film Industry
    Ms Lynne: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage when an announcement will be made on the Government's policy toward the British film industry.
    Mr. Brooke: I shall make an announcement when conclusions have been reached on the various options that emerged from last year's consultation round with representatives of the industry. It is unlikely to be before Easter.
    Ms Lynne: Would not accelerating tax relief on film production costs encourage more films to be produced in this country and thereby, in the long term, put more money into the Treasury coffers?
    Mr. Brooke: That suggestion was made to us during the consultation period. The specific question is for my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but we shall discuss with other Departments our overall response to the consultations.
    Sir Anthony Durant: Will my right hon. Friend reassure the film industry that, in the disbursement of the lottery money, which I believe will be done by the Arts Council, its wishes will not be ignored?
    Mr. Brooke: My hon. Friend is right to raise that question. The guidance afforded by myself to the Arts Council includes reference to film and the need for the Arts Council not only to take film into account in its decisions about distribution but to decide how it will receive expert advice on those decisions.

    Play Facilities
    Mrs. Golding: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what is the annual expenditure of his Department on children's play facilities.
    Mr. Sproat: The Sports Council, which we fund, provides a central support service on children's play. The 1993–94 budget for that work is £300,000. In addition, the Sports Council's Trust Company has this year given a grant of £25,000 to the National Voluntary Council for Children's Play.
    Mrs. Golding: Is the Minister aware that the National Playing Fields Association estimates that for every £100 that his Department spends on adult leisure activities, only 3p is spent on children's play? Given that 20 per cent. of the population of this country is probably under the age of 16, he cannot agree that that is a fair distribution of money. What will he do about it?
    Mr. Sproat: I was not aware of that statistic. It is interesting and I will look at it. I am currently looking at the way that the Sports Council, which has taken over the matter from the Play Board and the Play Unit, is handling children's play. The facts that the hon. Lady has put forward will be part of that consideration.
    Mr. Anthony Coombs: In recognition of the important role of the Sports Council—and, indeed, other independent organisations such as the Foundation for Sport and the Arts—in funding children's play and sporting activities, will my hon. Friend repeat the advice that he recently gave the foundation? He said that it should take more cognisance of competitive sport in schools when allocating grants; a by-product of that would be its ability to give greater priority to the important regional sports facility between Kidderminster and Stourport, in my constituency.
    Mr. Sproat: I do not think it appropriate to comment on the specific example given by my hon. Friend, for which I know that he is working very hard. However, I think it extremely important for the Foundation for Sport and the Arts to take account of the need for young people to engage much more in team games and competitive sports.
    Mr. Skinner: Is the Minister aware that every pit village contains at least one miners' welfare facility? There are children's play facilities, as well as football grounds and cricket pitches. It is now being suggested, however, that under the Coal Industry Bill, the Coal Industry Social Welfare Organisation, which runs those facilities, will be either taken over by the Government or split into God knows how many parts. Will the Minister give an assurance that CISWO will remain intact, whatever happens to the Bill, so that all those amenities can be retained?
    Mr. Sproat: I am acutely aware of the importance of the point that the hon. Gentleman has raised. Last week, I went through a list of all the sports facilities attached to all the collieries, and I agree that it is an impressive list.
    The details of the Coal Industry Bill are a matter for the Department of Trade and Industry, but I have been in touch with the Minister for Energy and have emphasised the importance of facilities such as playing fields and brass bands, which have been raised before. I take the matter very seriously and will do all that I can to ensure that those facilities suffer no disadvantage.

    Press Complaints Commission
    Mr. Streeter: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what assessment he has made of the current operation of the Press Complaints Commission.
    Mr. Brooke: We welcome the further improvements in press self-regulation announced by the Press Complaints Commission on 20 January.
    Mr. Streeter: Does my right hon. Friend agree that there is widespread public concern about the way in which the commission currently deals with its own affairs? Will he join me in urging it to consider appointing its own voluntary ombudsman?
    Mr. Brooke: My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the current concern about the way in which the Press Complaints Commission works, as now constituted. However, I welcome the appointment of one of its lay members, Professor Pinker, as privacy commissioner. It is up to the industry to ensure that Professor Pinker is given the powers and backing that he needs to be fully effective in performing his duties and capable of commanding the confidence of Parliament and the public.
    Mr. Soley: Does the Secretary of State accept that the commission makes changes only as a result of pressure from hon. Members or outside events? Could it not make a significant step forward if it were more willing to initiate complaints itself, and to follow up cases such as the recent Germaine Greer case, in which it appears that journalists gained access to her home without her consent and then ran inaccurate stories? Should not the commission take the initiative in such instances, rather than waiting for people to complain and thus being set up as a sort of defence counsel for the press?
    Mr. Brooke: I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman would be gracious enough to include me among the Members of Parliament to whom he referred. I think, however, that all hon. Members will welcome the movement and adjustment that the commission has achieved over the past year, although some may feel that it has not gone far enough. As for the specific case raised by the hon. Gentleman, such cases occur from time to time and I think that the commission will be judged according to how it deals with them.
    Mr. Peter Bottomley: Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would make sense for editors, publishers and proprietors to copy the BBC by publishing and making available to the public the standards by which it hopes that its staff and freelancers will abide?
    Mr. Brooke: There is something in my hon. Friend's suggestion, but he will be aware that the Press Complaints Commission is itself responsible for producing a voluntary code that it devised for itself.

    Tourist Sector (Deregulation)
    Mr. Robert Banks: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage how many regulations affecting the hotel and catering industries in the tourist sector will be dispensed with during the current Session of Parliament.
    Mr. Sproat: My Department will be formally consulting the tourism industry about the two tourism-related regulations for which it is directly responsible. In

    11
    addition, each of the seven main areas of regulation identified during my Department's inquiries as being of the greatest concern to the tourism industry, is being examined by the Departments responsible with a view to reducing the burdens they impose. It is too early to say how many regulations will be dispensed with altogether, but I am confident that we shall achieve significant deregulatory gains for the hotel and catering sector and other tourism-related businesses.
    Mr. Banks: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his vigorous attempts to reduce the regulations affecting the tourist industry. Does he agree that the performance of music by more than two players in pubs and restaurants should be encourged? Will he ensure that local authorities do not instigate punitive registration fees and that regulations are modified to make it easier for there to be live music on licensed premises?
    Mr. Sproat: The answer to my hon. Friend's first question is yes. The answer to his second question is that I will certainly do my best.
    Mr. Tony Banks: In reviewing the various regulations relating to the hotel and catering industry, will the Minister make it clear that the Government do not intend to throw everything out? A number of regulations need to be maintained. We do not want a wholly deregulated industry, but one that resembles more the well-run hotel and catering industries found on the continent. Will the Minister ensure in discussions with the Minister for Transport in London that hotels do not call private minicabs rather than black cabs late at night? That is another danger which worries people in London.
    Mr. Sproat: Of course we shall keep whatever regulations are sensible. Where they are stupid, we shall stop them. As to the cab problem, I shall certainly be in touch with my hon. Friend the Minister for Transport in London to find out what he thinks is the situation.
    Mr. Ian Bruce: Will my hon. Friend examine in particular all the forms that hoteliers have to complete and the records that they have to keep? Will he ensure that the industry can operate according to best practice rather than having a lot of inspectors going around checking records?
    Mr. Sproat: My hon. Frind makes an extremely important and sensible point. I will seek to do what he requires.

    Arts Council Funding
    Mr. Gunnell: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what is his estimate of the loss of jobs resulting from the announced levels of Arts Council funding to clients for 1994–95.
    Mr. Brooke: I have made no such estimate.
    Mr. Gunnell: The Secretary of State will be aware that arts organisations throughout the country have to decide between those whom they employ and the performances and services that they offer the public. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that for the sake of a small saving to the Exchequer great damage is being done to arts enterprises throughout the country? That policy short changes not only the public but the country because of the shortage of arts provision. It is a disgrace.
    Mr. Brooke: I acknowledge the hon. Gentleman's point about the small saving to the Exchequer—but my Department, like every other, is subject to the country's overall economic and financial conditions. The grant that the Arts Council will receive from my Department next year will still be 11 per cent. larger in real terms than that of five years ago.
    Mr. John Greenway: Will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to welcome Opera North to London this week, with two performances of its brilliant production of "Gloriana" tonight and on Thursday? Does he agree that that demonstrates the value of supporting through the Arts Council regional opera companies such as Opera North? Will he see to it that Opera North is not disadvantaged by comparison with the Welsh National Opera and Scottish Opera, which receive extra money from the Welsh Office and the Scottish Office?
    Mr. Brooke: I join my hon. Friend in welcoming Opera North to the royal opera house in my constituency. I am particularly delighted that Opera North was the first arts performance that I saw on taking my present office. My hon. Friend referred to my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Scotland and for Wales—my hon. Friend asked in particular about Wales—having larger budgets from which to find funding. I hope very much that we shall be able to resume the upward rise in Arts Council funding in the near future.

    Brass Bands
    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what representations he has received regarding Government support for brass bands; and if he will make a statement.
    Mr. Sproat: I have received a number of letters about brass bands. As I made clear in my reply to my hon. Friend on 3 February at columns 844–45, I see brass bands as an extremely important part of our artistic and cultural heritage.
    Mr. Greenway: Has my hon. Friend ever heard "The Flight of the Bumble Bee" or other similarly exciting tunes played by brass bands or other bands? Does he agree that brass bands and other bands are not confined to the north of England and that they are valuable in the opportunity that they offer to the public to attend concerts and to players to play in concerts? Will he do all that he can for brass bands?
    Mr. Sproat: Yes, I certainly will. I have not heard "The Flight of the Bumble Bee" played by a brass band, but I look forward to it. My hon. Friend makes the extremely important point that we should not allow what we consider to be the cultural and artistic part of our heritage to be too narrow or rarefied, as occasionally happens in certain artistic circles.

  ATTORNEY-GENERAL

    Drugs (Importation)
    Mr. Mackinlay: To ask the Attorney-General what involvement his Department has had with Customs and Excise and the police since 1991 in combating criminal importation of drugs.
    The Attorney-General (Sir Nicholas Lyell): My Department has contributed fully to the development of the comprehensive range of measures introduced by the Government to combat drug trafficking. As Attorney-General, I also have a general responsibility when matters are properly brought to my notice in relation to the fairness and effectiveness of the prosecution process.
    Mr. Mackinlay: Will the Attorney-General explain the extraordinary circumstances in which he agreed, along with the Solicitor-General, to meet counsel for a Mr. Charrington, who was in custody on serious drug charges on 21 December 1992? What was so different about that case, as distinct from the cases of all the other people awaiting trial, what was the involvement of the Customs and Excise and why were the charges almost immediately dropped following that meeting?
    The Attorney-General: It is a pity that the hon. Gentleman, who has taken some interest in the matter, has not bothered to read the detailed answer that I gave on 26 January at column 246 to the right hon. and learned Member for Aberavon (Mr. Morris). I made it perfectly clear that leading counsel for the defence made an application to see me about the case because he felt that, in the special circumstances of the case, his client was not necessarily being treated as he should. I arranged for a meeting which was attended by counsel for the prosecution. The independent prosecuting authority was the Customs and Excise. The matter was discussed and explained. Customs and Excise said that it was already reconsidering certain aspects of the evidence. It went away and considered the matter further. The decision to discontinue the case against Mr. Charrington was taken entirely by the commissioners of Customs and Excise on the advice of their leading counsel without any further reference to me.
    Mr. Rathbone: Irrespective of the facts of that peculiar case, may I ask my right hon. and learned Friend whether, as the Government's chief Law Officer, he pays special care and attention to the prosecutions that Customs and Excise wishes to bring and those that the Crown Prosecution Service wishes to bring and makes certain that there is no conflict of interest between those two prosecuting authorities?
    The Attorney-General: As my hon. Friend may realise, there is a distinction between the position of the Crown Prosecution Service and that of the Customs and Excise as an independent prosecuting authority. Under statute, I superintend the Director of Public Prosecutions, who is responsible for the Crown Prosecution Service. I do not have the same statutory relationship with the Customs and Excise. I have an overall purview in relation to the prosecution process, but I can become involved in cases by other independent prosecuting authorities only if those cases are properly brought to my notice.
    Mr. Fraser: I am sure that the Attorney-General will concede that the circumstances of that conference were extremely unusual. What was the involvement of the Attorney-General's Parliamentary Private Secretary in the matter? Why, as reported, did he try to suppress a report that the meeting had taken place? Did he have anything to do with the leak or any other connection with the case? Does the Attorney-General have any advice to offer about the liaison between the police, as a prosecuting authority,
    14
    and Customs and Excise? It seems extraordinary that the case should have proceeded for several months with one hand not knowing what the other hand was doing.
    The Attorney-General: There are a number of different strands, and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman would not want to be confused about them. Liaison between Customs and Excise and the police is an operational matter for the heads of those two organisations, who doubtless take liaison matters extremely seriously; such matters are not for me. As for the specific meeting, although such meetings are not regular, they are not exceptionally unusual. From time to time, such worries about cases are properly raised with me. The one that we are discussing was such an example. My hon. Friend the Member for Stockton, South (Mr. Devlin) had no involvement in that consultation, and no involvement in the case vis-à-vis my Department. I was not aware of his constituency involvement until after the matter appeared in the press.

    Crown Prosecution Service
    Mr. Hawkins: To ask the Attorney-General what information is required by the Crown Prosecution Service from the police in relation to guilty pleas in the magistrates court.
    The Attorney-General: In cases where the defendant has indicated that he will plead guilty, the Crown Prosecution Service requires only sufficient information from the police to be satisfied that the charge is appropriate and to provide the court with the information necessary to sentence.
    Mr. Hawkins: I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for his reply. Will he confirm that the arrangements made were fully discussed with the police? My right hon. and learned Friend will be aware of the great concern felt about any danger of over-bureaucracy or over-complication of bureaucracy in such matters.
    The Attorney-General: My hon. Friend raises a good point. I am aware of the concern that we should not have over-bureaucracy. My hon. Friend's question gives me the opportunity to say that the forms used by the police in relation to the Crown Prosecution Service were designed by the police with the assistance of the Home Office and the Crown Prosecution Service, and were agreed by the Crown Prosecution Service but not initiated by it. There is an important distinction between what is required in relation to guilty and not-guilty pleas. In a not-guilty case, it is necessary to take statements from all the witnesses required for the trial. In the case of a guilty plea, it is necessary to have a statement only from the victim, as well as any other statements that have already been taken.
    Mr. Alex Carlile: Does the Attorney-General agree that, wherever possible, the views of the victim should be obtained as a matter of course whenever it is intended to accept a plea of guilty to an offence lesser than the charge and whenever it is intended to drop the case?
    The Attorney-General: It is important to try to involve the victim in those circumstances. The victim does not have a right to be consulted. The Crown Prosecution Service must stand back and consider the matter objectively. The Director of Public Prosecutions and I are

    15
    keen that there should be good liaison between the Crown Prosecution Service and police at headquarters level, right through to the officer on the beat and the victim so that all understand what is being done and why.

    Over-lenient Sentences
    Mr. Clappison: To ask the Attorney-General how many sentences were referred to the Court of Appeal as being over-lenient in 1993; and how many of these resulted in an increased sentence.
    The Attorney-General: During 1993, I sought leave to refer 29 cases to the Court of Appeal, including one to the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland. Of the 18 cases decided to date, in which leave was granted in every case, 14 have resulted in an increase of sentence.
    Mr. Clappison: Does my right hon. and learned Friend agree that those 14 cases show how important a part that power plays in ensuring that the punishment fits the crime in every case? Is he aware that a warm welcome has been given to the extension of that power to a wider category of cases? Would he care to reflect that if we had listened to the view of the Opposition on criminal justice we would never have had that power at all?
    The Attorney-General: My hon. Friend is right. The Opposition opposed the power, but never mind: there is more joy in heaven over sinners who repent, and so on. Opposition Members also recognise that the Court of Appeal has been given a valuable power. Its objective is to seek to ensure that cases are sentenced in the range that the Court of Appeal criminal division regards as proper.
    Mr. Flynn: What does the Minister think of the decision to give a penalty of community service to Roger Levitt for stealing millions of pounds from his own clients? Is his advice to fraudsters that if they want to steal they should steal big?
    The Attorney-General: The hon. Gentleman knows that it is not proper for any Minister to make a comment on a judicial decision on sentence in any individual case. The House will be aware that the question of the power to refer sentences to the Court of Appeal as being unduly lenient in cases of serious and complex fraud is under active consideration.

  OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT

    Students (Training)
    Mr. Fabricant: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of possible economic benefits to United Kingdom industry from the provision of funds for the training of students from developing countries in United Kingdom colleges.
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Mark Lennox-Boyd): The main purpose of providing training under the aid programme is to benefit developing countries. I believe that schemes such as the British Chevening scholarships will also bring valuable economic benefits to the United Kingdom.
    Mr. Fabricant: I thank my hon. Friend for his reply. Does he agree that it would be wrong to be seduced by those siren voices who would argue against providing places for people from overseas countries to study at British institutions of further and higher education? Does he also agree that educational links with overseas countries more often result in enduring trade links? Will he give some indication of how many foreign students are currently studying in the United Kingdom?
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: I agree with the tenor of my hon. Friend's question. There are two main schemes for bringing students here—the Foreign Office scheme and the Overseas Development Administration scheme. Combining the two, about 21,000 students in all are studying in Britain at any one time, at a cost of £160 million. That is money well spent and my hon. Friend is right that it ultimately leads to the enhancement of our trade potential.
    Mr. Watson: Will the Minister comment on the position of the British Council, which is heavily involved in many of the areas—aid, trade and education—to which he has referred? May I highlight the example of the Scottish international resource project, which is proving beneficial to many overseas students? What guarantees can he give that the funding for such projects and for the other work of the British Council will be maintained in years to come?
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: I cannot comment specifically on the hon. Gentleman's point about the Scottish international resource project because I do not have the facts at my fingertips, but I can tell him that, wherever possible, we expand schemes that bring people to the United Kingdom. I can also tell him that the British Council has had enhanced funding in the past year for its activities.

    Spending Balance
    Sir Thomas Arnold: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the balance of spending as between (a) bilateral and (b) multilateral aid.
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: In 1992–93, multilateral aid was 44 per cent. of our total aid to developing countries.
    Sir Thomas Arnold: Has not the trend increasingly moved in the direction of multilateral aid? Is there not a feeling in many parts of the House that that should be stopped and reversed?
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: It is true that over years the trend has been increasing, but it fluctuates from year to year; how significant the increase has been over the past three years, I cannot say. Much of our multilateral expenditure is by agreement with other parties—it is not entirely determined by ourselves. For that reason, we must accommodate it if we wish to remain in forums such as the United Nations, international institutions and other areas where there is multilateral spending. The most important thing is to ensure that multilateral spending is money well spent. We certainly take a great deal of trouble with the European Community to assist in that process: for example, the "Horizon 2000" declaration, which was agreed in December 1992, set out procedures to improve

    17
    the way in which EC funds were spent and we currently have five officials seconded to the Commission to try to improve its spending plans.
    Mr. Tom Clarke: Does the Minister accept that the reputation of Britain's bilateral aid programme has been sullied by the decision to fund the Pergau dam project in Malaysia when his own civil servants and colleagues advised against it? Is not £234 million of British taxpayers' money being wasted in Pergau with the sole purpose of boosting the arms trade? Does the Minister agree with Sir Timothy Lankester that that was an outrageous abuse of our aid programme?
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: As the hon. Gentleman knows, the matter will be fully discussed by the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs, but I must make one or two points. First, our aid programme is not, and will not be, linked to arms sales. Secondly, the hon. Gentleman says that our reputation is sullied, but British aid has contributed to Malaysia's rapid economic development and to the productive relationship that we have with Malaysia in many spheres of activity, including trade. Our trade today is three times what it was in 1988.
    Mr. Lester: Does my hon. Friend agree that this question is a matter for the aid and trade provision? Should it not be made clear that the aid and trade provision is a system of soft loans and has nothing to do with our basic aid programme—our bilateral aid programme—which is based on helping the poorest countries first?
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: My hon. Friend is right. I should add that the aid and trade provision is about 5 per cent. of our total aid programme and, under new procedures, is to be directed to help the poorest countries. I remind the House that the aid and trade provision was invented by the Labour party.

    Angola
    Ms Hoey: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent representations he has received about the delivery and distribution of aid to those most in need in Angola.
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: Britain's contribution of £10 million to the international humanitarian effort has been widely welcomed.
    Ms Hoey: I am sure that the Minister is aware of the information coming out of Angola about the scale of the tragedy there: hundreds of thousands of people are starving and hundreds of thousands are going to starve. Does the Minister really believe that this country is doing enough, not only in terms of the amount of aid but in ensuring that it is distributed fairly? Is the co-ordination between the United Nations agencies and the voluntary agencies which
    18
    are doing such good work there ensuring that the aid is getting to the people who need it and not being diverted to the armed soldiers of UNITA?
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: I know that the hon. Lady is familiar with Angola and is an expert on this subject. She does the House a service by drawing our attention to the tragedy there, which is quite as bad as that of former Yugoslavia, or perhaps worse in terms of deaths. Since October last year, there has been better access to the provinces to deliver aid and, as a result, we are now providing £400,000 to finance two field officers to assist the in-country office of the United Nations department of humanitarian affairs and to help with the distribution of aid.
    Mr. Jacques Arnold: Bearing in mind the neglect and destruction that have occurred in Angola as a result of years of Marxist rule followed by civil war, would not one of the major contributions that we can make to Angola's redevelopment once the conflict has come to an end be to rebuild the infrastructure for which our country's engineering expertise is so well suited?
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: I have no doubt that that will be so in due course, but at the moment our priority is to provide emergency assistance—food, health care and nutrition. They must be the demands of the moment.

    Russia
    Mrs. Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assistance the United Kingdom and the Group of Seven leading industrial countries are providing to promote economic reform in Russia.
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: The United Kingdom has consistently supported the process of reform. To date, about £1·2 billion of United Kingdom funds has been pledged. The G7 programme of phased support linked to progress on reform is worth more than $46 billion.
    Mrs. Gillan: With the increasing reports of problems of Russian companies and organisations, one of which manifested itself in relation to Aeroflot flight SU242 when citizens' lives were put in danger by an apparent disregard for international safety rules, does the Minister agree that we should do even more to help the economic reforms and the transition to a market economy in Russia?
    Mr. Lennox-Boyd: I agree with my hon. Friend that without the successful transition to a market economy in Russia all the political developments that have taken place in recent years will be threatened and as naught. In our large overall programme of bilateral support to Russia, we are giving quite a lot of help through technical assistance, as Russia's biggest challenge is to acquire the necessary expertise in that area. Our present funding of about £140 million per annum will be very helpful in that direction.

Bosnia
3.30 pm
Dr. John Cunningham(by private notice): To ask the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, whether he will make a statement about the weekend's tragic events in Sarajevo and about what action Her Majesty's Government intend to recommend to Britain's partners and allies as a consequence.
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Alastair Goodlad): The whole House will share a feeling of horror and outrage about the massacre at Sarajevo on 5 February. The Government condemn that brutal and senseless act. Over the weekend, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary discussed the response of the international community with the United States Secretary of State, with the Foreign Ministers of France, Germany, Spain and Canada, and with Lord Owen. My right hon. Friend is now attending a meeting of European Union Foreign Ministers in Brussels.
The events of the weekend again emphasise the vital importance of negotiations between the parties to reach a political settlement as soon as possible. The Government reiterate their full support for the efforts of Lord Owen and Mr. Stoltenberg to that end, and call on the parties to show maximum flexibility at the scheduled talks in Geneva on 10 February.
However, action over Sarajevo cannot await an overall settlement. It is essential that the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation should consider immediately practical means for halting the bombardment of civilians there. The demilitarisation and international administration of Sarajevo are also being pursued by the two co-chairmen.
The Government welcome the United Nations Secretary-General's letter, asking NATO to authorise its military command to be ready to use air power on request from the United Nations. The Government support an early meeting of the North Atlantic Council to give that authority. The United Nations and NATO, taking into account military advice, will thereafter seek to achieve a ceasefire around Sarajevo. The Government remain determined that everything possible is done to ensure that that appalling conflict is brought to an end as soon as possible.
Dr. Cunningham: I associate my right hon. and hon. Friends and myself with the condemnation of that appalling atrocity in Sarajevo. Does not the recent history of the former Yugoslavia show that western policy about those problems is in disarray? The record is one of failure to prevent atrocities, resulting in the wanton slaughter that shocked the world this weekend. The record also, sadly, shows that resolutions of the Security Council of the United Nations, declarations by the Council of Ministers of the European Union and decisions of the NATO summit have never been implemented.
Those decisions and declarations are regarded by the Serbs and Croatians as empty threats, so their aggression and the carnage continue. Indecision about Britain's proposed troop withdrawal has further encouraged Serbs and Croatians to believe that their aggression would not only be ignored, but be rewarded by territorial gain. Tragically for all of us, the European Union bears the principal responsibility for that catastrophe.
20
What, specifically, does the Prime Minister mean when he says that he wants to see
"urgent, effective and more muscular action in Bosnia"?
Will the Government immediately press for the opening of Tuzla airport, for the lifting of the siege of Sarajevo and for the proper implementation of the UN Security Council resolution defining safe areas, as set out in resolution 824 adopted in May 1993—almost one year ago? Do the Government agree that if the Serbs and Croatians do not immediately accept and allow the implementation of those decisions of the international community, they should be enforced by the use of the vastly superior air power of NATO?
Mr. Goodlad: I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for joining in the condemnation of what has taken place. As usual, he is longer on analyses than on solutions to the problem. We are looking for effective action—if necessary, muscular action—to protect the civilian population of Sarajevo. They have been subjected to mortar attacks from both Serbian and Bosnian forces. The UNPROFOR command, with NATO support, must apply the pressure necessary to halt the attacks. If the military commanders advise that this requires tactical air support, we shall back their judgment; that has always been our position and remains so.
The right hon. Gentleman mentioned Tuzla. It is, of course, essential that Tuzla airport is reopened. The NATO summit expressed readiness to support UNPROFOR in Srebrenica and in Tuzla, where it was being obstructed. NATO air power is available if needed. Pressure is being exerted on the Serbs over Tuzla airport. The United Nations is discussing plans with troop contributors in that theatre.
The right hon. Gentleman mentioned air strikes. There is a distinction between strategic air strikes and tactical air strikes. Military commanders, whether in NATO, the United Nations or the United Kingdom, have consistently advised that a generalised policy of strategic air strikes would not end the war. It could make the situation worse by bringing the United Nations into the conflict and disrupting humanitarian relief. In specific situations, the tactical use of air power can help to achieve defined objectives. NATO will consider on Wednesday how that air power might be used to reinforce UNPROFOR's efforts to end the Sarajevo bombardment. We await the assessment of the military commanders, but we are fully prepared to see air power used if it will improve the situation. We want UNPROFOR to take strong action to help civilians in Sarajevo and to increase pressure on the parties to end the war.
Mr. Patrick Cormack: Will my right hon. Friend accept that the United Nations is involved in this conflict and that it is rapidly losing all its credibility? Will he further accept that the vacillation and the indecision have gone on for far too long? It is essential that, by the end of this week, proper steps are taken—with an ultimatum delivered with a threat of real force behind it—so that the siege of Sarajevo will be lifted and the heavy weaponry will be removed from the hills around the city. Will my right hon. Friend further accept that the United Kingdom is uniquely placed to take a lead in this? Can that lead now be taken?
Mr. Goodlad: My hon. Friend, who takes a close interest in the matter, will be aware that at the NATO

21
summit it was the British Prime Minister who took the lead, together with Mr. Balladur, in proposing that NATO urge UNPROFOR to draw up plans for Tuzla airport. We have made it clear that NATO air power will be available. I hope that the consultations that are taking place this week will achieve the ends for which we and my hon. Friend the Member for Staffordshire, South (Mr. Cormack) earnestly hope.
Sir Russell Johnston: Is the Minister aware that most hon. Members commend the question that has just been asked? It is, nevertheless, true that military action is much more hazardous now than it was when we advocated it during the siege of Ozijek. Does the Minister agree, therefore, that it is clear that the continued indiscriminate shelling of Sarajevo is bound to reproduce horrors such as occurred on Saturday—indeed, the shelling is now almost worse in Mostar—which means that the civilised community demands that clear, specific military action to defend Sarajevo, Mostar and Tuzla, which United Nations resolutions permit us to take, should now be taken?
Mr. Goodlad: It is irresponsible of the Liberal Democrats' spokesman to play politics over the tragic situation in Bosnia. If the half-baked, half-measures advocated by the Liberal Democrats had been adopted, we would be no nearer a solution, but United Nations troops would very likely have become participants in the conflict. The ex-post facto wisdom of the right hon. Member for Yeovil (Mr. Ashdown) is preposterous. It was even more preposterous for him to have asserted that he reflects the general wish of British troops that the United Nations mandate should be changed. He has been challenged by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence to substantiate that assertion. He has failed to do so—precisely because, as he knows, he does not reflect the views of our commanders.
Sir Nicholas Bonsor: The Bosnian conflict is littered with tragedy and atrocities. Will my right hon. Friend confirm that it would be wrong for the Government and the United Nations to change their policy because of the latest appalling tragedy in Sarajevo? Will he further confirm that we will not change those policies until we can secure the safety of our troops who are involved with the humanitarian effort and in humanitarian aid? If there is to be any change of policy by the United Nations, will he please ensure that we put our troops and humanitarian aid workers in a place of safety before we embark on an act of aggression that will make us participants in the conflict?
Mr. Goodlad: My hon. Friend is right to advance that argument. The commanders of UNPROFOR and of the British contingent will, of course, take full account of the need to ensure the safety of civilian aid workers and UNPROFOR troops. That is an important element. Aid is vital to Sarajevo, but it is also vital to stop the bombardment. The United Nations objective must be an effective plan to protect Sarajevo and to create a better environment for humanitarian relief work.
Mr. David Winnick: Is not it clear, even to this Government, that Saturday's butchery, in which nearly 70 people were murdered, occurred because, as with previous atrocities, the Serbian warlords believed, to a large extent, that they were secure from any form of western intervention and retaliation? Is the Minister aware
22
of the feeling of deep betrayal that is felt by people in Bosnia, who believe that they have been let down by the United Nations and by western Governments and are the innocent victims of aggression? Unlike what happened with the Gulf war, in which action was rightly taken, the Bosnian people are being allowed to be murdered without any intervention from the western community and international organisations.
Mr. Goodlad: The Serbian warlords have no grounds for holding the beliefs ascribed to them by the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Winnick: Not much.
Mr. Goodlad: Despite what the hon. Gentleman says, the international community will continue its efforts to bring an end to this tragic conflict.
Mr. William Cash: Does my right hon. Friend agree that there has been enough prevarication on air strikes in the past six months to a year? Does he further agree that it is utterly hypocritical for Labour Front-Bench spokesmen to believe that the European Union is responsible, when the real reason why it is impossible to make that organisation take any decision is that, under title 5 of the Maastricht treaty, with which Labour Members agreed, it is impossible to arrive at a proper line of control and command?
Mr. Goodlad: I cannot agree with my hon. Friend that there has been prevarication over air strikes, which have been authorised and are being considered in the context which I described to the House. I do not find myself with any surprise at hypocrisy on the part of the Opposition Front Bench.
Mr. Andrew Faulds: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is increasing concern and anger throughout all the Muslim communities in the world at the appalling lack of decision of the European Union Governments and that, more particularly, there is considerable dismay at Britain's craven conduct in these matters—this country is the leader of the "don't let's do anythings"—under a Christian Foreign Secretary and a Jewish Minister of Defence?
Mr. Goodlad: I understand the feelings in the Muslim communities throughout the world. I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman, whose question was unworthy of him, that there has been anything craven on the part of the British contribution. Our aid workers and troops in Bosnia, whom I visited, have behaved throughout with enormous courage.
Mr. Cyril D. Townsend: Is not the basic decision for the Government either to play our full part in humanitarian relief work in that tragic country or to become a party to the dispute by taking air strikes against Serb weapon positions?
Mr. Goodlad: We have never ruled out the use of tactical air strikes. Military advice is being taken at the moment, and no doubt decisions will be taken in due course.
Mr. Peter Mandelson: The Minister has spoken this afternoon of "muscular action". May I ask how and when?
Mr. Goodlad: As I have told the House, the European Council of Ministers is meeting this afternoon. NATO is taking counsel from its military advice, and announcements will be made after that process is completed.
Mr. Bill Walker: Does my right hon. Friend agree that surgical air strikes may sound grand, but not if the objective is to deter? The only way that deterrence will work will be if the United States is committed in the air and on the ground, as it was in the Gulf. Does my right hon. Friend agree that, without that commitment, surgical air strikes will only escalate the conflict and will not produce the desired result?
Mr. Goodlad: My hon. Friend points his finger at some extremely important considerations, and, of course, the deployment of ground troops has not been ruled out.
Mr. Ernie Ross: Following the tragedy at the weekend, the Minister has used the word "muscular", as my hon. Friend the Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Mandelson) said. The right hon. Gentleman did not explain what the new muscular attitude—rather than the wind power which we have had so far—amounts to. Will the Minister, for instance, support the new UN commander if he decides to use force to ensure that our humanitarian aid gets through? Will action be taken then?
Mr. Goodlad: The House can congratulate General Rose on the start that he has made. The troops are guaranteed our full support, and the commanders have not asked for the rules of engagement to change.
Sir Ivan Lawrence: Is my right hon. Friend aware that everyone wants the negotiated settlement about which he speaks? What are the statistical chances of getting such a negotiated settlement when negotiations have failed to achieve one during the past two years, when one side in the dispute has overwhelming weapon power and when the UN has so far shown itself to be a paper tiger?
Mr. Goodlad: I do not know what the statistical prospects of a settlement are. The parties are at the negotiating table, and they have received a clear message that a Bosnian settlement should include one third of territory and access to the sea for the Muslims. The details of the territorial exchange and the arrangements for access to the sea remain the key differences. Those are matters for the parties to solve with the co-chairmen, and that can only be done at the negotiating table.
Mr. Robert N. Wareing: Can the Minister say exactly what was in the UNPROFOR report concerning the criminal act on Saturday? What offers of co-operation have been forthcoming from the Bosnian Serbs and the Bosnian Muslims towards setting up an investigating commission to see precisely what did happen?
Mr. Goodlad: It is almost certain that the shell came from Serb positions, but there is no absolute certainty about it. I will certainly draw the hon. Gentleman's suggestions to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.
Mr. Michael Jopling: Accepting the Minister's statement that air strikes might relieve the pressure but could not end the war, and remembering the experience of air strikes in Vietnam and
24
in the Gulf war, when they were unable to find and remove military targets on the ground, and also remembering the ability, nowadays, of troops to live underground and to move at night, can he tell us whether there has been any military advice to suggest that air strikes could make a significant difference to the tragic situation in Sarajevo and in other places?
Mr. Goodlad: As always, my right hon. Friend brings great wisdom to bear on the situation. It has not hitherto been military advice that air strikes would help the situation, because of some of the considerations which my right hon. Friend has drawn to the attention of the House. As I have said, the matter is continually being assessed by the military commanders. The intention must be to improve the situation, not to make it worse.
Mr. Tony Benn: Is the Minister aware that the caution that has been shown up to now is much wiser than may be thought to be the case from some of the comments made across the Floor of the House? If air strikes were undertaken, not only would all humanitarian aid come to an end, which could lead to far, far greater loss of life, but British and other United Nations troops could be endangered and the peacekeeping attempts made by Lord Owen and others could terminate. That could lead to the long-term involvement by Britain and other countries in a Balkan war, the outcome of which could not be foreseen. Those possibilities raise political and not just military questions.
Is the right hon. Gentleman also aware that the point made by the right hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Mr. Jopling) about the uncertainty of so-called surgical strikes, as a means of bringing to an end a war that has a deep history and is the source of great bitterness, raises grounds for considerable caution? Were the Government to be cautious on the matter, they would receive far greater support than might be apparent from some of the comments made in the House today.
Mr. Goodlad: The right hon. Gentleman, again, focuses the attention of the House on the points that he has made in this context previously. As I said earlier, we await the assessment of the military commanders as to whether air strikes would improve the situation, but, as the right hon. Gentleman has said, some complicated factors must be taken into account.
Mr. Bowen Wells: Does not it follow, as night follows day, that if my right hon. Friend were to take the advice of the leaders of the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties, the United Nations would be committed as a participant in this war, which would then further escalate the United Nations' military commitment and, therefore, that of this country? Following that, it would be impossible to deliver the aid that we are currently delivering to the starving and very badly treated people of Bosnia.
Mr. Goodlad: My hon. Friend makes some extremely shrewd points.
Mr. David Trimble: The weekend actrocity underlines the extent to which the Muslims in Bosnia have suffered from Serb aggression. Is not it the case, however, that the Muslim army has been trying to compensate for the losses it has suffered through Serbian aggression by driving Croats from their homeland in

25
central Bosnia? Can the Government impress on the Bosnian Government that such action makes it more difficult for people to help them?
Mr. Goodlad: It is inherent in a situation of civil war that events such as those described by the hon. Gentleman will take place. For that reason, our efforts will continue to be directed towards bringing that civil war to an end.
Mr. Peter Viggers: Does my right hon. Friend agree that international organisations should concentrate on the long-term strategic objectives, which they have not yet done with sufficient clarity? Does he further agree that decisions on the ground in Bosnia should be left to local commanders, whose advice will clearly be that air strikes against any of the three sides in Bosnia will render the humanitarian effort impossible and place our troops in great danger?
Mr. Goodlad: Once again, my hon. Friend points to some of the difficulties that face the military commanders in advising on air strikes.
Mrs. Margaret Ewing: While the Minister is rightly listening to the advice of military personnel, does he accept that the western world has a clear moral and political responsibility to deal with the issues now facing us in the Balkans which, after all, have been going on for two years? Does he therefore accept that Sarajevo is specifically under threat from the Serbs? In that context, what recommendations are his Department and the Government making to the meetings of the NATO and European Union allies? Are the Government prepared clearly to state that they accept that moral responsibility and will take action when necessary?
Mr. Goodlad: It is precisely because we take that responsibility that, since the most recent manifestations of the dispute have been apparent to us, we have been involved in seeking not only to deliver humanitarian aid to Bosnia but to bring about an end to the civil war. The situation in Bosnia requires a more robust response than hitherto by the United Nations and NATO, but its purpose must be to improve the position in Sarajevo and contribute to pressure on the parties to end the war and reach a negotiated settlement. As has been pointed out by Members on both sides of the House, the plan must take account of the importance of the relief operation and the safety of soldiers and civilians running it. This week's discussions are taking place precisely to achieve that plan.
Mr. Anthony Coombs: While I welcome the fact that the possibility of more muscular action to alleviate the suffering of Sarajevo is being considered, does my right hon. Friend agree that the downside of such a policy depends on how much humanitarian aid is getting through? Has he seen recent reports that Larry Hollingworth, a former British Army officer and the head of the UN High Commission for Refugees in Zenica, estimates that only 10 per cent. of humanitarian aid is getting through to central Bosnia? That figure is borne out by the World Health Organisation.
Mr. Goodlad: I have seen that report, but most reports on the amount of aid getting through give much higher estimates—a figure of 70 per cent. has been mentioned. More than 1,000 flights and most of the convoys have got through, so the figure that my hon. Friend mentions is probably not realistic.
Mr. Dennis Skinner: Does the Minister appreciate that western Governments are partly to blame for all the slaughter on the streets of Sarajevo? Does he agree that when former Yugoslavia was in the throes of splitting up, Germany wanted to recognise Croatia? That was confirmed by Lord Carrington at the time and since. The Government and the House were wary of the possibility of that happening. Bosnia followed because Germany twisted the British Government's arm and a quid pro quo deal was done on the two opt-outs for Maastricht, and we have finished up with this mess. If there is any guilt—there is a lot of guilt around the conflict in the Balkans—does the Minister agree that the Government's hands are not clean?
Mr. Goodlad: Not for the first time, I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman's contribution—in this case, in the form of a history lesson of his usual inaccuracy—takes the situation no further forward.
Mr. Peter Bottomley: May I put it to my right hon. Friend that when he spells out the political aims—in the short term, humanitarian; in the long term, getting a settlement—he will enjoy the support of all who judge their politics by the week, not by the day?
Mr. Goodlad: I am extremely grateful for my hon. Friend's sensible remarks.
Mr. Jim Marshall: Will the Minister agree that the west does have a policy towards Bosnia—that it does not stand neutrally by? Will he remind the House that the two pillars of that policy are, first, waiting for the three sides in the combat to fight themselves to a standstill; and, secondly, denying the legitimate Government of Bosnia the right and the means to defend their people and their capital?
Mr. Goodlad: The hon. Gentleman does less than justice to the efforts of this Government and of the international community to assist the parties to reach an agreement at the table. They are at the table; that is where an agreement must be reached. The hon. Gentleman should face up to that.
The majority of the European Union countries, the co-chairmen, and the United Nations agencies are all opposed to lifting the embargo. We have never ruled that out, if all else fails, but we believe that it would do much more harm than good in Bosnia. It would escalate the fighting and seriously jeopardise the relief effort. It could also draw others in and lead to a widening of the conflict. I do not think that that is what the hon. Gentleman wants. I therefore suggest that he ceases suggesting it.
Mr. Robert Banks: Does my right hon. Friend agree that if bombing raids are undertaken under the UN flag, the neutral, peacekeeping role of the United Nations will be wholly undermined and, in future, people will view the UN in a wholly different light? It will no longer be seen as an agency facilitating the bringing of aid to the people who need it.
Mr. Goodlad: I note my hon. Friend's view. It is a consideration which must be borne in mind.
Dr. Norman A. Godman: If the Government are unwilling to lift the Bosnian arms embargo—I think that there is a strong case for lifting it—what is their view of extending sanctions

27
against Croatia and providing financial assistance to the countries that are bearing the greatest burden in respect of the enforcement of the sanctions?
Mr. Goodlad: The hon. Gentleman should bear it in mind that getting an agreement on sanctions against Croatia would have implications, for instance, for the position of our troops and of the United Nations relief workers in Split and on the road up to Vitez. So it is not entirely a straightforward matter.
Madam Speaker: We must now move on. Unfortunately, we shall no doubt return to this subject again.

Points of Order
4.3 pm
Mr. Andrew Mackinlay: On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Have you been approached by the Minister for Transport in London asking to make a statement about today's announcement by Network SouthEast that it intends to close London's oldest railway terminus, Fenchurch Street station, for seven months from the end of July? You will appreciate that that will have an enormous impact on thousands of commuters from Essex and on the people of east London, and that there will be, as a result, additional strain on the underground and more traffic congestion in Essex and east London. I should be horrified to learn that the Minister did not intend to make an early statement on the consequences of that announcement.
Dr. Robert Spink: Further to that point of order, Madam Speaker. If you ask the Minister to come and make a statement, will you ask him to make it clear that the closure is to take place in order to implement a £83 million resignalling scheme?
Madam Speaker: There is no point in putting arguments to me. Members should put points of order to me concerning our Standing Orders or breaches of our practice—they do not arise in this case.
To answer the orginal question: no, the Minister has not told me that he wants to make a statement on the matter.
Mr. Paul Flynn: On a point of order, Madam Speaker. You have in the past been harsh with the Government about their press releases and press conferences. I believe that the House has been further slighted today. Although we have had a statement on the serious matter of the atrocity in Sarajevo, each week in Britain 35 times the number of those killed in that atrocity die as a result of smoking.
Today, instead of a statement to the House, there was a press conference on the Government's policy on tobacco advertising. In my constituency this weekend, one tobacco company revived an advertisement which it admits has an appeal to children.
We cannot trust the tobacco industry on this matter and when the Government make statements on such serious matters, the House should be given the chance to give them full scrutiny.
Madam Speaker: I am sure that the hon. Gentleman realises that that is not a point of order.
If I might correct his original statement—the Minister did not make a statement. It was a private notice question, which I thought it necessary for the House to debate because of the seriousness of the situation.

Scottish Democracy
4.5 pm
Mr. John McAllion: I beg to move,
That this House notes the undemocratic influence and power of transnational and multinational companies in the economic life of Scotland and the deliberate erosion of the rights of Scottish workers by the imposition of legal shackles on trade unions and on their ability to defend workers' living standards by industrial action and collective strength; further notes the weakening of democratic life in Scotland by the centralisation of power and decision-making in unelected quangos, such as the Scottish Enterprise network of companies, Scottish Homes and NHS trusts; condemns the dismantling of local government democracy proposed in the Local Government Etc. (Scotland) Bill currently before the House; censures the Government for the continuing denial of a directly-elected Scottish Parliament, for which huge majorities of Scottish electors have voted in successive elections; recognises that the future of Scottish democracy depends upon giving effect to the sovereign right of the Scottish people to decide for themselves how and by whom they are governed; and therefore calls for the holding of a multi-option referendum in which people living in Scotland can decide democratically the form of government best suited to their needs.
I welcome at least four of Scotland's five Tory Back-Bench Members to the debate and I am delighted that they are taking such an interest in the future of Scottish democracy. If the debate serves no other purpose than to instruct the Scottish Tories on the Conservative Benches, it will have been very useful.
Mr. Phil Gallie: I find the hon. Gentleman's words puzzling. Scottish Tory Members have a very good record of attending Scottish Grand Committees and the like. I do not understand the point that he is trying to make. Perhaps he could clarify the matter.
Mr. McAllion: The hon. Member would have done better to wait to hear what I was going to say before making that intervention. If he is more patient and allows me to develop even one line of my argument, he might get on better in this debate.
Mr. Bill Walker: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. McAllion: We seem to have evidence that Conservative Members are organising a filibuster before I can even start the debate.
Mr. Bill Walker: I am responding to the hon. Gentleman's comments about the number of Scottish Conservative Members present. Perhaps he would care to look behind him and along the Opposition Benches and note the number of hon. Members supporting him.
Mr. McAllion: If the hon. Member had listened, he would have heard me welcoming the large presence of Scottish Tory Back-Benchers. I am delighted to see them here and I hope that they will listen attentively as they may learn something, which may not merely be in their interests, but will be of benefit to their constituents for whom I am much more concerned.
For the third time, may I begin by saying that the debate focuses on two related questions. The first is what has become known in Scotland as the national question—the right of Scotland to self-determination and self-government. The second question is that of democracy and the idea that in a nation—no one in the House can deny that
30
Scotland is a nation—the people must not merely have their say, but have their way. Those two questions are completely inseparable. In the words of the song,
"You can't have one without the other."
The reality to date is that Scotland does not have self-government and cannot be described as a democracy. I do not say that merely through personal convictions because such convictions are not always in touch with reality, as membership of the House should prove to any hon. Member. I say so because the Scottish people voted overwhelmingly—by three to one—in a democratic election to assert their sovereignty and to set up their own parliament in Scotland. The fact that they are still being denied that parliament nearly two years on by a Government for whom they did not vote makes a mockery of the Government's claim to be democratic. As the Government are sustained in office by this House, it also makes a mockery of its claim to be democratic. Indeed, it makes a mockery of its claim to be the mother of western democracies.
I therefore make no apology for raising the question of Scottish democracy in this debate, although I know that many people, including many Scots, will be deeply suspicious of the nationalist side of the debate. After a weekend when we witnessed the worst excesses of nationalism—when taken to its ethnic extremes—in Sarajevo, I can understand why people might think that way. They are right to feel a general and deep unease about those who beat the nationalist drum and who, in the words of my right hon. Friend the Member for Islwyn (Mr. Kinnock), think with their blood.
We are learning to our great cost in Europe today just how evil extreme nationalism can be, not only in the nationalist wars in Yugoslavia, but the resurgent nationalism in Germany, which is reviving racism and even nazism there, as well as the election in this country of an extreme British nationalist, against a background of rising racist attacks on Asian minorities in our cities, often by people who wrap themselves in the Union Jack and claim to be British nationalists. In Scotland, there is the disturbing emergence of Scotland Watch and Settler Watch. It does not matter whether they do it consciously or otherwise; they are stoking the fires of anti-English sentiment and resentment in our country.
Hon. Members on both sides of the House would agree that there can be no toleration of the kind of nationalism that defines us by emphasising the difference between us and them. There should be no tolerance in the House for those who attempt to define us in Scotland by emphasising the difference between us and English Members who represent other constituencies. If I refer to Scotland, the Scottish nation or Scottish people, I am simply referring to those who have chosen to settle and live in Scotland, irrespective of their ethnic, religious or national background.
As a direct descendant of immigrants to Scotland from Ireland in the previous century, I recognise more than most that Scottish culture is not threatened in any sense by immigration from outside. Indeed, quite the opposite is true. It is greatly enriched and strengthened by immigrants from other countries. The Scottish author, William McIlvanney, never said a truer word when he said that the Scots are a mongrel people and all the better for it.
Long may we continue to be a mongrel people, because our mongrel nature is one of our great national strengths. Having said that, we are none the less a nation. The right

31
hon. Member for Shropshire, North (Mr. Biffen) described Scotland as one of the oldest historic nations in Europe. The right hon. Gentleman is not only one of the most experienced, but one of the wisest Members of the House. His words should be listened to.
We should never lose sight, especially in the Opposition, of the positive side of our nationalism and that of other countries. For example, few socialists would quarrel with the aspiration of the Palestinian people to national self-determination. Even fewer did not or would not support the nationalist struggles in Cuba, Vietnam, Nicaragua and elsewhere in the third world against the domination by American imperialism. Few hon. Members, on both sides of the House, would not accept the legitimacy of the nationalist goal of a united Ireland, so long as it is pursued by democratic means and is brought about by the democratic consent of the people north and south in Ireland.
The point that I am trying to make is that nationalism can be, and often is, a progressive and liberating force in the modern world. I believe that Scottish nationalism is and can be such a force if it is properly channelled. Indeed, for most of this century, the cause of Scottish nationalism has been the cause of the Scottish Labour movement. Keir Hardie, who founded the Labour party, was a lifelong advocate of Scottish home rule. John McLean, who, perhaps, was Scotland's foremost revolutionary socialist, campaigned all his life for what he called the Scottish socialist workers' republic. Red Clydeside's Jimmy Maxton fought for what he described as the Scottish socialist commonwealth.
In the general election of 1918, the Labour party in Scotland drew up its election manifesto, which had only three distinctively Scottish commitments. The first was the prohibition of alcohol. The second was proportional representation. The third was a Scottish parliament. It is interesting to note that, more than 75 years on, some of us are still campaigning for at least two of those three commitments.
Mr. Nigel Griffiths: Which two?
Mr. McAllion: It certainly is not the prohibition of alcohol. I speak as the secretary of the all-party Scotch whisky group when I say that.
Although Labour subsequently dropped its commitment to Scottish home rule in the 1950s and 1960s, it eventually returned to it, placing it at the very heart of its "Agenda for Scotland" through our support for a claim of right for Scotland and for the Scottish Convention scheme for a Scottish parliament. Opposition Members do not hesitate to proclaim Scotland's right to self-determination and to home rule and its own parliament. These are basic democratic demands, supported by a minimum of three out of four Scottish voters. I believe that the potential exists for a common agenda for three of Scotland's four major constitutional parties; I hope that, by the end of the debate, Conservative Members will have been convinced as well.
There is plenty to form the basis of a democratic critique of Scottish government: God knows enough is wrong with it nowadays. The current housing crisis, for instance, is related to the lack of democracy in Scotland. Homelessness is now at record levels, having increased by a staggering 145 per cent. in the 1980s. According to reports in this
32
morning's Scottish press, in just four areas some 8,500 women are not only homeless but hidden out of sight, not recognised as homeless. God knows what the national figure is.
The first national housing condition survey, completed in 1992, revealed that no fewer than 423,000 Scottish dwellings were affected by damp, severe condensation, mould or, in some cases, a combination of all three. We all know areas in our constituencies which are euphemistically described as "areas of low demand". Housing in such areas consists of damp-ridden boxes and unemployment is at 40, 50 or even 60 per cent; crime and vandalism are rife; the streets are not safe for mothers to walk or children to play in; and drug abuse is common, with hedges and stairwells littered with discarded syringes. Those areas are little better than hellholes, but people cannot escape from them: they have no alternative accommodation because of the housing crisis.
That is a national disgrace, but we have not the democratic means to do anything about it. Not so long ago, locally elected councils were responsible for Scotland's housing. Those councils were accountable to their electorate; if local people were not satisfied with their performance, they could vote them out at regular elections. Now, every local housing scene is dominated by the quango Scottish Homes, whose financial muscle cannot be matched by individual councils. In 1993–94, Scottish Homes has a massive £372 million to invest in housing; with resources on such a scale, it will call the shots. Without an agreement with Scottish Homes to bring part of that £372 million into its area, no council can really be in the housing business.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton): Is the hon. Gentleman aware that some 42 strategic agreements have been made with local authorities and that two more are about to be made? In the vast majority of cases—if not all—local authorities have nomination rights in relation to Scottish Homes housing.
Mr. McAllion: The Minister should have been patient and waited until I had finished. I was pointing out that councils were not in the housing business unless they had secured such agreements.
Locally elected councils had to negotiate their agreements with Scottish Homes and in those negotiations all the muscle, power and influence were on one side. Councils are now being forced to submit to a housing agenda that is increasingly being set by the unelected Scottish Homes agency—an agenda whose priority is more home ownership, tenure change and encouragement of the private sector at the expense of the public sector. That agenda largely ignores those who are trapped in the worst housing, who have the fewest private resources and who are least able to look after themselves. That has arisen because housing in Scotland is dominated by non-elected quangos such as Scottish Homes at the expense of the input of elected local authorities, which used to be the main players on the housing scene before Scottish Homes.
That is true also of the Scottish Enterprise network, which has brought into being a whole new family of quangos in the form of local enterprise companies throughout Scotland. Their influence on economic development, training, business support and development grants completely dwarfs local council planning and

33
economic development departments. In my own area, Scottish Enterprise Tayside has an annual budget of about £25 million to spend on local economic development, compared with a combined budget for Tayside regional council's planning and economic development departments of less than £4 million.
To whom are Scottish Enterprise and other agencies accountable? Certainly not to the people of Tayside, local councils or Members of Parliament representing Scottish constituencies. They are accountable only to the Secretary of State for Scotland—and that must and does lead to abuses. In the past few weeks in my local enterprise company, two senior members were forced to resign because of a conflict of interest between their role as private business men and as heads of what is essentially a public agency. That situation cannot be tolerated and it should be snuffed out as soon as possible.
The same argument can be made in respect of national health service trusts, the new water boards and the host of new quangos that have come into existence under the present leadership of the Conservative party in Scotland. They are a law unto themselves and to their master—the Secretary of State for Scotland. Little wonder that he is prepared to defend quangos—as he did earlier today. They are in effect his own flesh and blood. He forms quangos, packs their membership with Conservative party supporters and sets their agendas—and the quangos do his bidding. The Secretary of State and the quangos are running Scotland without the democratic consent of the Scottish people. Although the people of Scotland fund those quangos, they have no say in them and are treated with contempt.
Many other aspects of Scottish life are equally intolerable.
Dr. Norman A. Godman: To emphasise the rottenness of quango appointments I should point out the appointment to the chairmanship of Inverclyde Royal hospital trust of a local employer who pays among the lowest wages in the whole Inverclyde area. Surely that augurs badly for the people who give their best service to patients of the Inverclyde Royal hospital group.
Mr. McAllion: My hon. Friend makes a fair point and that is not an isolated example. The Secretary of State for Scotland recently visited Dundee, but not in his ministerial capacity. In fact, he did not even advise my hon. Friend the Member for Dundee, West (Mr. Ross) that he was to visit the constituency. The right hon. Gentleman did so in his role as a member of the Conservative party, to raise funds for his party at a secret dinner held at the Invercastle hotel in Dundee—to which was invited the chairman of the Dundee NHS trust, as a Conservative party supporter, together with the chairman-designate of Scottish Enterprise Tayside.
Mr. Gordon McMaster: Sleaze.
Mr. McAllion: That is exactly right. We are concerned with the country being run democratically and it is not democratic for Scotland to be run by people appointed purely on the basis that they give money to the Conservative party—which was roundly defeated in the last local and general elections.
In the past month, we have seen how Westminster-style democracy deals with Scottish affairs. A Government who
34
had been defeated in the polls in Scotland introduced a Bill on local government which relates exclusively to Scotland and the people who live there. Members of Parliament who were elected to represent Scottish interests voted overwhelmingly against that Bill. The House simply shrugged off what Scotland thinks about Scottish legislation and voted to give the Bill a Second Reading. Indeed, it ensured that in the Committee stage there would be a built-in Government majority, against the wishes of the Scottish people.
Mr. Alex Salmond: The hon. Gentleman may have been in the House on 18 November last year when the leader of the Labour party made a complaint about English Conservatives being put on to the Committee which considered that Bill. He was certainly in the House last Tuesday when the Scottish spokesperson of the Labour party defended the right of English Tories to sit on the Committee. Which leader does the hon. Gentleman follow in that argument?
Mr. McAllion: This is a serious debate. It is unfortunate that it has to be dragged down into the gutter by the interventions of the hon. Gentleman. I am making a serious speech about the future of democracy. If the hon. Gentleman cannot recognise the national interest when it stares him in the face, he would do better renaming his party. It certainly does not act in Scotland's national interest.
Mr. Bill Walker: I assure the hon. Gentleman that I, for one, do not doubt the integrity of his view. I do not agree with it, as he knows, but I do not doubt his integrity. Will he clarify an important point of principle and detail? If a future Labour Government did not have a majority of Members in England, would it be right and proper for that Government to pass legislation affecting England which was opposed by the majority?
Mr. McAllion: As the hon. Gentleman knows, Labour is committed to a radical rehaul of the constitutional set-up in the United Kingdom. The start of that will be the establishment of a Scottish parliament with direct responsibility for Scottish affairs. Inevitably, the establishment of that Scottish parliament must change the very nature of this House. It is only a matter of time until we have a Welsh parliament and either regional assemblies or an English parliament—as the English people might decide under a federal constitution for the United Kingdom. That is the future and the way forward for the House. The hon. Gentleman had better recognise that it is the way forward for everyone in this country.
In the handling of the local government Bill by the Westminster Parliament we saw how Westminster-style democracy turns a minority view in Scotland into Government diktat. We saw it discount and disable the views of the democratic majority in Scotland. Yet we are asked to accept that that deeply undemocratic process is in our best interests and represents, in the Government's words, "A Partnership for Good".
Conservative Members argue that theirs is the democratic way while, at the same time, arguing that the democratic views of the Scottish people ultimately do not count in Scottish legislation. They argue that the role of Scotland in the partnership must always be defined for us by a bigger partner. They argue that democracy in Scotland means being governed by those whom we did not elect.

35
When they make those arguments, they stand on the verge of George Orwell's nightmare world of doublethink. Conservative Members are asked to hold two contradictory views simultaneously. If Conservative Members are not worried about the internal contradictions of their claims to be democratic in a Scottish sense, they should be. Everyone else is beginning to recognise just how unsustainable is the Tory position on Scottish democracy.
I am often struck by the religious fervour with which defenders of the current Union argue their case. It is almost as if Tories believe that history and God are on their side. That came across clearly in the most recent Government White Paper "Scotland in the Union—A Partnership for Good". In the introduction to the White Paper, the Prime Minister speaks about his faith in a Union which has lasted almost 300 years. The Secretary of State for Scotland waxes eloquent about the joys of a single market which has transcended almost three centuries.
The White Paper is almost awestruck when it speaks about the approaching 400th anniversary of the Union of the crowns of England and Scotland. There is about the document an air of historical inevitability—almost of destiny. It is almost as if 1707 is as important to Scottish Unionists as 1690 is to Ulster Unionists. Yet nothing in life is inevitable. The only constant factor in history is change—states come and go and unions come and go. In 1984, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was one of two world super-powers that bestrode the globe; it no longer exists.
Mr. Raymond S. Robertson: The hon. Gentleman makes a valid point, which I hope to develop later if I am able to make my speech. Therefore, I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will agree that the Union has survived for 300 years due to its ability to change. It is a dynamic force; the Union of 1994 is not the same one as that of 1707. It has changed to meet changing circumstances and will continue to do so. That is why it lasts.
Mr. McAllion: The hon. Gentleman has already admitted the case for change in the Union that exists in Scotland. The significant aspect of the Conservative party's attitude to the Union over most of the past 300 years has been its refusal to countenance any substantial changes in the Union. The hon. Gentleman is not guilty of that—I am pleased that he has joined us in our calls for changes to the existing Union and no longer tries to defend the Unionist status quo, as his hon. Friends do.
It is important for Conservative Members to understand that unions come and go. Not long ago, Yugoslavia was a powerful unitary state. Now, it has descended into the nationalists' nightmare in Bosnia, about which we are all concerned. As old unions have gone, new ones have come into existence. The European Union was designed by the Maastricht treaty and came into existence this year. In the spring of this year, the new democratic and non-racist South African Union will come into force. The lesson to be learnt from such developments is that nothing is permanent or sacrosanct about unions, including the United Kingdom.
The fact that the United Kingdom has existed for nearly 300 years is no argument or reason for the Union to continue. Recent history suggests that, as we approach the end of the 20th century, those political unions that are unsustainable are multinational, but based on a unitary
36
state that makes no allowance for that multinational dimension. Such unions are highly centralised and authoritarian, without local autonomy. Those unions are essentially undemocratic, where words such as "subsidiarity" and "decentralisation" are regarded as dirty. The United Kingdom has become like those unions under successive Tory Governments since 1979.
If the Union is in danger today, it is because of the activities, not of Opposition Members, but of Conservative Members. Those who would defend the Union argue that such arguments are merely constitutional points and that, ultimately, there is an economic case for defending the existing Union. They say that the Scottish economy is inextricably linked to the United Kingdom economy and it would be impossible to change that. Such arguments are essentially political. They try to underscore the importance of Scotland remaining part of the United Kingdom, and part of a much larger and more powerful economy, but they merely state the obvious.
Those who advance such arguments might as well say that the Scottish economy is inextricably linked to the European or global economy. Economic interdependence, not independence, is the watchword at the end of the 20th century. What happens in the rest of this island, the rest of the continent and the rest of the world matters greatly and has a powerful effect on the people of Scotland.
Scotland cannot step outside history and live in splendid tartan isolation, although some hon. Members want to see that happen. It needs to belong to a range of multinational entities and to a radically reformed, federal, decentralised and democratic United Kingdom. Scotland should belong to a different sort of European Union, which is genuinely democratic and has at its heart the interests of the peoples of Europe, not multinational companies. Scotland should belong to a United Nations that is an effective force for peace, not merely an observer of wars, as it has become on too many occasions.
Scottish sovereignty is not something which Scotland can keep exclusively to itself. We need to pool our sovereignty with other nations where it is in our common interest to do so. However, the decision to pool that sovereignty must be a Scottish decision. We must decide how much of our sovereignty we are prepared to pool and decide with which other countries we wish to place that sovereignty and how much we shall keep to ourselves. The present Union is unacceptable because we are not allowed to make that decision. We are denied the opportunity to decide how much sovereignty we share with the other nations of the United Kingdom. That is why the Union is profoundly undemocratic and why it is ultimately doomed until it learns to transform itself into the decentralised, democratic and reformed Union to which I have referred and which the Labour party intends to implement after the next election. The debate is a matter of the utmost importance to the people who live in Scotland for those reasons and also because of the questions that it asks about the democratic credentials of the Westminster parliamentary system. It is not just a dry, constitutional matter.
An article appeared in the New Statesman 18 months to two years ago. It was about life on the battle front—the derelict housing schemes on the edge of Glasgow—and described the life of a man who was separated from his wife. It said:
"last night's meal was potatoes mashed with half an onion, and a tin of peas. In the fridge, there is a can of lager and some long-life milk … He can afford to heat only one room in the flat,

37
so the bedroom remains unused. He sleeps on the sofa under a foam duvet, his coat serving as a pillow. In any case, he sleeps very little … The TV plays all night; at five in the morning, he falls asleep in front of women's golf or motorcycle racing in Florida sunshine. He is too demoralised even to get undressed. There is no hot water: a splash of cold tap water in a bathroom where the breath hangs in a mushroom of vapour."
Far too many of our countrymen are forced to live in such conditions in this day and age. That is partly to do with global and economic issues which are beyond Scotland's control, but it is partly because Scotland does not have the democratic means of changing those conditions. We live in a country which is rich in resources and which has enough wealth to ensure that none of our citizens has to live in such conditions.
Mr. George Kynoch: Will the hon. Gentleman be good enough to explain how that person managed to watch golf from Florida at 5 o'clock in the morning? Would not that mean that he had a satellite dish? He obviously had a television set. How many such things did one have in the average household of some years ago?
Mr. McAllion: That is not the point. The hon. Gentleman may have satellite television, but I have not and I can watch golf from Florida at 5 o'clock in the morning if I choose to do so. The general description of the person living in that derelict scheme should have caused the hon. Gentleman concern and he should have been worried that some of his fellow citizens are living in such conditions. Something should be done about it by the people who represent Scotland in the House.
Dr. Godman: Before my hon. Friend ends his fine speech, may I point out that in speaking as an honest apologist for the Union, the hon. Member for Kincardine and Deeside (Mr. Kinoch) is part of a long tradition? At the time of the Union, when Daniel Defoe was acting as a secret agent for the English Government, he said that it was a marriage of convenience, not of the heart. Conservative Members are part of that tradition.
Mr. McAllion: That is a good point. The hon. Member for Kincardine and Deeside is certainly not a secret agent, but an open agent of the party which governs in Scotland. People do not have to live in the conditions that I have described in this modern age in a wealthy country such as ours. Part of the reason for those conditions is that we have lost the democratic means by which we can do something about them. Restoring the democratic means to the Scottish people is and should be the first priority of every Member who represents a Scottish constituency.
I refer hon. Members to the last few lines of the motion, which recognises that
"the future of Scottish democracy depends upon giving effect to the sovereign right of the Scottish people to decide for themselves how and by whom they are governed; and therefore calls for the holding of a multi-option referendum in which the people living in Scotland can decide democratically the form of government best suited to their needs."
Everyone in Scotland should unite behind that theme. If we are genuine democrats, we have nothing to fear from the democratic decision of the Scottish people. Those who run away from that decision are those who fear the judgment of the Scottish people at the ballot box.
4.39 pm
Mr. Bill Walker: The hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion) and I are in complete agreement about one matter—we do not support the prohibition of alcohol. Having said that, I must now say where and why I disagree with him on other issues. I have always made it clear to him that I do not doubt the integrity with which he holds his views, but I believe sincerely that were his views to be examined critically and positively by the Scottish people they would be rejected. I hope to be able to tell him why.
First, the hon. Gentleman talked about the Scots and, to use his words, the people who live in Scotland, from wherever they came. As he must know, with his name and background, his family came from one of the other islands off the coast of Europe. I speak as one whose family, as far as one can trace, has always lived in Scotland. In fact, I think that I am the first member of my family to have married a non-Scot—my wife is English, but that does not mean that her view of the well-being of Scotland is any less honest than that of the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. McAllion: The hon. Gentleman may be interested to know that I am also married to an English woman and she, like me, is a citizen of Scotland and entitled to participate fully in Scottish democracy.
Mr. Walker: I can say that she participates with credit and distinction.
If I understood the hon. Gentleman correctly, he was saying that the Scots—the people who live in Scotland—are not properly or adequately represented in this unitary Parliament. He was referring to the Scots who live north of the border. Less than 9 per cent. of the United Kingdom's population live in Scotland—no one can deny that; it is a statement of fact. Eighty-three per cent. of the people who live in these islands live in England. How do the Scots in Scotland regard their representation in this place?
The Scots form less than 9 per cent. of the population, but constitute more than 12 per cent. of the total number of Members of Parliament. In all modern Cabinets—certainly those in the post-war years—the Scots have always enjoyed about 20 per cent. or more of Cabinet posts. In the present Cabinet, the Lord Chancellor, who is in charge of English legal matters and law, is a Scot. I wonder what would happen if we were to have an Englishman appointed as Lord Advocate—I can just see the reaction in Scotland. However, we have a distinguished Scot, the Lord Chancellor, in the Cabinet. The Secretary of State for Transport is a native Scot, as are the Secretary of State for Defence and, of course, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland who is here today. In other words, four of the 22 members of the Cabinet are Scots and, until recently, there were five Scots. As for Labour, if by some misfortune we were to have a Labour Government after the next election, there is no question but that the Scots would hold more than 20 per cent. of the posts.
By my reckoning, we have more hon. Members representing Scotland than we should have on a percentage basis of the population and, despite constituting only 9 per cent. of the population, the Scots have more than 9 per cent. of non-Cabinet positions of all levels.
Mr. Mike Watson: The hon. Gentleman clearly received a pocket calculator as a Christmas present and has only just discovered how to use

39
it. In view of his percentage calculations, would he like to comment on the fact that, at the previous election, his party received about 25 per cent. of the vote and took 16 per cent. of the seats but 100 per cent. of the power? What lesson can we learn from that?
Mr. Walker: I am sorry to hear my hon. Friend say that—he is my friend because he is my pair, when the arrangements are working. Clearly, he has not heard me arguing my case before. I have always argued—consistently, I hope—that Scotland and Scottish interests are well looked after in this place because we have always enjoyed more than our percentage share of posts and influence. It is not only in this place—
Mr. Michael Connarty rose—
Mr. Salmond rose—
Mr. Walker: I am answering my hon. Friend—at least, I hope that he will one day be my friend again so that we can get away from this place from time to time.
I have always argued—consistently, I hope—that in the spheres of science, arts and education, among others, the Scots have always enjoyed more than 9 per cent. of the key positions within the United Kingdom establishments.
Mr. Salmond: I have followed the hon. Gentleman's argument, which is not always the case. He is saying that the individual success of individual Scots will do some national good. Did the fact that the Secretary of State for Defence is a Scot help Rosyth last year?
Mr. Walker: In the short term, the answer is yes. I do not wish to digress and talk about Rosyth, but I am happy to debate the details with the hon. Member at any time. I think that I know more about the case than he does, but in the short term the answer is yes.
I was developing my argument—
Mr. Connarty: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for accepting an intervention. Instead of talking about personalities and the few people who make a difference, will he instead talk about the subject of today's debate which is about the lack of democracy in Scotland, the fact that the positions of power in Scotland are given to adherents of the Government's politics and the fact that they are, as it were, chosen by the Secretary of State, not by the people of Scotland?
Mr. Walker: If the hon. Gentleman will wait, I hope to develop my argument and deal with that point later. I shall not duck the issue, unlike the hon. Member for Dundee, East who failed to answer my question about what the next Labour Government would do. I try to answer questions, which sometimes upsets people. I occasionally upset my friends, but I try to answer so that the following week I do not have to try to remember what I said. It is best to answer honestly and objectively.
Sir Russell Johnston: It is very good of the hon. Gentleman to give way. I wish to follow the question put by the hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond). He asked whether the fact that the Secretary of State for Defence is a Scot was of advantage to Rosyth. The hon. Member for Tayside, North (Mr. Walker) said yes. Does that mean that had the
40
Secretary of State for Defence been an Englishman it would have been of benefit to Tynemouth or that had he been a Welshman it would have been of benefit to some establishment in Wales?
Mr. Walker: The hon. Gentleman constantly talks about his being reasonable and moderate and other lovely adjectives. Let me put it this way: has he ever been a member of a body, at whatever level, in which common interest did not assist in decision making? It is true in golf clubs; it is true in Cabinets; it is true everywhere else. I got into terrible trouble before for suggesting what a good thing it was to have more than one Scot in the Cabinet. I believe that it is a massive advantage to Scotland to have Members representing Scottish constituencies in the Cabinet in addition to the Secretary of State. That is true in defence and in other sectors.
I wish to develop that argument with regard to Scotland's interests. The hon. Gentleman said that the Labour party's objective was to create a Scottish parliament, a Welsh parliament, and regional parliaments in England. Is that correct?
Mr. McAllion: What happens in England is a matter for the people of England. I would not dare to tell them how to run their domestic affairs and I do not think that they should tell us in Scotland how to run our domestic affairs.
Mr. Walker: I asked the hon. Gentleman about the policy and the likely practice of the next Labour Government. I will now discuss that, because I believe that it has some importance and significance for the basis of his argument. As I understand it, it is the policy of the next Labour Government to give the Scots their parliament, and to get that measure through the House on the basis that England will have regional assemblies. That is, as I understand it, the logic of the Labour party's case. Let me discuss that, because it is important to consider the situation.
We would have a number of regional assemblies in England—I do not know how many, but let us assume that there are five. That is not an unrealistic assumption. With 83 per cent. of the population, there could be as many as eight, but let us assume that there are five or six. Let us assume that there are six regional assemblies in England, one in Scotland and one in Wales, giving a total of eight. The views of Scotland would constitute one eighth of the views to be listened to at the centre, because the centre would be under the federal structure that the hon. Gentleman spoke about. There would still be a federal structure in the United Kingdom, in London, in whatever form, and therefore Scotland would have a one eighth contribution instead of the approximately one fifth contribution—at its worst—that it enjoys now.
Currently, there is a Scottish Secretary of State and at least one other Scottish member of the Cabinet, and they take decisions that affect the whole of the United Kingdom. That would change if the Labour party's proposals were implemented. We would adopt a system in which Members of Parliament for Scottish constituencies would represent the same numbers of constituents as Members of Parliament with constituencies elsewhere in the United Kingdom, so that Scotland would lose its parliamentary representation and its power. Scotland would have less influence under the new system, because it would not be an equal.

41
I shall put it to the hon. Gentleman in simple language. I have listened to him argue his case and it has always seemed to me that he recognises that Scotland has less than 9 per cent. of the population, but he reckons that it has 50 per cent. of the equity in the United Kingdom. That, I think, is generally his view—that Scotland should have an equal say and an equal voice.
Mr. Gallie: I think that a point that the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion) raised with my hon. Friend should not go unchallenged. The hon. Member suggested to my hon. Friend that he was not interested in English affairs. However, if I recall correctly, he voted during the passage of the Criminal Justice Act 1993, which dealt with many English matters. He voted, I understand, during the passage of the Cardiff Bay Barrage (Hybrid) Act 1993, which was about Welsh affairs. If the hon. Member for Dundee, East is suggesting that he is not interested in other parts of the Union, it is not represented, to my mind, in his voting record.
Mr. Walker: I thank my hon. Friend. Yes; it seems to me that Opposition Members are trying to have their cake and eat it. They are trying to claim that, because they will have that representation and their own parliament in Edinburgh, they will continue to have the same power and influence as they currently enjoy under the Westminster situation.
That case will be put to the Scottish people. I believe that, in whatever form it is put, they will reject the proposals. When we voted in Scotland on the question of the Scotland Act 1978, it was fairly clear that, when the matter came out into the public domain, the people of Scotland thought, "Hold on a minute; we do not want to pay for a talking shop simply because it will be there." One third of them rejected it; one third said, "Yes, we will support it"; but, critically, one third did not bother to vote. The people who did not vote "didnae care", and they "didnae care" because they had been told that if they absented themselves that would be the equivalent of a no vote. On the basis that that was how it was sold to the people during the referendum campaign, at least two thirds of the Scottish people either did not care or opposed the proposals. I reckon that one could add them together.
The hon. Gentleman speaks about the so-called "democratic deficit" and what it appears to have done, but he glibly proceeds to discuss "pooling sovereignty". It is wonderful the way in which we pull out of the sky lovely phrases to suit any circumstances. What is meant by "pooling sovereignty"? My views about the constitution are well known to everyone and I will not describe them today, but I took my stand because I have strong views about the so-called "pooling of sovereignty".
The hon. Gentleman glibly uses it as a throw-away line. It is not that simple, as the hon. Gentleman should know, because it impinges on all other activities; I agree with him about that. Wealth generation, job creation, the way in which we deal with dampness in housing and all such matters have much to do with our economic performance—and when I say, "our economic performance", I make no apologies for saying that I mean the United Kingdom's economic performance.
I believe, sincerely, that the Union has benefited the Scots and the English out of all proportion to the sum of the two parts coming together. It is much greater than that.
42
That is why I think that when we speak about the "pooling of sovereignty", we must examine carefully what we are prepared to give or not to give.
The hon. Gentleman glibly skated around that. His hon. Friend the Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman), an Englishman—I do not hold that against him—spoke about a "marriage of convenience". He is obviously a student of history. If he is, he will know that many marriages of convenience have produced surprising results—very good results. If it was a marriage of convenience, using his description, he and others cannot deny that the ability to move anywhere in the United Kingdom seeking jobs, following one's career whether one is an artisan or a politician—in the hon. Gentleman's case, a politician—has been of enormous benefit to the people of the Clyde, because they have him as their hon. Member and, obviously, that has been a great benefit to him and to them. At least, being generous to him, I assume that it is. Therefore, he must accept that the Union, however it came about, has been of considerable benefit to him and to his constituents.
The economy is often critical to discussion of this subject. Has Scotland benefited from the Union? First, I will discuss Scotch whisky, about which I know that I will not get any argument from the hon. Member for Dundee, East. Has the Scotch whisky industry benefited from the Union? Yes, it has, because the Union created a substantial marketplace, a home market from which it was possible to expand into a world market that is the envy of many other industries. It is to the benefit of the Scotch whisky industry. The hon. Member for Dundee, East has argued that point many times.
We want a good home base so that the export markets can be maximised. The home base for which we have always asked is the United Kingdom home base. When we argue on behalf of the home base, we are not talking about the consumption of Scotch whisky in Scotland alone. The hon. Gentleman and I agree that the Union has been beneficial for the home base of the Scotch whisky industry.
How about the economy generally? Between 1979 and 1991, the Scottish economy grew on average by 1·7 per cent.
Mr. Watson: Did the hon. Gentleman get a calculator for Christmas?
Mr. Walker: I have a calculator, but I did not get it this Christmas.
By comparison—this is an important point—the economy grew on average by less than 1 per cent. between 1974 and 1979. I do not pick those years by accident; they are the years of a Labour Administration. It is possible that under the enlightened Labour Administration to which the hon. Member for Dundee, East looks forward, the Scottish economy could fare worse. It is a possibility, because that is what happened before; I do not put it any higher than that. What about living standards in Scotland? Gross domestic product per head increased by 30 per cent. between 1981 and 1991. That was brought about through the Union.
The hon. Member for Dundee, East and his hon. Friends talk about the "political deficit". What they are really talking about is the fact that the Labour party cannot get its hands on the levers of power. They are not talking about democracy. I do not doubt the integrity of the hon. Member for Dundee, East, as he knows. I was, therefore, astonished

43
that his right hon. and hon. Friends had managed to buy him off. How have they done it? What quango post have they given him? What have they promised him? What job has he been given? How has he been bought? Immediately following the general election, the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends—
Mr. McAllion: I assure the hon. Gentleman that I was not bought off with the price of Kevin Kelly's resignation.
Mr. Walker: The hon. Gentleman has obviously been shut up somehow and told to line up with the rest of the troops, so he has stopped rocking the boat so violently. His approach to the problems of the Scottish democratic deficit is the Scotland United approach, which he does not deny. That is not the approach of Labour Front-Bench Members. We have at least managed to ascertain that their views are different from the hon. Gentleman's. When the hon. Gentleman says that he is speaking on behalf of the Opposition—excluding the narrow nationalists and the Liberal Democrat nationalists—he is actually speaking on behalf of his friends in Scotland United. Labour Front-Bench Members have a different view.
That fact does not surprise me. Labour Front-Bench Members think, "Gosh, we shall have a lot of Scots in the next Cabinet." They do not want to rock the boat because people in England may say, "Hold on! There are too many Scots in key positions." That is the backlash that one gets if one attempts to push too hard the business of "We poor Scots are downtrodden and we do not get things our way." Some 83 per cent. of the population of these islands live in England. A backlash would not, therefore, be in the best interests of the hon. Member for Dundee, East, of the House or of the Scottish people.
The hon. Member for Dundee, East talks about dire threats caused by the views taken by people such as myself. I am well aware of the risks and hazards of the road ahead; that is why I have spent so much of my life in politics and in Parliament trying to address that. I have put forward ideas which, as is the case with the hon. Gentleman, have not always been well received by Front-Bench colleagues. However, one has to look carefully at the risks of the route that one proposes. I have never accepted that the Union is cast in concrete or that it cannot be modified. That is why I have suggested changes.
The hon. Member for Dundee, East referred to appointments to non-elected bodies. I have been asked to address that point and I do not want somebody to say, "You have not addressed that point, Mr. Walker." We must be careful about excluding anyone from statutory bodies. My personal view is that there should be fewer statutory bodies, but I believe that as long as the bodies exist, we must be careful not to say, "You cannot be a member of a statutory body because you are a trade unionist" or, "You cannot be a member of a statutory body because you are a business man."
There have been two resignations from Scottish Enterprise Tayside. The chairman-designate properly took the view that there was a conflict of interests. It was not a conflict of interests that would have damaged the interests of the people of Tayside, but the chairman-designate honestly believed that, as chairman of a company, he could not be seen to be promoting the interests of other companies. He was probably right. However, if we are to
44
get the best people for the jobs—that is all that we should look for—we should not exclude someone because his trade union interests will inevitably conflict with others.
Mr. Ernie Ross: I am glad that the hon. Gentleman raises the point at this stage. Everyone on Tayside was sickened to hear that James Miller had decided not to accept the chairmanship of Scottish Enterprise Tayside. He was eminently suited to taking on that task. Our objection was on the basis that he was appointed without any consultation. He was appointed by Scottish Enterprise Tayside, which is directly answerable to Scottish Enterprise, which is, in turn, directly answerable to the Secretary of State. That is a rather convoluted formula.
When the Secretary of State for Employment announced the formation of the training and enterprise councils and the local enterprise companies, I, as a member of the Select Committee on Employment, pointed out the problem to him, as the hon. Member for Swindon (Mr. Coombs) will recall. We raised the conundrum with the Secretary of State. There must be a conflict of interests when the head of one company takes decisions about promoting other companies, which will affect his company. That is bound to happen.
Mr. Walker: Any director of a company who accepts an appointment to a quango must understand that there is a real possibility that he will face a conflict of interests. I accept that, and I equally accept that a trade unionist would be put in the same position. That is not a reason for condemning such individuals and it is not a reason for excluding them.
Like the hon. Member for Dundee, West (Mr. Ross), I was bitterly disappointed by the resignation of the chairman-designate because I thought that he was eminently suited to the position. He was the ideal chap to follow Bill Low, a constituent of mine who did a good job.
That shows that those of us who are involved in political life should be careful when we comment on who should be a member of a quango. Quangos should be open to the best people, whoever they are and wherever they come from. The system for appointments must ensure that interests are declared. We have largely achieved that—we have certainly done so in the House, where the Register of Members' Interests is available for public inspection.
I am sorry that the hon. Member for Dundee, East raised that subject in the debate. Although it is an important subject, this is neither the right context nor the right debate in which to raise such a matter.
Mr. Ernie Ross: The other resignation has more alarming consequences for democracy in Scotland and needs to be dealt with by the Secretary of State for Scotland. The person who resigned was, in effect, a civil servant with business interests. That conflict led to his resignation. The Secretary of State needs to take account of that. Could hon. Members imagine the chief executive of Tayside region or of Dundee district council being allowed to be a business person? A conflict of interest would arise immediately. That needs to be dealt with. Will the hon. Member comment on that?
Mr. Walker: I have already publicly commented on the matter and I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman is not aware of that.

45
People who are paid substantial salaries to be involved in the distribution of public assets should not allow themselves to get into a position where a conflict of interest could arise and affect their judgment. Hon. Members, councillors or anyone else in public office face such a problem in their public lives. Chief executives of regions, district councils or enterprise companies should not allow themselves to be put into a position where they could be considered to have a conflict of interest, which would raise doubts about their integrity. The integrity of those in charge of such organisations should never be in doubt.
The hon. Member for Dundee, East spoke of people being appointed to quangos. A quango will operate effectively only if it has the right mix of talents, which, I have always believed, requires trade union input. Under our democratic process, one must be prepared to accept that there should always be an avenue of expression for another view, even if one does not agree with it.
That is why I believe that it is good that the hon. Member for Dundee, East speaks on such matters in the House; it gives him the opportunity to express his concerns and doubts. If nothing else, he will persuade the Unionists sitting behind and in front of him that he is wrong and that people such as myself are perhaps more right than he is.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Geoffrey Lofthouse): Order. One hour and 48 minutes are available for debate and no fewer than 10 hon. Members are seeking to catch my eye. I hope that hon. Members will bear that in mind.
5.13 pm
Dr. Norman A. Godman: I shall be brief.
May I join those who, earlier in the debate, sought to establish their credentials? I seem to be the first Member to speak tonight who is married to a Scot. It will interest you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to learn that I am the only Yorkshire-born Scots Member in the House, and I hope to be here for a long time. My wife could regard me as a foreigner, of course, but she also sees me as a fellow Scot.
I am grateful for, and readily acknowledge, the honest statements of the hon. Members for Tayside, North (Mr. Walker) and for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Robertson) that the Union is subject to change. They would not deny that it is legitimate to examine and criticise the governance of a country and to suggest, by way of prescriptions, a better way of governing it.
My hon. Friend the Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion) made an excellent speech, although I have one or two reservations about it. I understand why he is critical of multinational companies and of their role in the Scottish economy, but I am sure that he will agree that some of them are a damn sight better than indigenous employers. A local employer in my constituency is to become chairman of the Inverclyde Royal hospital trust, but the wages he pays his employees are among the lowest in the region.
I am pleased to say that IBM is in my constituency—my hon. Friend the Member for Renfrew, West and Inverclyde (Mr. Graham) sometimes thinks that it is in his constituency. It is the biggest private employer, and gives good terms and conditions of employment.
BMW's takeover of Rover was announced last week. I wish that BMW were locating in my constituency, because I know from my knowledge of German industrial relations
46
that it would have to introduce a Scottish mitbestimmung. Workers at BMW plants in Scotland would be given formal, effective trade union representation. Moreover, employment directives passed in Brussels would be implemented in Greenock or wherever a company such as BMW decided to locate. There are advantages to multinationals, and I should love more to locate in my constituency.
It is right to question the way in which Scotland is governed. I am a federalist, and I want to see a federalist European Union with its foreign and security policies. I want Scotland to be a federal nation in a federal system. It is wrong that Scotland is part of a multinational state that is overwhelmingly determined and shaped by London—by metropolitan thinking and decision-making.
Soon, members of the Scottish Prison Officers Association, who do a first-class job, often in difficult circumstances, will have their right to industrial action removed. Prisons will be privatised under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Bill, which is now in Committee. There are only two Scottish Members on that Committee, despite the fact that 40 per cent. of its content relates partially or exclusively to Scotland.
Tomorrow morning, the Committee will debate a legal concept that is new to Scotland—trespassory assembly. With his legal training, the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland will know more about it than me. He may smile, but I have already received representations from anglers, hill walkers and even Monro baggers, not that I am one myself, about clauses 44 to 55 of that largely English Bill. They have made those representations because the clauses are aimed at sorting out hunt saboteurs, new age travellers and those who organise raves. I have already asked the Minister at what point a rave becomes a ceilidh.
By and large, we do not face such problems in Scotland. I was talking to an old friend of mine, Jimmy Harvie, an 84-year-old ex-Glasgow bricklayer. He and his late lovely wife, Pearl, walked Scotland's hills for more than 60 years. People like Jimmy Harvie and other walkers, ramblers and fishermen are to be excluded from their favourite haunts. That is utterly scandalous, and those clauses should riot refer to Scottish pastimes at all. The average hill walker in Scotland is extremely fastidious—one does not find much litter on Schiehallion, Lochnagar, Ben Ledi or Ben Vorlich. People are careful on the hills in terms of protecting the environment.
As for fishermen, there should be public access to all our rivers. The rich perhaps should be dumped in the rivers—where the rivers are shallow, of course. There should not be the shackling by the new lairds who come in and buy up estates. Those people seem to have a curious idea of the existing law of trespass.
Mr. Gallie: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there are many small fishing clubs in Scotland with a membership who certainly are not rich? The members of those clubs stock the rivers and ensure that people can enjoy fishing. Is the hon. Gentleman suggesting that their rights on the river should not be acknowledged?
Dr. Godman: That is an important point. I am a member of two such clubs—the Port Glasgow club and the Newark angling club. Both clubs have many unemployed and retired members, and they are deeply concerned about the Government's plans for the management of Scotland's waterways. It is a complicated problem.

47
The Scottish element of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Bill should have formed an exclusive Scottish Bill, so that we could scrutinise and seek to amend it. It should not have been lumped in with an English Bill which is aimed at problems south of the border. That is an absurdity.
We have spent hours and hours talking about the abolition of the right to silence, but the right to silence is not affected in Scotland. That is an English matter. The right to silence remains in the police stations and the courts in Scotland, and that is how it should be. Scottish issues should not be lumped in with English issues on Standing Committees. It is disgraceful.
That is one reason why I will always argue for a Scottish Parliament. Those matters could be argued among Members who would be elected by a different electoral system. The one we have is a "rotten borough" kind of system.
Does the Minister agree that one element of a parliamentary democracy is the ease of access given to representatives of local communities for meetings with Ministers? If he does, when will he respond to invitations given to him by way of the editor of the Greenock Telegraph and representatives from the east end of Greenock to visit that area? Despite the valiant efforts of Inverclyde district council, the east end still suffers severe blight in terms of rotten, lousy, damp and cold houses which are lived in by people who simply do not have the financial means to escape that kind of housing imprisonment. Will the Minister come to the east end of Greenock to see that for himself?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I will accept the hon. Gentleman's invitation to visit Greenock, as I have done with all invitations from Opposition Members.
Dr. Godman: I am extremely grateful to the Minister. I was too modest to mention it, but I sent my own invitation a couple of weeks ago. I am delighted that the Minister has accepted with his characteristic generosity.
The critics of radical change on the Government Benches seem to accept some form of stilted evolutionary change to the Union. Judging by what constituents of all ages say to me when I do my walkabouts—that is a horrible word—they are deeply disenchanted and discontented with the present system for the governance of Scotland. The overwhelming majority of people in Scotland would welcome the setting up of a multi-option referendum. We could then determine whether it is those who share my view who are closer to the hearts and minds of the people in Scotland, or the honest apologists for the Union on the Government Benches.
I have mentioned Defoe, that English secret agent from all those years ago. He talked about the Union as a marriage of convenience which would best suit English interests and, by and large, that still holds today. However, it will change. We are extremely fortunate that the secessionist movement in Scotland is so honourably peaceable. The change will come, and the best way to help bring it about is to set up a multi-option referendum.
5.25 pm
Mr. George Kynoch: The motion before the House is wide, and I found it difficult to decide what aspect to address.
48
We have heard the hon. Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman) talking about a multinational company within his constituency and the amount it contributes, presumably to the economy of his constituency. Yet the motion talks about
"the undemocratic influence and power of transnational and multinational companies in the economic life of Scotland".
I have to tell the hon. Member for Dundee. East (Mr. McAllion) that I am happy that a significant amount is given by multinational and transnational oil companies to my area and to that of my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Robertson). Without them, the economy of our area would be that much poorer. I find it strange that the hon. Member for Dundee, East uses those terms, as I know that his area also contains a significant number of multinational companies.
Mr. McAllion: The hon. Gentleman may recall that the Timex multinational company had a long association with Dundee. However, it ripped off its Dundee workers and walked away to make its profits elsewhere in the world. I warn the hon. Gentleman that multinational companies could do that in his constituency.
Mr. Kynoch: I am pleased that the hon. Gentleman introduced Timex into the debate, as I was just about to refer to that company. I had hoped that the kind of industrial relations which were prevalent at Timex were behind us. I am not saying that it was the fault of one side or the other, because the faults clearly lay with employers and employees.
I can remember what industrial relations were like before the Government came to power in 1979, and I clearly remember the coal strike of the late 1970s. Pickets were standing at our factory gates when we had no grievance with any of our suppliers, but they prevented coal from being delivered to our company, and therefore affected the output and the economy of the area.
Thankfully, the Conservative Government came to power with a clear remit to reform union relations and to ensure that greater flexibility and accountability were given to employees, so that they could work in peace and harmony with their employers.
I am sorry to say that that did not work at Timex. The so-called picket line, which I understood was legally meant to consist of no more than five or six people, was supplemented by a demonstration of several hundred people. That was taking full advantage of the law, and it made a mockery of the law. I hope that, as time goes on, that can be clarified and tightened. Multinational and transnational companies can contribute a significant amount to the economy of Scotland, and I will return to that subject.
I would like to talk about some of the quangos which have been referred to in the motion. There is a direct reference to NHS trusts, and to
"the Scottish Enterprise network of companies".
I worked closely with the Scottish Development Agency when I was in the textile trade, and I continued to do so when it became Scottish Enterprise and set up local enterprise companies. I subsequently became one of the founder directors of Moray, Badennoch and Strathspey local enterprise company. We welcomed a trade union representative on the board of that company, as well as representatives from local government and businesses throughout the area.

49
That board reflected the geographical spread of local companies. That great strength had been lacking under the previous SDA set-up, because, in the north-east corner of Scotland, it was felt that the SDA was a Glasgow-based organisation. Although it had a regional office in Aberdeen, it was geared towards oil, and it was felt that the indigenous industries were a second thought to the SDA. By devolving the functions of the SDA and incorporating the training agency, the local enterprise companies democratised a system that did a lot of good for Scotland at the time.
I pay tribute to the significant benefits given to local people by Grampian Enterprise and the subcontractor in my area, the Kincardine and Deeside enterprise trust. The people who sit on the board of Grampian Enterprise give of their best and of their experience to ensure the balanced delivery of services in Grampian. It is insulting for those people that they are dismissed as Government placemen by the hon. Member for Dundee, East, because I know that they give of their time willingly, and without any recompense, to the benefit of the region.
I sat on the board of a local enterprise company, and I know what happened when a conflict of interest arose. The directors simply declared their interest, and either left the room or stayed to answer the relevant questions of other board members, without participating in the debate. That is the normal practice when any conflict of interest arises.
The hon. Member for Dundee, East has also described national health trusts as another Government quango. In the run-up to the award of trust status to the Aberdeen Royal hospitals NHS trust, I was politically unique in the north-east, because I supported the bid. I know that Opposition Members, of whichever party, were against it, and I suspect that certain of my colleagues had great reservations.
That trust, however, has provided greater flexibility and greater accountability in the delivery of health care in the area. It has meant that the delivery of health care has been brought closer and is more appropriate to the people. It offers more flexibility than was available in directly managed units.
According to the hon. Member for Dundee, East, that so-called quango is destroying democracy in Scotland, but it is worth considering what it has achieved in its first year of operation, 1992–93. According to the trust's annual report:
"A record number of patients were treated in 1992–93
over 2,500 more in-patients were treated
over 8,900 more out-patients attendances
over 1,900 more day cases
over 800 more operations.
The Trust has waiting time guarantees for in-patients of 12 months, and less for specific procedures."
Those figures prove that trust status has been successful. It has been welcomed by local people.
Mr. Gallie: My hon. Friend will be interested to know that South Ayrshire Trust, which is adjacent to my constituency, can boast of similar rates of success. The chairman of that trust, who has done a remarkable job, was certainly not seen as a friend of the Conservative party in the past. Does my hon. Friend agree that that is a perfect response to the challenge from Opposition Members who constantly carp about Conservative appointees?
Mr. Kynoch: I welcome that intervention from my hon. Friend. I am well aware that trust members are appointed because of the experience that they bring to their local
50
areas. Those representatives may be trade unionists, employers, employees, male, female and members of whatever political party, as long as they can contribute to the well-being of the trust. I believe that is absolutely right.
It is important to remember that half of any NHS trust board is made up of medically qualified people. Non-executive members from outside the medical profession do not make up the majority on any trust board.
When the Aberdeen Royal Hospitals NHS Trust was established, it was argued that it would be opposed from within and that there would be appalling employee-employer relations. It was argued that it would lead to the downfall of the NHS in the north-east, but the exact opposite has occurred. In the first year of its operation, the trust has improved employee-employer relations through an effective staff board, which discusses staffing issues. I can quote a specific example of such an improvement from the trust's annual report, which says of junior doctors' hours of work:
"Staff at all levels—medical, nursing and para-medical—have helped in the substantial efforts made to reduce Junior Doctors' hours."
That objective of the Conservative party has been brought about by the trust through partnership rather than conflict.
The trust should not be knocked by the Opposition as a quango, because it has already made significant developments in the delivery of clinical care. Bone marrow transplantations are now available in Aberdeen and that specialist form of medicine has been greatly welcomed. The trust has also taken delivery of a new magnetic resonance imaging scanner, which is better known as an MRI scanner. The trust also offers a local lithotripsy service, provided by a mobile unit, to get rid of kidney stones.
All those benefits have been brought about by a so-called quango, which has also increased the number of cardiac operations, which is pertinent to the Scottish population because of the incidence of heart disease. I do not believe that we should knock trust status; we should welcome it because of the benefits that it has brought to the health service.
I suspect that the hon. Member for Dundee, East also believes that that quango is more remote from the people than the old system of health care, but he should take note of what the trust's annual report has said about bringing health services closer to patients. It stated:
"Over the year we cared for 82,245 in-patients and 388,001 out-patients. All users of our services are encouraged to tell us what they think of our services—whether good or bad"
Those people were encouraged to comment on the delivery of services and the trust received just 440 formal complaints. That means that fewer than one in 1,000 patients made a complaint. Something must be going right with that quango. I believe that those benefits demonstrate the advantages of flexibility within the NHS and of involving local people in the running of the health service.
The motion tabled by the hon. Member for Dundee, East also refers to local government reform. We are currently considering the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Bill in Committee. I am amused when I hear Opposition Members claim that that reform will diminish the power of local democracy in Scotland. In recent weeks I have read a number of newspaper articles about the Labour-controlled council of Monklands. It is alleged that the council operates in a fashion that is far from democratic. Apparently, at the end of last week, the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith)

51
at long last entered the debate and is now asking my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland to investigate some of the allegations. I think that that is right and that we should try to achieve the democratic delivery of local services.
Mr. John Maxton: Is the hon. Gentleman also asking the Secretary of State to institute an inquiry, or is he simply leaving it to my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith)? Does he associate the name of the Secretary of State for National Heritage, the right hon. Member for Westminster, North (Sir J. Wheeler), with Westminster council in the same way as he so glibly associates my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Monklands, East with Monklands council?
Mr. Kynoch: I shall not be drawn down that path because we are discussing the future of democracy in Scotland. Unless we intend to take over the future of Westminster, we must contain our comments to Scotland. The hon. Gentleman's intervention, however, makes my point clear.
In my part of Scotland, the population desperately wants single-tier authorities as soon as possible. Although there are queries about some of the proposed boundaries, such fine detail will soon be debated fully in Committee. People want to rationalise and reduce the overheads of local government and bring local democracy closer to the people.
As I said on Second Reading of the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Bill, it is interesting to note that all the Opposition parties advocate single-tier authorities. But the big difference is that they also want a Scottish parliament, which would be an extra and more costly tier. According to 1994–95 figures, Government-supported spending per capita in Scotland is some 34 per cent. higher than in England. Perhaps I should say that quietly as the Secretary of State's Parliamentary Private Secretary has an English constituency and might be upset to learn that. Scotland gets 26 per cent. more than Wales. I must therefore assume that, if we had a Scottish parliament as the Opposition advocate, such spending would not be allowed to continue and Scotland would have to make up the shortfall.
I hope that the Scottish electorate is aware of the Opposition parties' proposals on local government reform and a Scottish parliament. My hon. Friend the Member for Tayside, North (Mr. Walker) referred to the number of Opposition Members with aspirations for a Cabinet position, who would then have to decide whether to sit in a Scottish Cabinet or a Cabinet in London. That might cause some interesting problems for the Opposition.
The motion does not make its point. I feel proud and positive about many aspects of government, trusts, Scottish Enterprise and LECs, which have made a positive contribution towards Scotland's economy.
5.43 pm
Sir Russell Johnston: I congratulate the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion) on initiating the debate. Unfortunately, it is difficult to have a balanced debate if the hon. Member for Tayside, North (Mr. Walker) takes advantage of the limited
52
time available to us. He spoke for 34 minutes and then disappeared. That is unreasonable behaviour. I hope to speak for less than 10 minutes.
The hon. Member for Dundee, East began by saying that people "must have their say and their way". He pointed out that the Scottish people had voted three to one in favour of some form of Scottish self-government. He did not, however, feel it necessary to mention that it was wrong for Labour to have 68 per cent. of Scottish seats in exchange for 39 per cent. of the vote. We do not have a fair voting system so that people can have their say and their way.
Mr. McAllion: I am happy to associate myself with the hon. Gentleman's remarks. As vice-chairman of the Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform, I am a long-term supporter of proportional representation both for a Scottish parliament and at the level of the United Kingdom.
Sir Russell Johnston: I welcome what the hon. Gentleman said, which has the added bonus of shortening my speech. I no longer need to make a long statement about the value of proportional representation, as he accepts it. That also affects patronage and other matters, which I need not go through.
Without federalism within the United Kingdom, subsidiarity in the European Community is a sham. The Government see it not as decentralisation or enabling more citizens directly to influence decisions that affect them, but as a way of defending Whitehall. The Government will oppose progressive social and environmental change agreed consensually in Brussels and Strasbourg, such as is contained in the motion that will be debated later today. But, on the basis of a quarter of the vote, they will impose on Scotland educational change, changes in the health service, changes in the ownership of public utilities, and changes in local government which the majority do not want. That makes no sense whatever.
I was astonished that the hon. Member for Kincardine and Deeside (Mr. Kynoch) leapt to the defence of quangos, saying that they were marvellous, closer in touch with the people, enormously politically balanced, fair and great. He justified that by saying that the Aberdeen Royal hospital's NHS trust had done more cardiac operations. I have no doubt that people under communist regimes said that, and that Franco built a lot of hospitals. If that is the hon. Gentleman's criterion of whether democracy is desirable, he does not understand the issue.
Mr. Kynoch: Does the hon. Gentleman recall that I said that half the members of the trust board were medical staff? Under the previous system of directly managed units, the medical staff had no say in the running of their hospital. They can now have an input and allow local flexibility in the delivery of services to achieve the positive results to which I referred.
Sir Russell Johnston: If the hon. Gentleman is saying that the new quangos are better than the old quangos, that is one argument. I simply do not like quangos, so my argument is different.
On local government reform, older Members may remember that, from 1966–69, I served on the Wheatley commission, appointed by the late—it would be fair to say great—Willie Ross, later Lord Ross of Marnock. It was a balanced commission, on which the late Betty Harvie Anderson, who was certainly no socialist, also sat.

53
Ultimately, it produced a consensual agreement on the way forward. The essense of what was said then was that we wanted stronger, more effective local government, which was less in thrall to central Government. If it could not stand up to central Government, it was no longer local. There is no justification for changes which no one has sought. They have been determined within a party which represents only a quarter of the Scottish electorate, and are clearly designed to strengthen central Government and weaken local government. That is the result of more authorities, in my view. My view is not entirely in line with my party's view, but as one gets older one is allowed more freedom in these matters.
Mr. Dennis Canavan: Hear, hear.
Sir Russell Johnston: I never used to get cheers from the hon. Gentleman—it is very encouraging.
I must tell the hon. Member for Dundee, East, much of whose speech I agreed with, that the hope of achieving Scottish home rule has persisted for a long time. It goes back to Gladstone and to the Bill that Asquith brought as far as Second Reading in 1914. The Bill fell. After the second world war, the idea was partly responsible for the growth of the Liberal party and of the Scottish National party in Scotland.
The Labour party was converted—or rather, reconverted, since Keir Hardie believed in it—to home rule in time. We can therefore assert in all fairness that there is an established and stable demand for self-government in Scotland. That more than justifies the call for a multi-option referendum to establish openly and officially the attitudes of the Scottish people. I hope that the Scottish political parties will then be able to base an agreed solution on the result.
5.50 pm
Mr. Henry McLeish: This has been an important debate, and it is a debate which will continue. It is also a timely debate. I warmly congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion) not only on winning the debate but on advancing, with his characteristic passion, the need for a Scottish parliament. He will have only a few years to wait until we have a Labour Government setting up a Scottish parliament in Edinburgh to tackle some of the real problems that the present Government have ignored because of their obsession with centralisation, contracting out and a market philosophy.
Quangos are at the top of the Scottish political agenda nowadays, and they clearly embarrass the Government. The issue disconcerts the business community because the public interest is now playing second fiddle to private and vested interests. Over the past few weeks and months, fraud, corruption and the woeful misuse of public funds seem to have been high on the agenda of a certain minority.
The Secretary of State for Scotland seems unconcerned, sitting idly by while these activities unfold. He seems either unwilling or unable to intervene. A new era is unfolding in Scotland in which the promotion of the culture of closet croneyism is well to the fore. Nearly 5,000 people behind closed doors spend almost £7 billion of public money, with only tenuous lines of accountability to the Scottish Office, Parliament, the press or the public.
It is important to use this opportunity to offer our response to a speech that the Secretary of State made in
54
Scotland today, ostensibly to set the record straight on quangos. The speech offered him a chance to come clean and to accept the widespread criticism of quangos. Tragically, that did not happen. The Secretary of State deliberately attempted to distort the debate on quangos by asserting that the number of executive public bodies had declined from 84 in 1980 to less than half that number now.
The real issue, of course, is why there are 167 quangos in Scotland. Was the right hon. Gentleman being disingenuous? Was he trying to distort the debate? Those 167 organisations operate outwith the usual realms of public scrutiny. It is not only their numbers that cause concern, but the fact that their powers have been rapidly extended. They spend an extraordinary amount of the Scottish public expenditure budget. We should also remember that in 1992 the Scottish Office had more executive bodies than did any other Department in the United Kingdom.
As quoted in the Evening Times, the Secretary of State attacked his critics as follows:
"What nonsense! The number of public bodies has actually fallen over the past decade, as the Government made services work better and with more thought for the taxpayer's wallet."
That clearly shows that the right hon. Gentleman does not understand what a quango is. Either that, or he has attempted to mislead the Scots in a major speech today. Meanwhile, I challenge the Minister to explain whether the Secretary of State is right and I am wrong about the increasing number of quangos.
In the same article the Secretary of State is quoted as saying:
"Many Health Boards and hospital trusts have meetings open to the public and I would like to see the rest follow their lead."
What an extraordinary statement. We argue for open government, while the Secretary of State says that he would like more public meetings held by these bodies. Why does the Secretary of State not open up all these quangos to scrutiny by press and public?
It is clear that the Secretary of State is complacent about quangos. He has whitewashed the deplorable record of some of them in the past few months, and he is trying to shift the blame away from his appointments and to lay it on the Opposition parties in Scotland, which are demanding firm action to clean up the quangos before we hear more stories of sleaze and corruption in Scottish public life.
The Secretary of State has also been back-pedalling on reforms that he promised in this House—minimal reforms to improve the handling of Scottish business. If we can believe the article in The Scotsman of 5 February, that much becomes apparent. We agreed that the reforms should come before the House, so what is the right hon. Gentleman doing about that? It appears that he is running scared. After the fiasco of the Peterken affair in Glasgow, surely he does not want Lord Fraser to come and answer questions in the Committee. Why are the Government back-pedalling on such an important issue?
Last week, the right hon. Gentleman withdrew from the Scottish local government Committee. Is his commitment to this form of democracy in Scotland waning? Has he no stomach for a fight?
Mr. Gallie: The hon. Gentleman has been unfair, suggesting that the Secretary of State is backing away from a fight and is not meeting his obligations. My right hon. Friend promised Scotland single-tier local government and

55
he is going to give it that. His absence from the Committee has to do with parliamentary procedures and a lack of co-operation on the part of Opposition Members.
Mr. McLeish: It is typical of the humbug of Conservative Members that they want the Secretary of State to proceed with the only thing that Scotland does not want—the reorganisation of local government. What about corruption in quangos? What about the right hon. Gentleman's back-pedalling on fundamental reforms to improve the government of Scotland at Westminster? If this is such a flagship policy, why does the Secretary of State run away from appearing in the Committee and dealing with his own business? It is pathetic. He seems to be getting bored with his brief and to want to give up his involvement in much of Scottish affairs.
Quite apart from trying to defend the indefensible—quangos—the right hon. Gentleman should apologise for introducing the most centralised state in the western world to Scotland. Other countries in Europe and in eastern Europe are trying to reform their democracies and to decentralise. Our Government are secretive and are massively centralising every power that belongs to local authorities.
Finally, the Secretary of State is also gerrymandering. This Secretary of State makes Westminster and Wandsworth look like a tea party. The biggest and most expensive vote-rigging exercise in Scottish history is being enacted in Committee. The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities suggests that it could cost up to £700 million for a set of organisations that no one wants but which the Scots will have to pay for. If that is not expensive vote rigging, I do not know what is.
This evening, we have mentioned taking stock, the Government reneging on their commitment, quangos and the Secretary of State not having the guts to face up to some of the endemic corruption within those organisations. We have also mentioned the cost of vote rigging in the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Bill. The real tragedy, however, is that when—and if—the measure is passed nearly 100 extra statutory committees and quangos will be created.
The Secretary of State said in Scotland today that he is hunting down quangos to slay them. What nonsense. Who is he trying to deceive? Any Conservative Member who has read the Bill will realise that from the three super water quangos downwards it is not about single-tier but about multi-tier authorities and about centralisation, quangos and statutory committees before we get to gerrymandered authorities which cannot provide services.
Why is the Secretary of State so afraid of democracy and its institutions? Is it because the ballot box in Scotland has not delivered for the Tories? Is it because they are obsessed with the free market ideology, which requires the destruction of accountable institutions and public organisations? Or is the Secretary of State merely wedded to centralisation and elective dictatorship? Is it not simply that the Government have been in office far too long and are complacent and contemptuous of public opinion to the extent that any idea of listening or responding has been thrown out of the window?
We need to rebuild Scotland's democracy and to recreate the conditions in which our democratic institutions can fight back. We need to reassert our commitment to rein
56
back the rapidly expanding frontiers of the unelected state and instead renew our commitment to elected government and all the institutions associated with that.
Scotland does not want falling standards in public life, or waste, or the sleaze that is undermining public confidence. It wants a Government who are committed to scrutinising effectively nearly £7 billion of public expenditure.
The Under-Secretary of State should set up a public inquiry to study the functions of quangos in Scotland. He should also set up an independent review of the corruption that daily unfolds in our newspapers and on television. He should stop the asset stripping of local democracy that will result from the nonsense that we are calling the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Bill. He should dedicate himself to renewing democratic principles and he should stop lambasting local councillors while his Secretary of State unashamedly praises people who are not worthy of that praise.
6.2 pm
Mr. Raymond S. Robertson: Until last week, I never realised that, in his armoury, the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion) possessed the ability to predict the future. When he chose the debate he could not have known how timely it would be. Last week we witnessed the constitutional capers of the Scottish National party—showing the usual maturity of a primary seven mock election—and later in the week the constitutional contradictions and contortions of the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Robertson) and the right hon. and learned member for Monklands, East (Mr. Smith).
At the beginning of last week, the hon. Member for Hamilton attempted to polish up his Unionist credentials and then put them on display for all to see as he set about defending the rights of English Members of Parliament to serve on Scottish Standing Committees. He did so seemingly oblivious of the fact that that was in direct contradiction to his leader, the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East who, during the debate on the Loyal Address, said:
"An overwhelming majority of the hon. Members who represent Scottish and Welsh constituencies are against the Bills that will only be carried by the votes of English Conservatives who do not represent the people in the countries concerned."—[Official Report, 18 November 1993; Vol. 233, c. 24.]
Last Thursday, the hon. Member for Hamilton was in turn contradicted by his leader who said that it was "wrong" for constitutional parallels to be drawn between Scotland and Northern Ireland, ignoring the fact that his shadow Secretary of State had written to the Prime Minister only weeks before arguing exactly the opposite.
It is unfortunate that the hon. Member for Fife, Central (Mr. McLeish) did not tell us whether it was the right hon. and learned Member for Monklands, East or the hon. Member for Hamilton—who had said completely contradictory things—who won that battle. I should gladly give way to the hon. Member for Fife, Central if he wished to tell us who won the battle, but I see that he does not want to intervene. The issues raise many questions but none more fundamental than who is deciding Labour's constitutional policy.
Today's debate is very welcome to Conservative Members. All the Opposition parties have refused to learn the lessons of the April 1992 general election. Let me remind them that at that election only the Scottish

57
Conservatives were able to increase their votes and their representation in the House. The nationalists never received their mandate for independence and lost two seats.
While preparing for today's debate I happened to chance on the leaflet issued by the SNP at that election, which was called, "Six Steps to Independence". It is worth while mentioning the first steps, if only to inject some humour into our proceedings. According to the SNP:
"Step One: You vote for the only party honestly offering to bring real power back to Scotland.
Step Two: We win the majority of Scottish seats at the election. That gives us the mandate to negotiate Independence."
How the nationalists' slogan of "Scotland free by '93" must haunt them. I see that the hon. Member for Moray (Mrs. Ewing) at least has the good grace to cringe when that is mentioned.
Mrs. Margaret Ewing indicated dissent.
Mr. Robertson: The Labour party did not fare any better as its neo-separatist bandwagon was derailed and in classic marginal seats, such as mine, the electorate swung behind the Unionist cause and rejected Labour's plans to play fast and loose with the constitution.
The Liberals were also marginalised as a force—albeit a small one—in Scottish politics. They lost one seat and came close to losing four others. However, some Liberals have learnt their lesson. The hon. Member for Gordon (Mr. Bruce) was widely quoted last year when he mentioned the dangers to his party in Scotland that would be unleashed by a close association with the Labour party in the constitutional convention.
The Opposition parties have all failed in their own way to learn the lesson of April 1992.
Mrs. Ewing: What about the Conservatives?
Mr. Robertson: When we went into that election we Conservatives were not embarrassed by our Unionist credentials. We did not keep them quiet in case anyone noticed that we were fundamentally and unequivocally different from every other political party contesting the election in Scotland. The courageous decision by my right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Scotland to put the question of Scotland's place in the United Kingdom at the centre of our appeal was crucial and proved decisive. Only we stood, and still stand, full square behind the Union. At that election, only the Conservatives offered Scotland the chance to continue to be a full and equal partner in the United Kingdom and the Scottish people duly responded to that message.
Two years later the Opposition parties cannot resist refighting battles that they have long since lost. Bluntly, they are nothing more than constitutional masochists, intent on settling old scores in pursuit of something that they desire for their political ends but that the Scottish people continually reject. I do not usually quote the hon. Member for Dunfermline East, (Mr. Brown), but he summed it up last year when he said in a lecture at Edinburgh university:
"I think we are making a mistake if we just assume there is a huge enthusiasm for home rule in Scotland."
For once, the shadow Chancellor was right.
The Scottish people want the sort of devolution that the Government have been delivering. For 15 years, the Government have been giving the Scottish people power over the homes that they live in, the schools that they send
58
their children to, the utilities that deliver the key services that they use and—most importantly—the power to play their full part in the United Kingdom.
The reform of local government empowers the Scottish people even further, because there will no longer be buck passing from district to region and vice versa. The electorate will no longer have to deal with two sets of councillors and be passed from pillar to post and back again. The reforms that we are debating in the Standing Committee on the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Bill will lead to greater accountability, enhanced sensitivity to local needs and to much more local local government for every voter and service user in Scotland.
We all know Labour's views on local government. Members of the Standing Committee will no doubt hear them again and again during the coming weeks and months. Labour Members want to strip local government of its responsibilities and invest them in an Edinburgh-based, Glasgow-run Scottish assembly. Or, as councillor Jean McFadden, Labour president of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, said:
"There may well be a tendency for the Scottish Parliament to suck up power from below."
Given the shower opposite, I assure you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that there most certainly would be such a tendency. That is the bottom line.
Mr. Norman Hogg: At the end of the day, Scottish local government is run by people elected at the ballot box. They are overwhelmingly Labour. I accept that the people reject the nobodies in the SNP, and they certainly reject the Conservative party, but, overwhelmingly, they elect Labour Members. Surely they are qualified to speak on behalf of local government in a way that the hon. Gentleman is not.
Mr. Robertson: I am glad that the hon. Gentleman realises what Councillor McFadden said; a Scottish assembly would "suck up power" from local councils and strip local authorities throughout Scotland of powers. It is not me saying that but the hon. Gentleman's party.
Mr. Norman Hogg: I accept that the hon. Gentleman is probably correct. There is a very real possibility that the Scottish parliament would find it difficult to reorganise Scottish local government because of resistance within local government. That stems from a fear of all government, because of the way that local government has been treated over the years, most notably by the Conservative Government, who have sought to destroy democratic control.
Mr. Robertson: We have had a real confession here today. Believe me, the hon. Gentleman's words will come back to haunt him.
The bottom line of the Labour-Liberal assembly proposals is to concentrate all power in Edinburgh and have that power dominated by the central belt, to the detriment of every other part of Scotland. The Labour party doubts its ability to win power at Westminster; it keeps losing the match, so it wants to change the game. We hear much about gerrymandering from the Labour party, but that is the real gerrymandering that the people of Scotland face.
As the party of the Union, we have never been frightened to question how the Union is working. As I said earlier, we have never failed to look at its failings as well as its strengths. Unionism is not blind, dogmatic adherence

59
to the present constitutional arrangements, to what Opposition parties all call the status quo. The Union that we have in 1994 is not the Union of 1707—indeed, how could it possibly be so? It has constantly adapted to changing circumstances, moved with the times and been flexible. That is where the Opposition parties get it helplessly and utterly wrong. In denying the dynamism of the Union, they deny history itself.
To listen to Opposition Members, including the hon. Member for Dundee, East who moved the motion, the House would be forgiven for thinking that Scotland's history ended in 1707 and its nationhood ceased to exist with the signing of the Act of Union. Nothing could be further from the truth. Scotland has had its best days since 1707—in culture, commerce and influence. Let us never forget that it was as part of the Union that our literature became world famous: Robert Louis Stevenson wrote "Treasure Island"; Robert Burns, "Tam O'Shanter"; Sir Walter Scott, the Waverley novels; Conan Doyle, "Sherlock Holmes"; and Adam Smith, "Wealth of Nations".
As part of the Union, Edinburgh became known as the Athens of the north, where the Scottish enlightenment took place. It was as part of the Union that Scottish soldiers fought for the Crown against Napoleon in one century and in two world wars in the next. It was as part of the Union that Clyde-built ships became masters of the seas and trade routes. It is as part of the Union that, in the 20th century, one in 10 of all the world's personal computers is made in Scotland. It was as part of the Union that Scottish inventiveness gave the world the steam engine, penicillin, television, telephone and the pneumatic tyre. It was as part of the Union that Scottish education was the first to be free and compulsory.
In Robert Owen, we led the way in social reform at New Lanark. It was as part of the Union that Scottish Christian missionaries pioneered in the mission fields of Africa and the far east. It was as part of the Union—my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Perth and Kinross (Sir N. Fairbairn) will like this—that my noble Friend Lord Mackay, a Scottish lawyer with no English legal training, became Lord Chancellor of Great Britain.
That heritage is far too precious to throw away. Scottish culture today is just as distinct and proud as it has ever been. We have unique ways of doing things: in visible and tangible ways such as our legal system, our education system and our Church and in less obvious ways such as our acceptance of a shared inheritance and broadly similar attitudes and values. Those ways are just as pronounced and obvious, and are still cherished as much today, as they were all those centuries ago.
Far from destroying the character of the Scot and compromising his unique national characteristics, Unionism has enhanced them. They have been a powerful force in forging the destiny of the United Kingdom and, through the United Kingdom, the wider world. Far from creating a Britain of uniform Britons, the Union has benefited from encouraging the diversity of its people.
Nobody should forget that it was the Conservative party which continually updated Scotland's institutions and constitution and a Conservative Government who first established the Scottish Office and upgraded the office of Secretary for Scotland to a full Secretary of State within
60
the Cabinet. It was in that proud tradition that "Partnership for Good" was written and presented to the House—the next milestone in the continuing evolution of the Union. That is why the Union is ready to face up to, and meet head on, the challenges of the 21st century and will celebrate its 300th anniversary in great shape.
Curiously, as the hon. Member for Dundee, East rightly said, the union of the old Soviet Union died after 70 years because it had none of that. The Soviet Union imposed uniformity and demanded conformity, suppressed culture and nationhood and survived by constantly rewriting history. In complete contrast, our Union positively encourages diversity and can accommodate nationalism. The events at Murrayfield on Saturday were testimony to that, although hon. Members will forgive me if I do not dwell on that encounter for too long.
In conclusion, Scotland's place is as a full and equal partner in the United Kingdom. The Scottish people have shown time and again that they do not want to see the old saltire ripped from the Union flag. The Union has endured and it will endure—its dynamism will see to that.
Sir Nicholas Fairbairn rose—
Mr. Robertson: I have no time.
In 2007, the peoples of Scotland and England will celebrate 300 years of pooled sovereignty and joint nationhood. In 2107, when you and I, Mr. Deputy Speaker, are long gone, our successors will, I believe, still be here, still debating the nature of that peculiar and unique relationship which binds our two nations together, still marvelling at what it has achieved; and, yes, there will still be some on the Opposition Benches questioning its chances of survival.
6.16 pm
Mr. Dennis Canavan: All I can say after that is that Rabbie Burns must have been burlin' in his grave when he heard himself being wheeled out in defence of the Union by the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Robertson), who would surely qualify for inclusion in "a parcel o' rogues in a nation".
I thank and congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Dundee, East (Mr. McAllion), who initiated the debate. It is the first opportunity that the House has had since the general election to debate the Scottish constitutional question and the lack of democracy in Scotland.
I remind Conservative Members, including the hon. Member for Aberdeen, South, who tried to talk up the Tories' election result in Scotland at the general election, that they were hammered. They managed the magnificent feat of getting a quarter of Scottish voters to support them. If that is their measure of success, they surely have low horizons and expectations—or perhaps they are trying to rewrite history.
If we believe recent opinion polls, Tory support has dwindled to a mere 16 per cent. of the Scottish electorate. There is no doubt that Scotland is being governed by an unrepresentative minority clique. Not only were the Tories rejected by three quarters of the people of Scotland at the previous general election, but the people of Scotland gave the positive message that they voted for parties committed to the setting up of a Scottish parliament.

61
The denial of that parliament by the Government means a continuation of the democratic deficit in Scotland, which is the only country with its own legal system and laws, but no legislature to pass those laws.
Mr. Gallie: The hon. Gentleman has suggested that all the other parties in Scotland fought the election on the basis that they wanted a separate Scottish parliament. Does he not accept that one party—the Scottish National party—stood for election on one issue alone: the establishment of a self-ruling Scotland with no Westminster connection? Labour and the Liberal Democrats stood for,a parliament within the Union—a Scottish assembly.
Mr. Canavan: Three quarters of the Scottish people voted for parties committed in principle to the establishment of a Scottish parliament. There are always differences of opinion within those parties about the exact powers that such a parliament should have, and about its relationships with the rest of the United Kingdom—and, indeed, the rest of the world; but the best solution to that problem is contained in the motion, which refers to "a multi-option referendum". Let the people decide.
If the hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie) believes in the sovereignty of the Scottish people, he should support me on that. The truth is that there is more democracy in Hong Kong than in Scotland; soon, there will probably be more democracy in Northern Ireland. Surely no hon. Member can defend that.
Sir Nicholas Fairbairn: When asked by a South American business man why the Scots were so popular all over the world, I replied, "It is because we have the great good fortune to be the only nation that does not have the misfortune to have a Government."
Mr. Canavan: I am surprised that a distinguished Scottish lawyer does not support my argument. Surely it is a disgrace that Scotland, which has its own legal system and its own body of law, has no legislature to pass that law. At present, bits and pieces are incorporated in English Acts, preventing the proper scrutiny and quality of legislation that the Scottish people deserve.
Sadly, the only Government response on constitutional questions since the general election has been the "taking stock" exercise, which has turned out to be a bit of a farce. Even the pussyfooting proposals in the White Paper have been delayed. Surely it is not enough to respond to the wishes of the people of Scotland by saying, "Oh, well, we shall have more meetings of the Scottish Grand Committee in Edinburgh and elsewhere in Scotland"; that is almost as relevant as saying, "We shall shift the Committee to Timbuktu."
The Scottish Grand Committee is basically a talking shop. I am not saying that it is a completely useless talking shop, but it has no real executive or legislative powers. If the Government had wanted to give it such powers, they would have referred the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Bill to it, and let all the elected representatives of the people of Scotland decide the future of the legislation, rather than drafting English Members on to the Committee to preserve the Government's majority.
The Bill threatens to destroy what is left of local democracy in Scotland. It has been rightly described as the most blatant piece of gerrymandering in the history of Scottish local government—and very expensive at that: the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities has estimated the
62
cost at some £720 million. If passed, it will also have serious consequences for important services such as social work and education; it aims to remove the statutory responsibility to employ qualified directors of education, qualified social workers and committees dealing with those subjects.
I assume that the Under-Secretary of State who is responsible for education in Scotland will speak at some point. I hope that he will pay careful attention to what I am about to say. The Bill interferes with the traditional catchment areas of many schools, thus infringing what is supposed to be one of the basic tenets of democracy, in which the Government claim to believe—parents' right to send their children to the school of their choice.
Let me take a couple of examples from my area. St. Modan's and St. Mungo's high schools are the only two Catholic high schools in Central region; some of my constituents choose to send their children to both schools. Both have rolls of about 800 pupils: St. Modan's is in Stirling, St. Mungo's in Falkirk.
If the Government's proposals for local boundary changes proceed, both schools will be in different local education authority areas. At present, about 60 per cent. of St. Modan's pupils travel from outwith Stirling district, which would be conterminous with one of the proposed new LEA areas. It may lose more than half its pupils, unless the pupils cross the LEA boundary—which they are unlikely to do unless the Government guarantee parents free transport, and also guarantee that the new LEA will not be burdened with extra costs.
So far, the Minister has refused to give any such guarantees, despite representations from hon. Members—including me—from the Scottish Catholic Education Commission and from the Scottish hierarchy. I hope that he will reply tonight, and that he will answer all the parents in Scotland whose right to choice will be severely curtailed, if not obliterated, by the Bill. It seems that the Government either do not fully realise the consequences of their proposed legislation, or are hellbent on wrecking their children's educational opportunities, destroying parental choice and eroding what is left of Scottish local democracy.
The Bill would also take power from elected representatives by creating up to 100 more quangos. That would make matters worse rather than better. I understand that Scotland now has 5,000 quango members; after the proposed reorganisation, there will be only 1,200 elected local government members—less than a quarter of the number of quango members. The quangos will be responsible for more public expenditure than the elected council members.
I am worried about more than the denial of democracy. As my hon. Friend the Member for Fife, Central (Mr. McLeish) said, the Government are creating a system that is wide open to abuse and corruption. Last week, a conference of the west of Scotland Conservatives took place in Renfrew. The Minister and his colleagues may not take everything that I say as gospel truth; let us hear what other members of his party said and decided.
The majority agreed with the statement:
"Quangos are a gravy train for Tory supporters",
and an overwhelming majority agreed that there were
"too many quangos in Scotland".
The same report said that leading Tories—including the chairman of the Scottish Tory party, Sir Michael Hirst—were surprised at the votes that took place. No

63
wonder Sir Michael was surprised—he would not recognise democracy if it were speared in his eyeballs. He was rejected by the voters of Strathkelvin in 1987, to reappear with his knighthood and patronage appointment as chairman of the Scottish Tories.
Given the placemen in certain posts, that seems to be the career pattern for Scottish Tories. Lord Fraser of Carmyllie, the Minister with responsibilities for health and home affairs in Scotland, was rejected by the voters of Angus in 1987. Lord Mackay was rejected by the voters of Argyll, then turned up as a Minister with responsibility for transport.
Last weekend, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury claimed in front of a student audience that foreigners are in the business of buying academic qualifications and indulging in corrupt practices. If the right hon. Gentleman is looking for corruption opportunities, he need look no further than all the quangos that were created and the many more that are being formed.
From the membership of those quangos, it seems that, to be virtually assured a seat on at least one of them, one has to buy not an A-level or university degree but only a Tory party card. That is what it is—jobs for the boys. That abuse of party power is even worse than that practised by many of the Stalinist regimes that once existed in eastern Europe.
Mr. McAllion: Did my hon. Friend read in the Scottish press that, because of the dearth of talent among members of the Tory Front Bench, there is every likelihood that Lord Mackay will be appointed Secretary of State for Scotland—even though he was not elected with a single vote cast anywhere in Scotland?
Mr. Canavan: I did, and I was appalled. I wondered whether the day will come when the Secretary of State for Scotland, instead of answering questions at the Dispatch Box, will have to be summoned to the Bar of the House because he has not been elected by even one constituency in Scotland. How will that go in terms of accountability? Scotland is ruled—or rather, misruled—by a party which has only minority support, and which has no mandate from the people of Scotland.
I conclude with this warning. The Government cannot run away from the people of Scotland for ever. This year, they will receive two blunt messages. They will get a double whammy in the forthcoming local and European Parliament elections. The people of Scotland are fed up with, and can see through, the Government, and their verdict will be given on a Government who have an increasingly strong stench of corruption—which is symptomatic of terminal decline.
If the people of Scotland can accelerate that decline through the ballot box, so much the better. The sooner that we can be rid of this Government, the better for the people of Scotland.
6.35 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Lord James Douglas-Hamilton) rose—
Mr. Salmond: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The Chair has a responsibility, particularly in debates such as this, to protect minorities in the House that represent close to one quarter of the Scottish vote. What is
64
the argument for independence that the House is unwilling or unable to debate? When such points of view are excluded from debate, does that not reinforce the strong view that is held in Scotland—far beyond the ranks of the Scottish National party—that the House, its processes and procedures are a conspiracy against Scottish public interest?
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris): The Chair is interested not in the personal views of any party, but in fairness in terms of the number of times that right hon. and hon. Members have contributed to debates.
Mrs. Ewing: Further to that point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. In the interests of fairness, surely all constitutional parties represented in the House should have been given an opportunity to express their views in this debate. My hon. Friend, who has been present for the entire debate, was not afforded that opportunity. Meanwhile, a party that represents a minority viewpoint in Scotland was represented by several speakers.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Right hon. and hon. Members know full well that the number of times that they have contributed in the past determines to some extent how often they are called subsequently. The debate has not yet finished, so who knows who may yet contribute to it? I call the Minister.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The hon. Member for Falkirk, West (Mr. Canavan) and I entered Parliament on the same day. The only difference between us at that time was that he sat on this side of the House and I sat on the other. The hon. Gentleman has lost none of his characteristic vigour and vitality, and I shall seek to answer his points.
Mr. Canavan: The Minister should get on with it.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I will, and I shall deal now with the hon. Gentleman's points.
The Labour party's claim that the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Bill will create 100 new quangos is the purest fantasy. The Bill provides for a maximum of seven non-departmental public bodies, plus any necessary residuary bodies. They are the three new water companies, customers council, recorders administration, staff commission and property commission. I am astonished at the hon. Gentleman's nerve in talking about quangos. The last Labour Government presided over many more. In 1979, there were 84 executive quangos in Scotland, which this Government have almost halved to 47. I have only to look at Labour's election manifesto to see proposals to establish 17 new quangos. The hon. Member for Falkirk, West should make the sternest representation to members of his own Front Bench because they are not going along with his views.
Mr. McLeish: Surely to goodness the Minister does not believe the Secretary of State's speeches when he reads them. Does he agree that Scotland currently has 163 quangos and not the number claimed by the Secretary of State? What about expenditure levels of nearly £7 billion? I am giving the Secretary of State, who is in his place, an opportunity to give the Minister the benefit of his advice. It is appalling that the Minister should attempt to distort the argument by giving completely false figures.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The hon. Gentleman is hoist by his own petard. The number of advisory bodies has also reduced during this Parliament. It is a plain and unmistakable fact that there were 84 executive quangos under the last Labour Government in 1979, but there are only 47 today. I remind the hon. Member for Fife, Central (Mr. McLeish) of the new quangos that Labour proposes to establish. It wants a cultural education committee, human rights commission, national investment bank, judicial appointments and training commission, consumer protection commission, wages council and various other bodies. Labour's 1993 conference passed motions endorsing the establishment of various bodies such as a training agency, national investment bank and regional development agencies—the list goes on and on. Yet Labour Members have the nerve to criticise the Government when we have reduced the number of quangos.
I did not intend to begin with that point, but as the hon. Member for Falkirk, East told me to get on with it, it was only fair to answer his key point. He is wrong—the Government have reduced the number of quangos in Scotland, and the hon. Gentleman's representations should be directed at his own leader and members of his own Front Bench. I will say to the credit of the hon. Gentleman that he has no more hesitation in voting against his own side than against us.
Mr. Kynoch: Has my hon. Friend considered that the Opposition might have withdrawn all those conference pledges on increasing the number of quangos, just as they withdrew all their pledges on spending?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: We shall examine Labour's future actions with the greatest care. We noted what was said this afternoon, and it was not consistent with the line taken at Labour's national conferences or with its proposals for a number of new quangos.
The hon. Member for Fife, Central asked a significant question about local government being extended to quangos. I confirm to him that the White Paper published last July by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, who has responsibility for public service and science, proposed a code of practice for access to Government information. It will be implemented in April not only for Government Departments but for quangos within the jurisdiction of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration. That is undoubtedly a step forward. The principles of the code will be adopted by other non-departmental public bodies. There will be a similar code of practice for access to information about the national health service.
Mr. McLeish: Will the Minister confirm this evening in the House that he will set up a register of directors' interests which will be tough and will have an open regulatory regime to ensure that the wilful neglect of public funds that is taking place at present is stamped out?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I can confirm that Scottish Enterprise is considering that matter. It is right that appropriate rules and procedures should be drawn up in that connection, as they are for the House of Commons.
Mrs. Ewing: I do not want to interfere in the dispute between what is probably the largest quango in Scotland, namely, the official Opposition and the Minister. Will the Minister confirm that, in a debate in the House in which the constitutional issue has been discussed, the Scottish
66
National party, which is the driving force and the powerhouse on the constitutional issue, has been denied the opportunity to participate? As a member of the legal profession in Scotland, does he agree that there is a need to ensure that there is accountability between the various organisations in Scotland and that we have been denied the accountability of putting on record our viewpoint?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: A considerable amount of parliamentary time was taken up last week as a result of the parliamentary disruption engaged in by the Scottish National party. Hon. Members cannot have it both ways. They cannot engage in disruption and take up a great deal of parliamentary time and then complain that they are not given enough time. The fact remains—
Mr. Salmond: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The Minister seems to suggest that there is some connection between the SNP not being called in the debate today and events last week. Through the prerogative of the Chair, can you confirm that?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: It is not true.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I am grateful for that confirmation. There is no question but that the SNP is dealt with fairly in terms of parliamentary time.
Mr. Salmond: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is it in order for the Minister to make that connection? It is a simple point of order. It is a simple question, Sir.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I will answer it. No.
Sir Nicholas Fairbairn: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Is it in order to address the Chair with one's hands in one's pockets?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Sadly, it is.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: We have to consider the motion against the back drop of history. The Act of Union represented a partnership of willing partners and we believe that it is the world's best example—
Mrs. Ewing: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. In the light of your clear ruling on the subject, will you ask the Minister to withdraw his clear allegation made on the Floor of the House that we were denied an opportunity to speak in today's debate because of events last week?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I should make it clear that Madam Speaker has total responsibility. We who share the responsibility with her are the ones who decide who may or may not be called in any debate. The previous behaviour of hon. Members has no relationship with whether they are called on a subsequent day. I hope that that is clear. If anyone else suggests anything to the contrary, he is wrong. I hope that that is clear.
With the greatest respect, I do not think that the Minister made any allegation. He may have felt that there had been some such response, but I have made the ruling clear. The hon. Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) may yet catch my eye. He knows what time the debate ends. I do not know how long the Minister's speech will be.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: To return to the matter of quangos, far from believing that all quangos should be dismantled, we believe that they have a legitimate purpose in the diffusion of power. I give one

67
example. The chairman and non-executive directors of such bodies are accountable in several ways not only to the law of the land but, through the citizens charter, to the people whom they serve. They are accountable to their sponsoring Secretary of State for their stewardship, and through him to Parliament. There is a parallel chain of accountability for the use of resources. It starts with the chief executive of the body and ends with the Public Accounts Committee of the House of Commons. That is consistent with the best traditions of democracy and parliamentary tradition.
If citizens know what they are entitled to expect from public services, as they will be under the citizens charter, and are given proper avenues of complaint if they do not receive it, they are well placed to call that body to account immediately. My hon. Friend the Member for Tayside, North (Mr. Walker) made the point well in that connection.
I confirm that we are determined that women in particular should be considered for more public appointments.
Mrs. Maria Fyfe: So long as they have a Tory party card.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: They will be appointed on merit. Our approach is sensible and can be delivered. The proportion of women who hold appointments made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is already 40 per cent. That is one of the highest of any Government Department. However, we are not complacent and we want to improve on the figure. We are always keen to learn about women and men of ability and experience who would like to make a further contribution to life in Scotland.
The issue of local government reform was raised. My hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Robertson) was right to say that the purpose of the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Bill was not to dismantle democracy. Its purpose is to avoid excessive duplication. For example, there are now two sets of councillors, two sets of headquarters and two sets of officials. It makes sense to co-ordinate housing, social work, education, sport and similar functions.
I shall bear in mind the point made by the hon, Member for Falkirk, West.
Mr. Canavan rose—
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I am answering the hon. Gentleman. The point that he raised is covered by clause 32 of the Bill. We shall reach it some time. We shall debate it thoroughly and I shall bear in mind the point that he made.
Mr. Canavan rose—
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I shall not give way. There will be plenty of opportunity to debate the matter at length in Committee. I am sure that it will be discussed further when the Bill returns to the House if satisfaction is not obtained at that time.
The hon. Member for Fife, Central made proposals for a multi-referendum. I recall when I was a new Member asking Michael Foot, the then Leader of the House, to consider a referendum. He replied that a referendum was not the way to proceed. He subsequently changed his mind
68
because a referendum appeared to be the only way to get the Scotland Bill on the statute book. A referendum with vague, general propositions tends to be of little value. It would be necessary to put before the electors a clear proposition for a particular policy, spelling out in detail what was involved. That is precisely what was done in 1979. When faced with a clear proposal, less than one third of the Scottish electorate voted in favour of change and the results were inconclusive.
Mr. McAllion: Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Salmond: Will the Minister give way?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: No. I have many points to answer.
I want to answer the charges made about the White Paper "Taking Stock". In 1926, it was a Tory Government who created the office of Secretary of State for Scotland. In 1939, a Conservative Government brought the Scottish Office to St Andrew's House in Edinburgh. The White Paper "Taking Stock" focuses on several matters. Scotland already receives a considerable share of parliamentary time. Some 60 Scottish Bills have been enacted in the past 10 years. In addition, when Scots legislation is incorporated in United Kingdom Bills which apply to Britain or the United Kingdom, the greatest care is taken to ensure that, both in terms of policy and in the drafting of the legislation, an approach appropriate to Scotland is taken. There have been discussions through the usual channels about the matter. Agreement has been reached and my right hon. Friend will make a statement in due course.
Sir Nicholas Fairbairn: I hope that my hon. Friend has noticed that the verbose motion flows from a concept about the undemocratic power and influence of transnational and multinational companies in Scotland's economy. Two such companies have just come to Scotland and provided 2,000 jobs. We have obtained domination of the world by the same methods. What would have happened to Scotland if the narrow-minded idiocy being displayed had prevented us from investing in other countries, and prevented other countries from investing in ours?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I can answer conclusively—multinational companies have had a good record. Last year, 79,000 people were employed in overseas-owned manufacturing units in Scotland, representing almost 25 per cent. of manufacturing jobs. It has been reported that gross wages and salaries per employee were 20 per cent. higher.
Dr. Jeremy Bray: Does the Minister agree that the real damage done to Scotland involves the loss of control of Scottish companies? Is he aware that the last steelworks in Scotland, the Craigneuk works at Motherwell, is closing today, with immediate redundances? Will the Government do anything to try to find a buyer for it as a going concern?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: It does not belong to the Scottish Office to sell, but strenuous efforts are being made by the local enterprise company. It is important that its efforts are successful. Mossend steel works, which is not far from the hon. Gentleman's constituency, is due to open shortly, creating many hundreds of jobs.
Mr. Gallie: Does not my hon. Friend think it shameful that the hon. Member for Fife, Central (Mr. McLeish) did not distance himself from the insulting motion on inward investment? Does he not agree that it is a condemnation of the Labour party's commitment to jobs in Scotland?
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The hon. Member for Fife, Central has been thoroughly unrealistic—inward investment has played a key role in creating and sustaining employment in Scotland.
Mr. McLeish rose—
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I shall not give way as I have given way to the hon. Gentleman already.
Mr. Norman Hogg: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. My hon. Friend the Member for Fife, Central (Mr. McLeish) was severely attacked in the intervention of the hon. Member for Ayr (Mr. Gallie), which was answered by the Minister. When my hon. Friend tried to intervene to clarify the position, he was arrogantly brushed aside by the Minister.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: That has nothing to do with the Chair and is a matter for debating—
Mr. Norman Hogg: It was a good point—
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. It was a bad point.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: Several hon. Members raised the subject of "Taking Stock". Responsibility for the Scottish Arts Council will transfer to the Secretary of State, as will various other responsibilities, such as training, through the establishment of Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise. There have already been some impressive results. In Scotland, more than half the Scottish work force are qualified to at least Scottish vocational qualification level three, compared to 30 per cent. south of the border. Responsibility for the highlands and islands airports will be transferred to the Secretary of State, which makes sense.
We are giving high priority to ensuring that Scotland is right at the heart of Europe. That is why we set up Scottish Trade International. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Eastwood (Mr. Stewart), was successful in persuading the Europeans that Scotland should host Europartenariat. Some 350 companies exhibited to similar companies from nearly 50 countries, and more than 5,000 meetings with Scottish companies were held over the two-day event. Scottish Trade International will be carrying out a follow-up exercise to ensure that the participants have all the advice and information that they need to pursue the deals that they made. That has been good for Scotland. On the issue of Scottish Office visibility, not only have we opened up access to more information, but we have established telephone inquiry links and 22 information points, and information leaflets will be made available.
I agree with my hon. Friends the Members for Kincardine and Deeside (Mr. Kynoch) and for Ayr (Mr. Gallie) about the success of the national health service trusts. The benefits of that policy are already becoming apparent, with more patients being treated, improved facilities and services specifically adapted to particular needs.
The hon. Member for Dundee, East demanded a Scots parliament. The Conservative stand on that issue is
70
unrepentant, and is incorrigibly and unequivocally Unionist. At the last election, we stood full square on that platform. Much to the dismay of pollsters, pundits and bookies, we were the only party in Scotland to increase our share of the vote and our representation in the House. Only one Labour seat in Britain was taken by the Tories in the last general election: that of my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, South. That was due to his vigorous and strong Unionist stand.
Mr. McAllion rose—
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: I shall not give way to the hon. Gentleman at this moment.
It is right to consider the role of the Secretary of State. If the motion were implemented, he would be stripped of resources, without the power to legislate and without the backing of his Department. He would rapidly become a cypher and would be unlikely to retain his position in the Cabinet. If he were to lose his place in the Cabinet, it would be bad for Scotland in the United Kingdom Parliament, and Scotland's influence would be correspondingly reduced.
My hon. Friend the Member for Tayside, North was right to consider the number of Scots in the Cabinet. There are four—the Secretaries of State for Scotland, for Transport and for Defence, and the Lord Chancellor. Could that number be maintained if a Scots parliament were established? I am far from certain that it could.
Before the last election, the hon. Member for Livingston (Mr. Cook) said that once there was a Scottish parliament that handled health issues in Scotland, it would be impossible for him to be a Minister for health in England. There are also concerns about the number of Scottish Members in the House. There are now 72 Scottish Members. If calculated on the basis of the population, the number should be 57. Would it be reasonable to maintain the present numbers if a separate Scots parliament covering most aspects of Scottish public affairs were established? If we followed the example of Stormont, we would have only 40 Scottish Members. I would not want to see the number of Scots represented in the House reduced as that would be contrary to Scotland's interest, as would the elimination of the office of Secretary of State.
Implicit in the motion is the fact that the parliament would raise taxes. The Scots would then be the most heavily taxed people in the United Kingdom. It would be unreasonable to make the rest of Britain pay for an extra tier of Government in Scotland without comparable parliaments all over England. The difficulty of the policy of the hon. Member for Inverness, Nairn and Lochaber (Sir R. Johnston) is that the rest of Britain does not want regional parliaments all over England, and certainly not throughout Wales. Tax-raising powers would constitute an extra burden on Scottish industry.
There was a report in The Scotsman on 19 August 1974 which stated:
"Mr. John Smith, MP for North Lanark, claimed that members of the party who were pressing for devolution to a Scottish Government without the loss of the office of the Secretary of State and a reduction in the number of MPs at Westminster were being dishonest."
I do not wish to see the role of the Secretary of State eliminated, and I do not want the loss of employment that would go with the creation of another parliament. I do not want endless conflict between rival parliaments, which the motion would doubtless entail.

71
I quote the words of a distinguished parliamentarian, who said:
"Feelings of pride in one's land and one's culture are both respectable and desirable, but they are perfectly compatible with membership of a somewhat wider political family: to sacrifice benefits accrued over 270 years in order to gratify confused and ephemeral political ambitions would be tragic and unforgivably foolish."
Those are not my words, but those of the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) in his book "Devolution: the end of Britain?" I endorse them today.
Let us remember our common heritage with the rest of the United Kingdom. Let us strengthen those links and not throw away the benefit of hundreds of years of unity. We have an inescapable duty to oppose the motion. The Union has brought with it great benefits to all parts of the United Kingdom. Sometimes it appears that the people of Scotland are not fully aware of those benefits. Identifiable public expenditure per head is 15 per cent. higher than in the United Kingdom as a whole. To look at it another way, Scotland represents some 8·9 per cent. of the population—
It being Seven o'clock, proceedings on the motion lapsed, pursuant to Standing Order No. 13 (Arrangement of public business).

European Community Documents
Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 102(9) (European Standing Committees).

PARENTAL LEAVE
That this House takes note of the unnumbered Explanatory Memoranda submitted by the Department of Employment on 7th October 1993 and 7th December 1993, relating to parental and family leave, and the unnumbered Explanatory Memoranda submitted by the Department of Employment on 7th October 1993 and 11th November 1993, relating to non-standard employment; endorses the Government's view that measures taken in the field of social affairs should have full regard to the effects on job creation, to the principle of subsidiarity, and to the diversity of national traditions and practices; shares the Government's view that the need for Community legislation on parental leave and leave for family reasons and associated social protection provisions has not been demonstrated; supports the Government's view that it should not accept proposals which would increase the cost of employing part-time and temporary workers and reduce the number of jobs available; and endorses the Government's view that terms and conditions of employment are best agreed directly by the parties concerned without outside interference.—[Mr. Wood.]
The House divided: Ayes 189, Noes 99.

Division No. 108]

[7.01 pm

AYES

Ainsworth, Peter (East Surrey)

Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James

Aitken, Jonathan

Dover, Den

Alexander, Richard

Duncan, Alan

Alison, Rt Hon Michael (Selby)

Duncan-Smith, Iain

Amess, David

Durant, Sir Anthony

Ancram, Michael

Eggar, Tim

Arbuthnot, James

Emery, Rt Hon Sir Peter

Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)

Evans, Jonathan (Brecon)

Arnold, Sir Thomas (Hazel Grv)

Evans, Nigel (Ribble Valley)

Ashby, David

Evans, Roger (Monmouth)

Atkins, Robert

Faber, David

Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)

Fabricant, Michael

Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Valley)

Fairbairn, Sir Nicholas

Baker, Nicholas (Dorset North)

Fenner, Dame Peggy

Baldry, Tony

Fishburn, Dudley

Bates, Michael

Forman, Nigel

Blackburn, Dr John G.

Forth, Eric

Bonsor, Sir Nicholas

Fox, Dr Liam (Woodspring)

Boswell, Tim

Fox, Sir Marcus (Shipley)

Bottomley, Peter (Eltham)

French, Douglas

Bowden, Andrew

Gallie, Phil

Bowis, John

Gardiner, Sir George

Brandreth, Gyles

Garel-Jones, Rt Hon Tristan

Brazier, Julian

Gillan, Cheryl

Bright, Graham

Gorman, Mrs Teresa

Brooke, Rt Hon Peter

Gorst, John

Brown, M. (Brigg & Cl'thorpes)

Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth, N)

Browning, Mrs. Angela

Gummer, Rt Hon John Selwyn

Bruce, Ian (S Dorset)

Hague, William

Burt, Alistair

Hamilton, Rt Hon Sir Archie

Butler, Peter

Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)

Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)

Hannam, Sir John

Carrington, Matthew

Harris, David

Carttiss, Michael

Hawkins, Nick

Cash, William

Hawksley, Warren

Clappison, James

Heald, Oliver

Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)

Hendry, Charles

Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey

Hill, James (Southampton Test)

Coe, Sebastian

Hordern, Rt Hon Sir Peter

Congdon, David

Howarth, Alan (Strat'rd-on-A)

Conway, Derek

Howell, Rt Hon David (G'dford)

Coombs, Simon (Swindon)

Howell, Sir Ralph (N Norfolk)

Cope, Rt Hon Sir John

Hughes Robert G. (Harrow W)

Cormack, Patrick

Hunter, Andrew

Cran, James

Jack, Michael

Curry, David (Skipton & Ripon)

Jackson, Robert (Wantage)

Davies, Quentin (Stamford)

Jenkin, Bernard

Deva, Nirj Joseph

Jessel, Toby

Devlin, Tim

Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey

Dorrell, Stephen

Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)

73

Jones, Robert B. (W Hertfdshr)

Rowe, Andrew (Mid Kent)

Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine

Ryder, Rt Hon Richard

Key, Robert

Sackville, Tom

King, Rt Hon Tom

Sainsbury, Rt Hon Tim

Kirkhope, Timothy

Shaw, David (Dover)

Knapman, Roger

Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)

Knight, Mrs Angela (Erewash)

Shersby, Michael

Knight, Greg (Derby N)

Sims, Roger

Knight, Dame Jill (Bir'm E'st'n)

Skeet, Sir Trevor

Knox, Sir David

Smith, Sir Dudley (Warwick)

Kynoch, George (Kincardine)

Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)

Lait, Mrs Jacqui

Speed, Sir Keith

Lang, Rt Hon Ian

Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)

Lawrence, Sir Ivan

Spink, Dr Robert

Legg, Barry

Sproat, Iain

Lennox-Boyd, Mark

Stephen, Michael

Lidington, David

Stewart, Allan

Lightbown, David

Streeter, Gary

Lloyd, Rt Hon Peter (Fareham)

Sweeney, Walter

Luff, Peter

Sykes, John

Lyell, Rt Hon Sir Nicholas

Taylor, Ian (Esher)

MacKay, Andrew

Taylor, John M. (Solihull)

McLoughlin, Patrick

Taylor, Sir Teddy (Southend, E)

Maitland, Lady Olga

Thomason, Roy

Marshall, John (Hendon S)

Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)

Martin, David (Portsmouth S)

Thurnham, Peter

Merchant, Piers

Trend, Michael

Mills, Iain

Twinn, Dr Ian

Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling)

Viggers, Peter

Monro, Sir Hector

Walden, George

Moss, Malcolm

Walker, Bill (N Tayside)

Nelson, Anthony

Waller, Gary

Neubert, Sir Michael

Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)

Newton, Rt Hon Tony

Waterson, Nigel

Nicholls, Patrick

Wells, Bowen

Nicholson, David (Taunton)

Whittingdale, John

Norris, Steve

Widdecombe, Ann

Ottaway, Richard

Wiggin, Sir Jerry

Paice, James

Willetts, David

Patnick, Irvine

Wilshire, David

Pattie, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey

Wolfson, Mark

Powell, William (Corby)

Young, Rt Hon Sir George

Richards, Rod

Riddick, Graham

Tellers for the Ayes:

Robathan, Andrew

Mr. Sydney Chapman and Mr. Timothy Wood.

Robertson, Raymond (Ab'd'n S)

Roe, Mrs Marion (Broxbourne)

NOES

Ainsworth, Robert (Cov'try NE)

Ewing, Mrs Margaret

Allen, Graham

Faulds, Andrew

Alton, David

Fisher, Mark

Banks, Tony (Newham NW)

Flynn, Paul

Barnes, Harry

Foster, Rt Hon Derek

Benn, Rt Hon Tony

Foster, Don (Bath)

Bennett, Andrew F.

Fyfe, Maria

Benton, Joe

Garrett, John

Berry, Dr. Roger

George, Bruce

Boyes, Roland

Gerrard, Neil

Bradley, Keith

Godman, Dr Norman A.

Bray, Dr Jeremy

Golding, Mrs Llin

Callaghan, Jim

Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S)

Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge)

Hall, Mike

Canavan, Dennis

Hardy, Peter

Chisholm, Malcolm

Hill, Keith (Streatham)

Clapham, Michael

Hinchliffe, David

Clarke, Eric (Midlothian)

Hogg, Norman (Cumbernauld)

Clarke, Tom (Monklands W)

Home Robertson, John

Coffey, Ann

Howarth, George (Knowsley N)

Connarty, Michael

Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N)

Corston, Ms Jean

Hughes, Simon (Southwark)

Cox, Tom

Jackson, Glenda (H'stead)

Cryer, Bob

Jackson, Helen (Shef'ld, H)

Cunningham, Jim (Covy SE)

Jamieson, David

Dafis, Cynog

Johnston, Sir Russell

Davidson, Ian

Jones, Martyn (Clwyd, SW)

Davies, Ron (Caerphilly)

Kirkwood, Archy

Dixon, Don

Llwyd, Elfyn

Dowd, Jim

Lynne, Ms Liz

Etherington, Bill

McAllion, John

74

McCartney, Ian

Robertson, George (Hamilton)

McFall, John

Roche, Mrs. Barbara

Mackinlay, Andrew

Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)

McMaster, Gordon

Salmond, Alex

Maddock, Mrs Diana

Shore, Rt Hon Peter

Marshall, Jim (Leicester, S)

Smith, C. (Isl'ton S & F'sbury)

Maxton, John

Spearing, Nigel

Meale, Alan

Spellar, John

Michael, Alun

Squire, Rachel (Dunfermline W)

Michie, Mrs Ray (Argyll Bute)

Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

Miller, Andrew

Tipping, Paddy

Mullin, Chris

Tyler, Paul

O'Brien, Michael (N W'kshire)

Walley, Joan

O'Hara, Edward

Watson, Mike

O'Neill, Martin

Welsh, Andrew

Orme, Rt Hon Stanley

Williams, Alan W (Carmarthen)

Pike, Peter L.

Powell, Ray (Ogmore)

Tellers for the Noes:

Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lew'm E)

Mr. Derek Enright and Mr. Dennis Skinner.

Raynsford, Nick

Rendel, David

Question accordingly agreed to.
Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 102(9) (European Standing Committees).

LANDFILL OF WASTE
That this House takes note of European Community Documents Nos. 5953/91 and 7506/93 and the Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum submitted by the Department of the Environment on 10th January 1994, relating to the landfill of waste; endorses the Government's view that the proposal is unnecessarily detailed and prescriptive and does not take sufficient account of the principle of subsidiarity which is enshrined in the Treaty of European Union; welcomes the Government's intention to press for the removal of a number of the more detailed provisions now that it is clear that other Member States wish to take forward the Directive; supports the Government's view that carefully controlled co-disposal is an environmentally sound practice, the banning of which in the United Kingdom would be detrimental to the environment and would lead to significantly increased disposal costs for certain types of industrial waste; and endorses the Government's intention to seek a common position in Council which would allow those countries who practise controlled co-disposal to continue to do so.—[Mr. Robert G. Hughes.]
The House divided: Ayes 184, Noes 103.

Division No. 109]

[7.13 pm

AYES

Ainsworth, Peter (East Surrey)

Butler, Peter

Aitken, Jonathan

Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)

Alexander, Richard

Carrington, Matthew

Alison, Rt Hon Michael (Selby)

Carttiss, Michael

Amess, David

Cash, William

Ancram, Michael

Clappison, James

Arbuthnot, James

Clark, Dr Michael (Rochford)

Arnold, Jacques (Gravesham)

Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey

Arnold, Sir Thomas (Hazel Grv)

Coe, Sebastian

Ashby, David

Congdon, David

Atkins, Robert

Conway, Derek

Atkinson, David (Bour'mouth E)

Coombs, Simon (Swindon)

Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)

Cope, Rt Hon Sir John

Baker, Rt Hon K. (Mole Valley)

Cormack, Patrick

Baker, Nicholas (Dorset North)

Cran, James

Baldry, Tony

Curry, David (Skipton & Ripon)

Bates, Michael

Davies, Quentin (Stamford)

Blackburn, Dr John G.

Deva, Nirj Joseph

Booth, Hartley

Devlin, Tim

Boswell, Tim

Dorrell, Stephen

Bowden, Andrew

Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James

Bowis, John

Dover, Den

Brandreth, Gyles

Duncan, Alan

Brazier, Julian

Duncan-Smith, Iain

Brooke, Rt Hon Peter

Durant, Sir Anthony

Brown, M. (Brigg & Cl'thorpes)

Eggar, Tim

Browning, Mrs. Angela

Emery, Rt Hon Sir Peter

Burt, Alistair

Evans, Jonathan (Brecon)

75

Evans, Nigel (Ribble Valley)

Martin, David (Portsmouth S)

Evans, Roger (Monmouth)

Merchant, Piers

Faber, David

Mills, Iain

Fabricant, Michael

Mitchell, Andrew (Gedling)

Fairbairn, Sir Nicholas

Molyneaux, Rt Hon James

Fenner, Dame Peggy

Monro, Sir Hector

Fishburn, Dudley

Moss, Malcolm

Forman, Nigel

Nelson, Anthony

Forth, Eric

Neubert, Sir Michael

Fox, Dr Liam (Woodspring)

Newton, Rt Hon Tony

Fox, Sir Marcus (Shipley)

Nicholls, Patrick

French, Douglas

Nicholson, David (Taunton)

Gallie, Phil

Norris, Steve

Gardiner, Sir George

Ottaway, Richard

Garel-Jones, Rt Hon Tristan

Paice, James

Gillan, Cheryl

Patnick, Irvine

Gorman, Mrs Teresa

Pattie, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey

Gorst, John

Powell, William (Corby)

Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth, N)

Richards, Rod

Gummer, Rt Hon John Selwyn

Riddick, Graham

Hague, William

Robathan, Andrew

Hamilton, Rt Hon Sir Archie

Robertson, Raymond (Ab'd'n S)

Hamilton, Neil (Tatton)

Roe, Mrs Marion (Broxbourne)

Hannam, Sir John

Rowe, Andrew (Mid Kent)

Harris, David

Ryder, Rt Hon Richard

Hawkins, Nick

Sainsbury, Rt Hon Tim

Hawksley, Warren

Shaw, David (Dover)

Heald, Oliver

Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)

Hendry, Charles

Sims, Roger

Hill, James (Southampton Test)

Skeet, Sir Trevor

Hordern, Rt Hon Sir Peter

Smith, Sir Dudley (Warwick)

Howarth, Alan (Strat'rd-on-A)

Smith, Tim (Beaconsfield)

Howell, Rt Hon David (G'dford)

Speed, Sir Keith

Howell, Sir Ralph (N Norfolk)

Spicer, Michael (S Worcs)

Hughes Robert G. (Harrow W)

Spink, Dr Robert

Hunter, Andrew

Sproat, Iain

Jack, Michael

Stephen, Michael

Jackson, Robert (Wantage)

Streeter, Gary

Jenkin, Bernard

Sweeney, Walter

Jessel, Toby

Sykes, John

Johnson Smith, Sir Geoffrey

Taylor, Ian (Esher)

Jones, Gwilym (Cardiff N)

Taylor, John M. (Solihull)

Jones, Robert B. (W Hertfdshr)

Taylor, Sir Teddy (Southend, E)

Kellett-Bowman, Dame Elaine

Thomason, Roy

Key, Robert

Thompson, Patrick (Norwich N)

King, Rt Hon Tom

Thurnham, Peter

Kirkhope, Timothy

Trend, Michael

Knapman, Roger

Twinn, Dr Ian

Knight, Mrs Angela (Erewash)

Viggers, Peter

Knight, Greg (Derby N)

Walden, George

Knight, Dame Jill (Bir'm E'st'n)

Walker, Bill (N Tayside)

Knox, Sir David

Waller, Gary

Kynoch, George (Kincardine)

Wardle, Charles (Bexhill)

Lait, Mrs Jacqui

Waterson, Nigel

Lang, Rt Hon Ian

Wells, Bowen

Lawrence, Sir Ivan

Whittingdale, John

Legg, Barry

Widdecombe, Ann

Lennox-Boyd, Mark

Wiggin, Sir Jerry

Lidington, David

Willetts, David

Lightbown, David

Wilshire, David

Lloyd, Rt Hon Peter (Fareham)

Wolfson, Mark

Luff, Peter

Young, Rt Hon Sir George

Lyell, Rt Hon Sir Nicholas

MacKay, Andrew

Tellers for the Ayes:

McLoughlin, Patrick

Mr. Sydney Chapman, and Mr. Timothy Wood.

Maitland, Lady Olga

NOES

Ainsworth, Robert (Cov'try NE)

Bradley, Keith

Allen, Graham

Bray, Dr Jeremy

Alton, David

Callaghan, Jim

Banks, Tony (Newham NW)

Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge)

Barnes, Harry

Canavan, Dennis

Benn, Rt Hon Tony

Chisholm, Malcolm

Bennett, Andrew F.

Clapham, Michael

Benton, Joe

Clarke, Eric (Midlothian)

Blunkett, David

Clarke, Tom (Monklands W)

Boyes, Roland

Coffey, Ann

76

Corston, Ms Jean

McCartney, Ian

Cousins, Jim

McFall, John

Cox, Tom

McMaster, Gordon

Cryer, Bob

Maddock, Mrs Diana

Cunningham, Jim (Covy SE)

Mandelson, Peter

Dafis, Cynog

Marshall, Jim (Leicester, S)

Dalyell, Tam

Maxton, John

Davidson, Ian

Meale, Alan

Davies, Ron (Caerphilly)

Michael, Alun

Dixon, Don

Michie, Mrs Ray (Argyll Bute)

Dowd, Jim

Miller, Andrew

Enright, Derek

Mullin, Chris

Etherington, Bill

O'Brien, Michael (N W'kshire)

Ewing, Mrs Margaret

O'Hara, Edward

Faulds, Andrew

Orme, Rt Hon Stanley

Flynn, Paul

Patchett, Terry

Foster, Rt Hon Derek

Pickthall, Colin

Foster, Don (Bath)

Pike, Peter L.

Foulkes, George

Powell, Ray (Ogmore)

Fyfe, Maria

Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lew'm E)

Garrett, John

Prescott, John

George, Bruce

Raynsford, Nick

Gerrard, Neil

Rendel, David

Godman, Dr Norman A.

Robertson, George (Hamilton)

Golding, Mrs Llin

Roche, Mrs. Barbara

Griffiths, Nigel (Edinburgh S)

Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)

Gunnell, John

Salmond, Alex

Hall, Mike

Shore, Rt Hon Peter

Hardy, Peter

Short, Clare

Hill, Keith (Streatham)

Skinner, Dennis

Hinchliffe, David

Smith, C. (Isl'ton S & F'sbury)

Home Robertson, John

Spearing, Nigel

Howarth, George (Knowsley N)

Squire, Rachel (Dunfermline W)

Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N)

Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

Jackson, Glenda (H'stead)

Tyler, Paul

Jackson, Helen (Shef'ld, H)

Walley, Joan

Johnston, Sir Russell

Watson, Mike

Jones, leuan Wyn (Ynys Môn)

Welsh, Andrew

Jones, Martyn (Clwyd, SW)

Williams, Alan W (Carmarthen)

Kirkwood, Archy

Lloyd, Tony (Stretford)

Tellers for the Noes:

Llwyd, Elfyn

Mr. Andrew Mackinlay and Mr. Michael Connarty.

Lynne, Ms Liz

McAllion. John

Question accordingly agreed to.
Mrs. Margaret Ewing: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. During the last debate you ruled from the Chair, quite clearly and effectively, that who is called during the course of a debate is a matter for those who represent Madam Speaker in the Chair, and that decisions are taken on the basis of fairness. We accept that ruling. However, during the debate the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State clearly stated that my hon. Friend the Member for Banff and Buchan (Mr. Salmond) was not being called because of events that happened last week. That seems to me to have been a direct threat to the constitutional rights of Back Benchers to speak out on behalf of their constituents or on behalf of their nation.
If the records show that those were the comments of the Minister—we can look at both written and oral evidence of the debate—will the Minister be asked to withdraw those comments in the interests of fairness, which you spelled out so clearly?
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I suggest that we read the Hansard—
Mrs. Ewing: And the recordings.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I suggest that we read the Hansard recordings tomorrow.
Mrs. Ewing: And watch the video.

Sustainable Development (Rio Summit)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Andrew Mitchell.]
[Relevant documents: The First Report of the Environment Committee of Session 1992–93 on Forestry and the Environment (House of Commons Paper, 1992–93, No. 257) and the Government's Response thereto (Cm. 2259).]
7.24 pm
The Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. John Selwyn Gummer): On 25 January, the Government presented to Parliament four exceptional documents. Each of those was presented by no fewer than 16 members of the Cabinet, including my right hon. Friends with responsibilities ranging over economic and environmental protection. Among them were Trade and Industry, Agriculture and Fisheries, the Exchequer, Health, Defence, Heritage, Science, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and of course the Foreign Office with its interest in overseas development. They raise issues with the widest possible implications, for the principles set out in those papers must increasingly underpin Government policies across the board.
Unfortunately, that concern goes under a typically unlovely 20th century name: sustainable development. The term was, as one might imagine, coined by a committee, albeit a distinguished international one. The Brundtland commission in 1987 described sustainable development in this carefully defined prose:
"Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."
I prefer to say that we are working for economic growth without cheating on our children.
We must continually stress the two sides of that equation: economic development and environmental protection. Sustainable development is not anti-growth. Indeed, it cannot be achieved except through growth. It cannot be achieved except through the maintenance of a prosperous economy. It depends on the encouragement of profitable, competitive, world-class industries. For modern demands for high standards of living will not abate; they are bound to continue to increase. It is successful private enterprise which will find new ways of meeting those demands in an increasingly sustainable manner.
It is profitable companies which will develop new solutions to environmental problems—problems such as air pollution. It is profitable companies which are already selling the environmentally sound processes throughout the world, processes which have been developed here in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Andrew F. Bennett: On the subject of profitable companies, can the right hon. Gentleman resolve for me what seems to be one of the central dilemmas of the present system—capitalist or whatever one calls it—that companies have limited liability and therefore have no responsibility in the way in which they are accountable to their shareholders for the future? How can the Government find a way of building in individual responsibility for companies for the future and square that with the companies' accountability to their shareholders and their limited liability?
Mr. Gummer: The issue of environmental liability is important and it is being considered with great care in the
78
European Union. I look for the type of limited liability that is based on the duty of companies to do at any given time what any knowledgeable individual should do in pursuing policies that do not harm the environment or the future of our children.
There are arguments about how one draws that line. I would be very leery of saying to a company that it should know more about the environment than anyone else knows about it at a particular moment. The idea of insisting upon hindsight would be very dangerous, but I believe that we should be able to find a sensible answer. That is what the European Union is doing—trying to find the right answer.
Mrs. Helen Jackson: In that case, does the Secretary of State agree with and totally support the European directive that made it a requirement for companies undertaking major developments to carry out a properly worked out and costed environmental impact assessment? Alternatively, does he feel that it is sufficient to leave that as a voluntary set-up?
Mr. Gummer: The hon. Lady knows that I have been pressing hard for a whole range of environmental assessments, not least the concept of environmental audits as part and parcel of the normal activity of major and medium-sized businesses. She knows my views on those matters. There are some real problems with the details of the directive which are not to do with the issues that unite us, so I cannot say that I agree with every jot and tittle. I believe that we must deal with the whole question of environmental liability in a sensible way which will meet the proper concerns of the hon. Member for Denton and Reddish (Mr. Bennett) but will not lay on the shoulders of business impossible demands. We cannot expect business to have knowledge of something that is not discovered until some time afterwards. I look to a European answer which may be more in tune with our two requirements than is the case with answers suggested in other parts of the world.
Mr. Kevin Hughes: How does the Secretary of State square his statement with the activities of Fisons, a private company which is mining peat on Thorn and Hatfield moors in my constituency? It is ripping that lowland peat bog to pieces although it is important internationally. There has been a voluntary agreement between English Nature and Fisons since January 1992, yet it has still not been signed. I have pursued the matter since I was elected to the House and I can get no sensible answers. This site and other lowland peat bogs are very important, as most people are aware. Will the Secretary of State tell us what the Government intend to do to get the agreement signed and what they intend to do further to protect lowland peat bogs?
Mr. Gummer: The hon. Gentleman knows that when I was Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, I spent a great deal of time being particularly interested in the alternatives to peat. That is an issue which, no doubt, unites us. I shall be perfectly happy to look at the details if the hon. Gentleman gives them to me. He may then get sensible answers, if that is what he seeks. I will do my best and see what needs to be done. I am sure that he does not want me to comment on the particular details of the matter here, although I am happy to look at it and to see what we can do.
Mr. Paul Flynn: Can the Secretary of State square his statement about not cheating our children with his decision on the thermal oxide reprocessing plant, which was based on a planning inquiry held some 15 years ago? The available evidence was not published. Surely that is not just cheating our children, but cheating our grandchildren's grandchildren.
Mr. Gummer: The hon. Gentleman has not spent the time that I and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food spent in going through the details and coming to our conclusion. The case is now before the courts. The decision taken by me and my right hon. Friend was entirely consonant with my belief about not cheating our children. The hon. Gentleman must learn soon that there are choices to be made and that those choices have to be made after the most detailed discovery and discussion of what the facts are. That is what I did and I stand by it.
If we are to have the sustainable development that we want, we need profitable companies which can most afford to invest in new plant and cleaner technology. A thriving private sector will invest in the research and development that is needed to identify and understand the solutions to our environmental problems. Only from a thriving economy can we draw the resources that we need to continue to expand the health services, to invest in education, to conserve and enhance our landscape and to build our heritage—in short, to meet the proper aspirations of our people.
I start with that clear message because I believe that sustainable development must be woven into our life styles. It must not become an excuse for a puritanical belief that life must be miserable for it to be sustainable. The words "sustainable" and "development" must be kept together. It is the phenomenal success of industry over the generations which has contributed to many of the environmental problems today. It is only through business—better business—that any real solutions can be found. That is an essential part of the discovery of solutions to the problems that we face.
The British, who invented the industrial means of production, have long experience of the harm that can be done. That was best expressed in a poem by Hopkins, in which he wrote:
"Generations have trod, have trod, have trod;
And all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil
And wears man's smudge and shares man's smell: the soil
Is bare now, nor can foot feel, being shod."
Hopkins expressed his anguish at seeing the destruction and loss from industry—[Interruption.] I am sorry that the hon. Member for Knowsley, North (Mr. Howarth) has not looked at the poem recently. If he looks at it carefully, he will see that it contains a number of the demands for sustainable development that we are addressing this evening. Hopkins also possessed the vision that we need—the vision of all that remains, of all that is fundamental and of all that can be preserved. It is on that preservation and on that seeking to pass on our heritage to the next generation that the sustainable part of sustainable development depends.
Mr. Cynog Dafis: We should get something clear at the beginning of our debate. The Secretary of State seems to identify development with sustainable growth. Does he see growth to satisfy all human aspirations as being a continual and
80
everlasting process? Does he believe that, if there is a time when all reasonable human aspirations have been satisfied, it will be unreasonable to expect continuing economic growth?
Mr. Gummer: I can only point to a quotation that I used in my introduction to the document on sustainable development, which is the sensible comment made by Newman that growth is the only evidence of life. I find it difficult to conceive of a society in decline in which it is worth living. There is no known example of a period of flowering of culture and science that is also a period of economic decline. Culture and science flower at a time of economic expansion. That is a fact of history and it is one explanation why the socialist societies did not produce the scientific and cultural results that one would have expected over the years. Marxism developed a period of permanent economic decline.
I look to a society that grows. A society in decline cannot meet the reasonable demands of a civilisation in which human beings expect each year to find new ways in which to express themselves and to grow. I have no objection to that. Growth must happen in a sustainable way. It is only those who are so saddened that they cannot imagine sustainable growth whom we should fear. Those people want to use the admirable concept of sustainable development as a means of imposing on the nation their views about the restrictions that should be placed on the spirit of man. I find that another excuse for a sort of puritanism which, I hope, we shall have grown out of.
We can take pride in the United Kingdom's part in the Rio earth summit. Our environment strategy of 1990 meant that we were well placed to call on other nations to plan comprehensive strategies. We, ahead of most, had done so. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister was the first world leader to announce his firm intention of attending the summit, which helped to ensure that other prominent Heads of Government took the plunge. On that occasion, my right hon. Friend launched the Darwin initiative and the technology transfer project. He also announced our sponsorship of the "Partnerships for Change" conference.
Those initiatives have made a real contribution and we should emphasise the nature of that contribution. They have made clear our commitment to the need for a global realisation of sustainable development. Britain was committing itself to partnership and to an understanding that we in the developed countries have a special responsibility to help other nations meet their commitments. The solution has to be global, but it will not be achieved unless the partnership is universally accepted.
Mr. Tam Dalyell: May I ask the Secretary of State a question of which I gave his office notice? If there is to be a global solution, why does not the biodiversity action plan extend to the British Indian ocean territories of Chagos Archipelago, Tristan da Cunha and St. Helena, which are fantastically rich in biodiversity? If the Government are setting an example, why does not their biodiversity policy extend to the outposts of empire?
Mr. Gummer: I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving notice of that question. I have to admit that it would have been more difficult to answer if he had not done so.
At the time, there were reasons that made it difficult to put those places in the same category as the other. dependent territories, but I am seeing whether we can overcome the problem. I agree with the hon. Gentleman

81
that there is particular biodiversity in those places, as there is in many countries mentioned in the biodiversity document. He points to the fact that the demands of sustainable development, in its widest sense, will be met only by a global solution. I shall be happy to write to him about my researches.
Mr. Richard Ottaway: I agree with my right hon. Friend about the global solution; the documents deserve everyone's support. Many people, however, believe that world population growth has a fundamental role to play. Indeed, in reply to the debate on the earth summit last year, my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs said that population growth was causing considerable environmental problems. Will my right hon. Friend note that it is a matter of regret that population and planning takes up only one word in one line of the four documents? Might not it be expanded in the future?
Mr. Gummer: I am sure that we could discuss that subject for a long time. One of the problems is that what has been most damaging in many countries is not population growth but the movement of the population into urban centres from the countryside. Sometimes, people treat the issue too simplistically. In Latin America, for example, the population expressed as persons per square mile is not very high, but the number of people who have crammed into urban areas in the past 25 years, denuding the countryside, is high. The problem is complex and difficult, and it is devastating the environment. I agree that the matter should be thoroughly discussed, but it needs to be discussed on a much wider basis than only population control.
Mr. Ottaway: My right hon. Friend must accept that world population is growing at the rate of 10,000 every 55 minutes, which is not insignificant. What better opportunity is there to discuss the problem than during this debate on the documents?
Mr. Gummer: The documents' specific purpose is to deal with a number of other issues. I am not speaking for you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but I am sure that, if my hon. Friend wishes to do so, it will be in order to discuss population growth as part of sustainable development.
Mrs. Teresa Gorman: Is not it true that every new mouth born in the world has to be fed but it comes with a pair of hands and a brain? It is the sum total of human creativity and energy which has made the world a better place in which to live for the majority of people.
Mr. Gummer: I am carefully trying to avoid the type of discussion that would divide hon. Members in a different way from which we are usually divided. I believe that human beings have an individual validity. That leads me to be extremely careful about the promotion of certain methods to deal with sustainable development, but that is better left for another debate. I am pleased that, on such a subject, my hon. Friend and I are on the same side.
Mr. Alan W. Williams: I liked the right hon. Gentleman's redefinition of cheating children. How does the Government's policy on North sea oil and gas fit with their concept of sustainable development? Does not the dash for gas cheat our children?
Mr. Gummer: I do not think so. If we did not make the changes, the possibility of meeting targets on carbon and achieving a cleaner environment would be much reduced. It would not be reasonable to say that the Government's policy does not make a real contribution towards sustainable development.
Mr. Michael Bates: Will my right hon. Friend give way?
Mr. Gummer: I must get a little further into my speech before I give way to my hon. Friend.
Our proposals were designed to underline the commitment of the United Kingdom to a global partnership with the rest of the world. As a former Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, I am aware of the considerable part that is being played by the trustees of Kew, who are helping nations that would otherwise not have the ability or scientific base to provide the information that they need to begin their sustainable development programmes.
On his return from Rio, it was again the Prime Minister at the Lisbon and Munich summits who persuaded other European Union and G7 Heads of Government to undertake to produce plans for sustainable development. Since then, the United Kingdom has secured election to the newly established United Nations commission on sustainable development. The United Kingdom is one of the first to produce the promised sustainable development strategy and the first to publish a programme under the climate change convention.
That sustained commitment shows the Government's seriousness about building for our long-term future. I know that our aspirations are widely shared.
We need to show in all that we do the recognition that it is only by a world partnership that we can achieve our aims. My predecessor built a good relationship between the United Kingdom and India and, through that, between the north and the south. We have expanded that and there are now many lines of communication between the south and member states of the European Union. I hope that, together, we can carry that policy forward.
One of the remarkable achievements of last year's meeting in New York was that the suspicion between north and south was considerably allayed and many of our previous arguments were resolved. That is a helpful development and we shall seek to extend it in meetings in Geneva and again in New York. I believe that the Indian Minister will seek to do much the same at a meeting in Agra, which could do much to break down the sensitivities of new nations, which feel that it is hard for them to present such documents, because they may be criticised by older nations. We have accepted the principle that we should be prepared to criticise each other, which is a major breakthrough, in order to achieve the best possible answer.
It is particularly beneficial to have not only the clear commitment of the Government but the personal commitment of the Prime Minister. I hope that the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) will ensure that the Labour party leader will make the same commitment. It would be good to have a statement of clear support from him. I have difficulty recalling the last time that the Leader of the Opposition made a speech or the issue, but perhaps now is the right time for him to do so. The attitudes set out in the documents must have widespread support. It is inevitable that those who are

83
already convinced and who are campaigning for one environmental cause or another will say that we have not gone far enough. It is right that they should goad us, but it would be wrong for us to accept their assessment without reserve. Everyone has accepted that this is the right direction and we can demonstrate that the strategy that we have set out measures up to the importance of the issue.
Mrs. Anne Campbell: Will not the deregulation initiative which is being promoted by the Government seriously weaken the action on environmental improvement? I know that the document says that economic instruments will be used in preference to regulations, but does the Minister agree that what should be used is that which is most effective? Will he also consider not necessarily going for economic instruments in every single case?
Mr. Gummer: I agree absolutely that we must use the most effective measures. Deregulation is not about getting rid of necessary regulations, but unnecessary ones.
The hon. Lady should ask hon. Members on the Opposition Front Bench, who have steadfastly refused to support the fiscal measures that are necessary to deliver the carbon dioxide commitments—[Interruption.] It is all very well for the Opposition. They know perfectly well that they could not deliver what is needed for carbon dioxide emissions without the fiscal measures that we have taken. The Opposition are dishonest and hypocritical if they will not stand up and say which taxes they would increase to ensure that we can reach the carbon dioxide targets.
Mrs. Helen Jackson rose—
Mr. Gummer: I will give way to the hon. Lady if she will tell me which taxes she would raise. If she will not tell me, she should not be talking about this part of the debate.
Mrs. Jackson: Will the Secretary of State tell us the specific targets for the reduction in carbon emissions which the Government are prepared to set by the year 2000?
Mr. Gummer: The hon. Lady is short-sighted if she does not know that. We have signed up to the international targets and we have said exactly how we will achieve them. The Labour party has refused to accept the measures that are needed to reach those targets. What is worse is that the Labour party and, I believe, the hon. Lady herself want to get rid of the electricity which is produced by nuclear power. That would mean that we would have to tax even more heavily and would have to cut even more to meet those targets.
If the hon. Lady looks at the Labour party's policy on nuclear power, she will see the problem that it presents. Nuclear power currently provides about 22 per cent. of the United Kingdom's electricity. If that were to be replaced, the United Kingdom's emissions of carbon dioxide would be between 6 million and 15 million tonnes of carbon higher. How would the hon. Lady deal with that? Where would she get an alternative for that? What taxes would she put up to damp down the use of energy? The hon. Lady and her party would have to spend about double what is proposed.
The trouble with the Labour party is that it is generous in its generalities and it is careful never to make any
84
particular promises. The hon. Lady has again betrayed the facts. The Labour party has no policy, except promising the best and promising that we can get it all without a single increase in taxation and without any disadvantage to anybody anywhere in the world; or, at least, anybody in the world who has a vote.
Dame Elaine Kellett-Bowman: Does my right hon. Friend agree that some of the hopes that were placed on wind energy are proving not to be as fruitful as was expected? Does not that form of energy have substantial environmental disadvantages?
Mr. Gummer: My constituency contains two nuclear power stations and many of the people who campaigned against the building of Sizewell B asked us to replace it with wind energy. I am interested that many of those same people are busy writing to me today to say that I should oppose any possibility of putting up a wind farm anywhere in Suffolk. I note, therefore, that there are many people who are always against everything, but who are never in favour of anything. Those people then complain if they do not have the electricity that they need to keep the old warm and to keep the hospitals and schools running.
The Opposition would be much more credible if they honourably told us which taxes the hon. Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown) would allow them to increase in an unforeseeable future in which they might possibly gain power. The public would respect them much more. I wish to hear which taxes the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury would impose to meet the requirements in respect of which we have imposed the taxation which the hon. Gentleman now opposes. What extra taxation would the hon. Gentleman propose to cover the nuclear deficit when he removes the possibility of any nuclear use?
Perhaps the Opposition have changed their policy and they have a new policy on nuclear power.
Mr. Alan W. Williams rose—
Mr. Gummer: I have been generous in giving way. I will give way to the hon. Gentleman if he will tell me which taxes the Opposition would want to increase. Will he tell me that?
Mr. Williams: Yes.
Mr. Gummer: Then I will give way.
Mr. Williams: The Secretary of State has talked at length about the matter. The right hon. Gentleman is trying to justify VAT on fuel—[HON. MEMBERS: "Which taxes?"] I am coming to it. He is trying to justify VAT on fuel on the basis that it will reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Would not the Secretary of State have more credibility if he told us that the money was to be earmarked for energy efficiency schemes which would reduce carbon dioxide emissions? Is not the money being used to cure the public relations problems of the Government?
Mr. Gummer: The hon. Gentleman will not get away with that. That is the last refuge of—I will not say what, because it would be unparliamentary. He knows in his heart of hearts as a geologist and an expert, as he often remarks, that the policy of his party is incredible. What does he say? He says that our policy would be more

85
credible if we not only bring in the taxes to which the Opposition are opposed, but spend the money raised on something that the hon. Gentleman thinks is a good idea.
I remind the hon. Gentleman of what we are spending the money on. There is a considerable increase in the money which is going to every pensioner, so that they can now get assistance towards the major work involved in having an energy-efficient home. We are dealing with 500,000 homes this year. The hon. Gentleman knows that, but he does not mention it.
I gave way to the hon. Gentleman on a false prospectus. He made it clear to me that he was going to tell me which taxes the Opposition were to raise. The hon. Gentleman was going to tell me how the Opposition would deal with the fact that less carbon is put into the atmosphere by nuclear energy. He did not tell us, because the Labour party does not know. If it does know, it dare not tell us.
Labour Members would then find themselves in the same position as the most dishonourable case, which is the Liberal Democrat party. The Liberal Democrats, of course, are always green in words. The Liberal Democrats were in favour of the extension of VAT to fuel and then they changed their minds. Why? They changed their minds because there was a by-election in which it was inconvenient to stand up for their principles. I note that principles in the Liberal Democrat party are convenient only as long as they are electorally sound. The party has shown the same kind of principles on green issues which it showed on the racial issue in Tower Hamlets. Whenever there is a problem that can be got out of by winning a vote, the Liberals will be there.
The party knows perfectly that it would have to tax to meet carbon dioxide requirements. Liberal Democrats are very good at saying how green they are, but they never say how they would tax. They use generalities, but they never mention facts when it comes to how it will affect somebody who might vote for them.
Mr. Simon Hughes rose—
Mr. Gummer: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will explain why his party dropped the proposal for VAT on fuel.
Mr. Hughes: The Secretary of State spoils a debate on important issues with this banter, which all hon. Members could enter into. [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] I will answer the right hon. Gentleman's question. He knows perfectly well that he has been entirely selective about recent political history. We did consult before the election on whether VAT was a sensible option for dealing with environmental issues. We rejected it as an option. It was not in our manifesto for the general election and it has not been in any since, because we have been persuaded by the arguments. I am sure that the message of the debate will be that if the Government consulted more widely and listened to the answers more closely, they would have a sounder policy.
Mr. Gummer: It is fascinating that the hon. Gentleman should say that, but he has not mentioned that he would introduce another tax, which would have the same effect, but which was not mentioned to the electorate. That part of the manifesto was kept very quiet. The Liberals published
86
all kinds of leaflets which suggested that they would manage the green goods without paying the difficult price for that.
Mr. Hughes: No, no.
Mr. Gummer: The hon. Gentleman cannot say, "No, no". I have raised this issue for a simple reason: if we are to win the battle for sustainable development, we must be honest about the cost. We cannot deliver that development unless we accept that real costs are involved. The Government have committed themselves to insist upon those costs and to help those least able to pay them.
The system that we presented was much more generous than that which the Labour party suggested was the minimum necessary. We do not go for the minimum of help; perfectly rightly, we have done better than that. Does the Labour party support the necessary taxes that must be imposed? Does the Liberal party come out and say, "Yes. We would tax. This is the amount and this is how it would affect people"? Do the Liberals put that in their manifestos for by-elections? No, they do not.
I have some hope for the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury, because we agree about many issues, but I have no hope for the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes), because the Liberals would have to turn back the history of 50 years if they started to tell the truth about taxation.
Mr. Hughes rose—
Mr. Gummer: The hon. Gentleman will have plenty of opportunity to talk about this issue.
Mr. Hughes: The right hon. Gentleman does not want to listen to the argument.
Mr. Gummer: I will be very happy to hear the argument and no doubt we will hear in extenso—[HON. MEMBERS: "Ad nauseam."] If we deal with sustainable development, we must make sure that we do not pick out particular aspects and avoid the holistic approach that we need to take. We cannot win the battle on climate change unless we are prepared to charge the cost. That cost must be clear and we must seek to ensure that it does not fall on those who are least able to pay it. We must make the measures effective if we are to deliver the end.
There is more to it than just fiscal measures. We need to insist on the role of individuals. The Government must set a clear example, and so must the House. I am pleased that the House has decided to meet the same targets as have been set for Government offices. The House of Commons and the House of Lords will meet the 15 per cent. reduction in energy use. I met the man responsible and he is satisfied that the programme is well on course.
The Ministers in each Department responsible for green issues are also responsible for delivering the departmental targets. At the end of the period concerned, we should have achieved the 15 per cent. reduction that we need. I hope that, among other things, the temperature at which the House generally works will be lowered. I believe that it is higher than it need be.
The only way in which we can, ultimately, achieve our ends and sustain them is not only by setting an example, which we must, but by harnessing the enthusiasm, the willingness to contribute and the simple common-sense actions of countless individuals nationwide. Those small things, which everyone can do, make a huge difference to

87
our achievements. It is true that while every household is responsible for 7·5 tonnes of carbon going into the atmosphere, that emission could be reduced by 1 tonne if people adopted relatively small measures. Many may point the finger at each one of those measures and say that they do not seem much, but if each household, out of 20 million, were to adopt those simple measures, the difference could be enormous.
By using less central heating, by using only that amount of water that needs to be boiled for a particular function, by using energy-saving bulbs and by walking, when possible, instead of driving, a great deal could be achieved. That is why we have set an example not only by what we are doing in Government buildings and offices, but by helping pensioners to provide the insulation necessary for their homes.
Those measures represent just 30 per cent. of our target. We must consider transport, which is an important part of the equation, although it is responsible for less carbon than that produced from domestic sources. The car is perhaps the single most emancipating manufactured product yet devised. We need to retain the freedom which car owning has provided. [Laughter.] It is all right for Opposition Members to laugh, but the car has given to many people opportunities that they never had before. Those opportunites should not be laughed at. The Opposition will find that the electorate does not share their laughter, because people feel that the motor car has been and is a great force for good.
The car must be the servant, not the master. The issue is how we control the car sensibly within our society. That is why the sustainable development plan states frankly:
"If people continue to exercise their choice as they are at present—and there are no other changes—the resulting traffic growth would have unacceptable consequences for both the environment and the economy of certain parts of the country—and could be very difficult to reconcile with overall sustainable development goals."
There are several approaches to solving that. One is to increase the cost of travel by road. The Government have not baulked at that responsibility, but I have not noticed enthusiasm from the Labour party to support the extra duty on petrol, over and above the cost of living, to help towards that. I have not noticed that, because it is embarrassing to support tough, necessary measures; it is much easier to claim the credit for the advantages that those measures achieve and to make generalised anti-road comments.
Ms Joan Walley: Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Gummer: I am happy to give way if the hon. Lady will tell me that she will support that tax.
Ms Walley: In view of what the right hon. Gentleman has just told the House, do I take it that he and the Secretary of State for Transport intend to review the widening proposals for the M25?
Mr. Gummer: What an interesting answer. I have still not heard an answer about the tax. The Opposition do not want to answer that question. They do not want to accept the fact that they want all the easy popularity, but they do not want to meet the bill. Meeting the bill for sustainable
88
development points up the difference between hypocrisy and reality. I will not, of course, aim either of those words at anyone because that would be unparliamentary.
The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) knows perfectly well that a public inquiry is being held about the future of the M25. That is the proper way to conduct business. I am sure that she would want the public to have their say, and no doubt they will, and a decision will be made as a result.
A second solution is within our hands as individuals, because we can choose to use the car less or more sensibly. Many people already make a point of doing that and I believe that many others will do so. Technical measures can also help, such as the manufacture of cleaner motor vehicles and I pay tribute to those who have already done so much in that regard.
We can also, however, employ the land use planning system to influence the siting of new shops and offices. Where we choose to work, where we go to enjoy ourselves and where we go to shop are significant choices for our use of the car. They also make a significant impact on urban quality.
Understanding what is needed to improve the quality of cities and towns requires us to look at issues in a broader way. How people shop relates to how they use their cars. How local authorities respond influences whether businesses will invest in town centres. Good urban design demands vitality in the urban property market. That vitality flows from people's decision to shop in town centres. In turn, that depends on a positive approach to planning and managing town centres. That is a job for local authorities, because they must be imaginative in enabling things to happen. They should not say no to a substantial new development without making clear their reasons. Whenever possible, they should point to an alternative way of making provision for economic development. They must adopt a positive approach.
Local authorities must work with local people, landowners and developers to identify the right local strategy. Those strategies in local plans must take account of the national priorities set out by the Government last year in planning policy guidance note 6. That policy is intended to help to deliver town centres that serve the whole community. Those centres should provide a focus for retail development where competing businesses are near enough for shoppers to compare prices and benefits from competition. They should be places in which a series of different uses are encouraged. They would then be attractive to local residents, shoppers and visitors because they would have lively restaurants, cafes, culture and entertainments, as well as shopping facilities and places for people to live.
I want us to improve the quality of our towns so that we can reduce the pressures of urban sprawl and the pressures to develop green-field sites. That means encouraging new shopping developments in locations where they can reinforce town centres—in town centres or within walking distance of them. Where they would result in an unacceptable impact on a town centre, it may be necessary to discourage development on green-field sites on the edge of cities.
I wish to mention a further development that has resulted from the document on sustainable development. Month by month, we shall have new examples of the steadily developing strategy outlined in the document. Today, the Producer Responsibility Industry Group,

89
representing 28 major companies in the packaging world, presented to me some new packaging proposals. I have the document in front of me. It must be considered further by both Government and industry. Businesses must decide whether to follow its recommendations or face the prospect of a much more bureaucratic scheme proposed by legislation in response to the European Union packaging directive.
The Government must also reserve their position on the plan until industry is sure that it complies with United Kingdom and European Union competition law and until appropriate authorisations have been received from the relevant competition authorities. But I have no hesitation in endorsing the way in which the industry group has approached the challenge. Recycling is a crucial part of any sensible sustainable development strategy. The plan would nearly double the recycling and recovery of packaging waste from 32 per cent. in 1993 to 58 per cent. by 2000. It would bring convenient access to recycling to 80 per cent. of homes by the end of the century, either through home collection or close-to-home bank schemes. Some 15 per cent. of households—3·5 million homes—will be covered by 1996.
The plan includes a clear commitment to expand markets for recycled materials. Having looked hard at potential markets, we believe that recycling of plastics waste is projected to increase from 5 to 16 per cent. by 2000. The plan also safeguards some of the recycling activities most seriously threatened by the impact of foreign schemes, such as United Kingdom paper collection and reprocessing. I shall want to look again at some of the detailed targets, but I believe that the plan is a major step forward.
Mr. Robert B. Jones: As my right hon. Friend knows, the Select Committee on the Environment is midway through its inquiry into recycling. Will he confirm that the producer responsibility group document will be made available to the Select Committee before it reaches its conclusion?
Mr. Gummer: I am happy to do that. It will also be discussed widely by the industry and I hope that we shall have a concerted agreement at the end.
Mr. Bennett: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Will you confirm that, if a Minister refers to a document in his speech, he has a duty to place a copy in the Vote Office? There is none there at present. As the Minister has referred to the document, does not he have a duty to produce it for the House?
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Geoffrey Lofthouse): Yes, that is the usual procedure. I hope that the Secretary of State will make the necessary arrangements.
Mr. Gummer: I am happy to place the document in the Library and the Vote Office. I apologise to the hon. Member for Denton and Redditch if he feels that I have not already done so, but I received the document only this afternoon. Once I receive full details, I shall certainly make them available to the hon. Gentleman. The document will be in the public domain—it is the group's document, not mine—and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman would not have wished me to hide the information from the House.
We should ensure, almost immediately, that the new arrangements made so happily through the Uruguay round make it clear that those policies work closely with our
90
environmental policies. We agreed that in Rio and, on the international stage, we contribute to work under way in OECD, the UN Conference on Trade and Development, and the United Nations Environment Programme to examine the interaction between trade and environment policies. I recently had a meeting with my French, German and Spanish colleagues to see how best the European Community can contribute to that important aspect of our policy.
We have announced that the Government will put forward their policies not just for internal criticism but for outside monitoring, which is why there is a panel on sustainable development with such distinguished members. We shall also have a round table on sustainable development, whose proceedings and attitudes will be determined by its members, not laid down in advance. We are reaching out to ensure that the citizens' campaign will reach every village and town in the country, so that sustainable development becomes part of everyone's policy. That is essential if we are to achieve sustainable development.
I began my speech with the first half of a quotation from Hopkins' poem. Some hon. Members will be longing to hear the end of that poem, for at least it holds out hope of change—
Mr. George Howarth: And hope of the end of the speech.
Mr. Gummer: As the hon. Gentleman says, it also holds out hope of the end of my speech.
The poem says:
"And for all this, nature is never spent;
There lives the dearest freshness deep down things;
And though the last lights off the black West went
Oh, morning, at the brown brink eastward, springs—
Because the Holy Ghost over the bent
World broods with warm breast and with ah! bright wings."
There is much to give us hope for a real renaissance in our attitude to the environment in which we live and breathe. Throughout the world, there is a determination to achieve sustainable development, not to cheat our children. Not only in the rich west but in the poor south we must find a way through on a global basis. But none of us can be excused from accepting our individual responsibility for contributing to sustainable development.
8.15 pm
Mr. Chris Smith: I welcome the opportunity to debate the documents and sustainable development. I am pleased that the Government say that they want to take Rio forward. It is good to see them trying to go forwards rather than backwards for a change.
The Government announced the four documents with a great fanfare of trumpets at the Banqueting house. Again tonight, there has been much trumpeting from the Secretary of State about how wonderful the Government are being. But what do the documents really add up to? The answer, I am afraid, is very little. They contain a reiteration of existing statements and commitments, but little that is new. The Government have laboured mightily and brought forth 567 pages, two committees and advice on opening your curtains when you get up in the morning.
The two committees are all well and good, but they do not add up to a real vision of a sustainable future for our country or the rest of the earth that we all share. May I

91
highlight some general failures in this exercise by the Government? First, they have failed to look with real imagination to the long term. They have recognised the need to do so, but have not done it. The documents contain no sense within the Government of a real concept of where our country could be in 50 or 100 years' time.
There is much talk about the need for research, consultation and waiting for evidence before making decisions, but no sense of direction. If the Government had a sense of direction, they would have recognised the importance of global actions and solutions, especially in relation to the developing world.
I am pleased that my hon. Friend the Member for Monklands, West (Mr. Clarke) is here, because he pointed out that, following the Budget, the Government are freezing the amount that our country is spending, in cash terms, on overseas aid. Let us put that into the equation when discussing global solutions to sustainability. Let us also put the general agreement on tariffs and trade into the global arena. I was pleased that the Secretary of State—this was a first for the Government—acknowledged today that we need to put the environment into the GATT process. When the Prime Minister came back from the Uruguay round, he was asked about that by my right hon. and learned Friend the Leader of the Opposition. This, in fact, answers the question that the Secretary of State asked today about my right hon. and learned Friend, who asked the Prime Minister about the impact of the outcome of the GATT negotiations on the environment. The Prime Minister replied that no one thought there was a problem. Everyone accepted, he said, that the environment was happily taken care of.
Of course, the environment has not been taken care of. Many people are rightly worried that the GATT process will trump environmental protection in international agreements. We want the environment and its needs written firmly and clearly into the remit of the new world trading organisation.
Mr. Robert B. Jones: I am all in favour of bringing the environment into the GATT round, but many of the most vociferous opponents of the idea are countries of the south which believe that it would be used as a cloak for protectionism by the rich countries of the west.
Mr. Smith: The hon. Gentleman misreads the feelings of many countries in the south. They want to be able to exercise protection of their environment themselves; at the moment, the GATT rules do not allow them to. If environmental protection became an excuse for protectionism, that would not be a good thing. Equally, we must not allow the cause of free trade to lead to the unnecessary degradation of the global environment.
Perhaps the most disappointing part of the documents is that which deals with the prospect of catastrophic climatic change and the impact of carbon dioxide emissions leading up to and beyond the year 2000. Let us consider the steps leading up to the year 2000 first. The Secretary of State made a great deal of that in his speech. Perhaps, then, he will tell us where he believes the savings of carbon dioxide emissions will come from through the work of the Energy Saving Trust. That trust has £6 million from British Gas and a promise of £25 million from the regional electricity companies—and that is it. Is this the trust that is going to
92
yield up about a quarter of the prospective savings of carbon dioxide to which the Secretary of State tells us the Government are already firmly committed? I suspect that we need to hear a great deal more about the funding for, and the actions of, the Energy Saving Trust before we can believe that the Government intend to deliver their commitment.
Dr. Robert Spink: Does the hon. Gentleman recall that in February 1993 he told Green Magazine that Labour had been thinking of a number of small but effective tax measures, which included increasing VAT on environmentally unfriendly products? On which products would he put VAT; and does he consider coal-fired power stations, with their production of carbon dioxide, environmentally friendly?
Mr. Smith: I can tell the hon. Gentleman exactly what our document, published in 1991, said—that we would favour putting small increases of VAT on items such as heavy metal batteries and materials containing CFCs. If the hon. Gentleman cannot tell the difference between a heavy metal battery and a domestic gas bill, I am afraid that he is even more stupid than I thought.
The Government's bogus argument is that VAT on domestic fuel is a green measure, intended to change environmental behaviour. In fact, of course, it is designed purely to raise money for the Exchequer—but they do not tell us that. Putting up the price of domestic energy does not change the behaviour of the overwhelming majority, who carry on using the same amount of energy as before, but paying more for it. The people who give up using some of their energy are the people who cannot afford to carry on using it. So the entire burden of a minimal reduction in energy use and carbon dioxide emissions is borne by those who are least able to bear it. That is what happens when VAT is imposed on domestic fuel.
Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the Select Committee on the Environment carried out a study of energy efficiency and recommended that the Energy Saving Trust be funded to the tune of £1·5 billion. Where does the hon. Gentleman think that sort of money should come from? If he thinks it should come from the utilities, will he make it clear to the British people that their electricity and gas bills will have to rise considerably to meet that target?
Mr. Smith: First, the hon. Gentleman should ask the Secretary of State that question. Secondly, it seems to have escaped his notice that the regional electricity companies are making about £1·5 billion profits each year. Thirdly, if the hon. Gentleman had properly read the Opposition's proposals for a national programme of energy efficiency work, he would know that what we propose does not require a single penny's contribution from the taxpayer. Nevertheless, under the sort of programme that we suggest, with a small premium increase in the unit cost of gas and electricity only for people who have had energy efficiency work carried out for free, four times as much carbon dioxide could be saved as the Government claim they will save by means of imposing VAT.
Mr. Dafis: Can the hon. Gentleman confirm one little statistic? Is it not true that Government receipts from 17·5 per cent. VAT on domestic fuel will amount to £2·5 billion?
Mr. Smith: Correct. But the Government will spend only about 2 per cent. of that on the home energy efficiency scheme. So the Secretary of State's claims to generosity—all that extra money going into energy efficiency—amount to nothing more than one fiftieth of the sum that the Government intend to take away from people.
Mr. Jim Cunningham: Does my hon. Friend recall that when the Paymaster General was asked, during consideration of last year's Finance Bill, what percentage of the VAT would go on energy measures, he said that he was not prepared to answer hypothetical questions? Does not that nail the lie being used to mislead the public about the reasons behind the VAT?
Mr. Smith: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. It was noticeable that the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, introducing his Budget in March last year, said not a word about any increase in funding for energy efficiency work. Finally, however, the Government woke up to the fact that they had to be seen to be doing something to mitigate the impact of VAT, and that they did in November.
Dr. Spink: The hon. Gentleman is wriggling and refusing to answer a simple question. I shall ask him once again. Which taxes will he enforce or raise to reduce CO2 emissions? It is a simple question. Please may we have a simple answer?
Mr. Smith: I have already given a simple answer to the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Clifton-Brown). By establishing a national programme of energy efficiency work, such as we propose, one can save four times the amount of energy that the Government claim to be saving through the imposition of value added tax, without imposing a single penny of extra tax.
Perhaps the hon. Member for Castle Point (Dr. Spink) can tell us why—even on the Government's figures—Britain's carbon dioxide emissions will be reduced by less than 1 per cent. through the imposition of VAT on fuel. The Government are imposing the maximum social pain and distress on millions of people for absolutely minimal environmental benefit.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr. Smith: I must speed on, so I shall not allow any more interventions at this stage.
What will happen after the year 2000? The Government's calculations for what they will do in the run up to 2000 are paltry, but when we ask what they have in store beyond that year they say:
"Further international action may well be necessary. The current Convention measures will need to be reviewed in the light of the further scientific evidence that has been sought."
In other words, they have no clue what will happen beyond the year 2000.
At the moment, all we have from the Government is a commitment, which they show little sign of being able to meet as carbon dioxide emissions are rising, to have emissions at the 1990 level in the year 2000. We have no commitment beyond that, not even one to stabilise at the level from the year 2000. The documents do not give us any further information.
The first general failing of the documents is that they have no real long-term vision. The second general failure is that the Government do not understand, as they should, that environment protection can be an opportunity and not merely a threat and a burden. Throughout the documents,
94
the environment is seen as something that imposes penalties and dampens prosperity, but it can be a stimulus for prosperity. It is estimated that the global market in environmental products and technologies will be worth at least $300 billion a year by the turn of the century. I hope that, instead of harping all the time on the difficulties of meeting some of the environmental challenges, the Government will start to think about the inherent opportunities.
Thirdly, the documents fail to understand that sustainability is about social equity as well as environmental probity. The Government have totally failed to grasp that fact and their attempt to claim VAT as an environmental measure is precisely in that category. A sustainable approach does not mean that one simply ignores people's needs, especially the needs of those least able to cope with some of the changes that may be necessary.
The Government's documents are, therefore, defective in their wider vision, but the detail also leaves a lot to be desired. There are four areas of concern. First, the roads programme; even the Government are beginning to show some signs of recognising that the development of public transport and not the building of more roads provides the key to a proper sustainable transport policy. Will they, therefore, admit that they were wrong to desecrate Twyford down? If the Secretary of State is so fond of Gerard Manley Hopkins—as, indeed, am I—he will know the closing lines of that wonderful poem, "Inversnaid", where Hopkins writes:
"What would the world be, once bereft
Of wet and wildness? Let them be left
O let them be left, wildness and wet:
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet."
Will the Secretary of State apply that to Twyford down; to the 161 sites of special scientific interest that are due to be destroyed by the roads programme; and to the 500 SSSIs that have been damaged during the past three years? Will he apply those principles to the sites that we ought to be declaring inviolable for ever, as part of our implementation of the European Union's habitats directive? Will he apply that to the parts of the home counties where the M25 is to be widened?
If the Secretary of State is serious about putting sustainability at the heart of our transport policies, he will launch a proper and thorough review of the roads programme and its impact on the environment.
I touched on the second area of concern when I mentioned habitats and biodiversity. The hedgerows are one of the most important forms of habitat in this country. The Government said in their manifesto at the last election—we know that they said a lot of things which have since turned out not to be the case—that they would legislate to provide statutory protection for our hedgerows. So, what has happened? A Conservative Back-Bench Member valiantly tabled a private Member's Bill to do precisely that, but it was talked out by some of his fellow Conservative Back Benchers.
My hon. Friend the Member for Wentworth (Mr. Hardy), who has pursued such matters vigorously since he came to the House, produced a Bill last Friday which would have provided protection for hedgerows, but the hon. Member for Clwyd, North-West (Mr. Richards), who sits on the Conservative Benches, objected and the Bill fell.

95
The deregulation task force document produced by the Government states in recomendation No. 314 that the task force recommends:
"Abandon the proposed introduction of hedgerow legislation."
That recommendation is, as yet, undenied.
Mr. Robert B. Jones: The hon. Gentleman is putting the argument rather one-sidedly. He should recall that three years ago I tried to introduce a private Member's Bill to protect hedgerows. The Bill was not blocked by any of my Conservative colleagues or the Conservative Whip but by the hon. Gentleman's hon. Friend, the Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen).
Mr. Smith: If the hon. Gentleman wishes to reintroduce his Bill, I can assure him that he will have full co-operation from the Opposition to ensure that it gets through. We have made the Government that offer on several occasions. If the Government want to introduce legislation—perhaps as part of their long-delayed legislation to pave the way for an environmental protection agency—we would give them full and speedy co-operation.
Perhaps the hon. Member for Hertfordshire, West (Mr. Jones) and the Secretary of State could tell us whether it is the Conservative party manifesto commitment on hedgerows that will stand or the deregulation task force proposal. We have lost one fifth of our hedgerows during the past 10 years and it is about time that they had proper statutory protection.
The third area of concern is forestry. At the moment, Britain is one of the least forested countries in Europe. There has been a remarkable improvement in the planting, conservation and access policies of the Forestry Commission during recent years. The Government appear to accept, because they signed up to the forest principles strategy at Rio, that we need a proper forestry strategy. But there is no prospect of a national strategy if, as the Government appear to wish, the Forestry Commission is to be privatised.
An interdepartmental working party is already beavering away and is due to report to Ministers about now. Ministers are due to make their decisions on the future of the Forestry Commission in the next few weeks. We in the Labour party insist that the Forestry Commission, in whole or in part, should remain in the public sector. It should not be privatised because, if it were, public access, the conservation values of forest maintenance and management and the possiblity of having a genuine national strategy for the future of our forests would be diminished. Perhaps the Minister will give us a commitment that the Government will abandon any plans to privatise the Forestry Commission.
The fourth issue on which progress could be made is bathing water standards. At the moment, our bathing water and our beaches fail to meet the European Community directive legal levels for quality in far too many cases. If one looks around the regions, one will see that, in the south-west, 13 per cent. of beaches fail to meet the standards. In southern England, outside London, 24 per cent. fail to meet legal standards. In the north-west, 67 per cent.—two thirds—of all the beaches have bathing water that fails to meet the legal requirements laid down in agreed European directives.
Mr. Robert B. Jones: The hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) seems to be placing much reliance on European legislation. Surely he must remember the Environment Select Committee's unanimous condemnation of the directive for being poorly based on science. That has been reiterated by the Director General of Water Services. Furthermore, a substantial piece of work has been done by Which? exposing how it is enforced in Europe and here.
Mr. Smith: I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman, unusually, is mistaken. He is getting his directives mixed up. What he said might well be true as far as the drinking water directive is concerned, but it is not true in relation to the bathing water directive. If he wants a practical demonstration of that, I have with me a sample of bathing water, culled only yesterday, from a beach in Cornwall. Its contents are rather unpleasant. This is the bathing water
What are the Government up to? They are in what one might call a recidivists' alliance with the new right-wing Government in France, trying to get the bathing water directive and a whole series of others repealed, withdrawn or amended. The bathing water directive is there on the memorandum that is circulating between the two Governments.
The Prime Minister may believe, as he told us when he came back from the Council in December, that it is perfectly all right for us to swim in sewage when we go to the seaside in this country. I do not share that belief. I want to ensure that our bathing water is improved rather than diminished in quality. I want to see the bathing water directive upheld and not dismantled. I have the proof of why it is needed.
I have identified only four of the many specific issues that could be advanced. We must see much better progress, much more conviction and some signs of real action if the Government are to be believed in what they say about sustainability; otherwise, these documents and the Government's statements on sustainable development will remain simply statements, worthy statements perhaps, but with no sign of action and no real vision underlining them.
8.45 pm
Mr. Robert B. Jones: I am glad to be able to follow the hon. Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith), because he and I were old colleagues on the Environment Select Committee many years before he reached his present distinguished role, which I hope he will enjoy for many years.
I should remind the hon. Member that the Environment Select Committee has produced reports not only on the drinking water directive but on the bathing water directive as well. The unanimous findings were that the directive was not well based in science. As I said a moment ago, that has been upheld by what the Director General of Ofwat has said, but also by an interesting paper—I commend it to the hon. Gentleman—produced by the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology.
One example of where the directive is defective in science is that the parameter for the incidence of salmonella—as laid down in the bathing water directive—is nil, not 0·001 or 0·000001 per cent. As a third of all

97
gulls carry salmonella, any beach that is near gulls could pass only if those gulls were shot. I am sure that that is not a method which the hon. Gentleman would commend. Like him, I am totally committed to improving the standard of bathing waters, but the matter should be addressed by reference to proper health threats, not by simply framing directives in poorly produced scientific language.
I feel a bit left out of the debate, because I have not brought my book of Hopkins poetry with me. I will not venture down that road. One of the most striking things about the debate is that if it had been held in the aftermath of Rio, approximately two years ago, there would have been far more press attention and far more hon. Members in the House.
We have gone a great way since Rio in all sorts of ways, but I am afraid that, in public perceptions and interest, we seem to have gone backwards. That confirms my general impression that the media are more interested in issues that are trivial and transitory than those that are important and long-term, as undoubtedly this issue is.
Rio was accompanied by much razzmatazz. None of us could have woken up and not heard—if we listened to the "Today" programme—Brian Redhead and others lecturing us on all these extremely important issues and saying what a critical conference it was. Some things have come out of it, but it is a painfully slow business.
There is much common ground between Opposition Members and Conservative Members. I include Ministers in that, because trying to take forward international agreements when one knows that some who signed up to them did so because they wanted press attention at the time of the razzmatazz, yet had no intention whatever of honouring them, must be a frustrating process.
Some criticism was made of the United Kingdom at the time for wanting to look at the fine print of the various agreements before signing up. As so often under those circumstances, the United Kingdom is only the second country to publish a detailed response. I am reminded of a report on acid rain, of which the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury and I were co-authors. We said that the Government should join the 30 per cent. club. They did not, but they were very confident that they would achieve the club's objectives. That has come to pass. But has the hon. Gentleman looked recently at the record of all the countries that signed up? Quite a few subsequently said, "Sorry; we meant to achieve that goal, but we did not manage to."
I had the honour to be one of the four Members of Parliament who attended the IPU follow-up conference in Rio, in November 1992. Considerable interest was expressed in some of our United Kingdom activities—especially the annual reports of the Department of the Environment, which are extremely well set out and coherent, and contribute greatly to debate on a factual rather than a suppository basis. [Laughter.] It is always possible to make slips: on a previous occasion, I referred to the Po without adding the word "river".
I also welcome the digest of statistics produced by the Department; that, too, contributes a great deal to factual debate. What Rio produced were words, words, words and yet more words. I do not believe that future generations would forgive us if we did not deliver on some of those words—and one of the most important subjects is climate change and global warming.
There is, in general, a scientific consensus on that, although some debate still takes place: the greenhouse
98
effect is recognised as highly probable, although there is room for debate on whether global warming results from it. However, there are extremists on both sides. There are the ostriches, who will say that, because one or two scientists do not agree, we should do nothing; and there are those would take us back to the dark ages, reacting hysterically and histrionically to the evidence.
I think it eminently sensible to operate on the precautionary principle—not just because of the important matters that are at stake, but because the precautions make sense in their own right. It makes sense to conserve resources and energy, to preserve species and to be both good neighbours and good forebears for generations yet to come. I have always felt—as, no doubt, have other hon. Members—that my duty is to pass on to the next generation a world better than the world that I inherited.
I believe that, so far, we are on common ground; but all the actions taken in the United Kingdom and the European Union will be of little consequence if we cannot export our attitudes to other countries. Countries such as China are so important, in terms of their population and their potential economic growth, that if they are unwilling to play a part in the attempt to tackle global warming, we might as well all pack up and go home. We must take every opportunity to embrace such countries in international conventions, and to assist them by means of technology transfer and other forms of help.
The Government have, very properly, entitled their attempt to turn their aims into action at home "Helping the Earth Begins at Home". Fifty per cent. of our greenhouse gas emissions are generated by and from buildings; 25 per cent. are caused by traffic. Every individual has some control over those emissions.
One of the depressing features of traffic emissions is that, although Europe and the United Kingdom spend considerable time producing regulations that control what goes into cars at one end and what goes out at the other, little effort has been put into trying to improve the efficiency of the engines in between. There is enormous scope for new technology in car design that might cut that 25 per cent. total.
I believe that the car is with us to stay. Although it is highly desirable that more people use public transport wherever possible—or, indeed, use no transport other than their own two legs—there is a good case for ensuring that the traffic that remains is civilised. That means proper traffic management schemes, proper bypasses and a good look at road pricing—not necessarily in terms of charges for motorways, which would deal with the wrong end of the problem, but in terms of charges for entry to congested cities. I hope that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport will examine that possibility first.
Mrs. Anne Campbell: Surely the real problem—which the Government have not yet tackled—is how to reduce dependence on the motor car. We all agree that such a measure would be very unpopular, but no one has come up with an effective proposal this evening.
Mr. Jones: Of course that is a problem. I think that pricing has a part to play, along with changing attitudes and trying to encourage more car sharing. I have always believed, however, that, rather than trying to make water flow uphill, we should recognise what people are going to do and try to make it less environmentally damaging. That, I think, represents the thrust of what I have been saying.

99
I have mentioned the importance of bypasses. My constituency is fortunate, in that the A41 bypass opened recently. It is well recognised as one of the most environmentally friendly new roads in Britain: it will have 80,000 trees along its length by the end of the planting season, and it will bring much-needed relief to the communities on its path—Berkhamsted, Northchurch, Bourne End, King's Langley and Hemel Hempstead.
My constituents living in those roads—and in roads represented by my hon. Friend the Member for Hertfordshire, South-West (Mr. Page)—will know that the environmental arguments are strongly in favour of the bypass, and I am sure that the same is true of other hon. Members' constituents.
Those who attack the roads programme always seem to be in favour of the bypass in their constituencies; it is the generality they attack. A few months ago, I replied to a constituent from Friends of the Earth who had suggested that the programme should be reduced, asking him to give me a list of the roads that he thought should be removed from it. He never replied: they never do, because they are unwilling to face up to what may happen in individual areas.
I have referred to emissions from buildings, which may be caused by heating or lighting. There is undoubtedly a strong case for greater efforts in energy conservation, as the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury rightly pointed out; currently, however, we await the Government's response to the Select Committee's report on that important subject.
I will not anticipate either that response or the debate that I hope will follow it, but I shall highlight one or two points. The energy ratio fell between 1983 and 1989, but that trend reversed, and there has since been a sustained 3·7 per cent. per annum increase, which needs to be addressed. My noble Friend Lord Walker of Worcester said 10 years ago:
"A new publicity campaign would move the UK from being one of the most apathetic nations in energy conservation to a position where we are the best within two years."
I never did think much of my noble Friend's forecasting methods, but he has to be so far out with that particular prediction that I hope he will not be reminded of it too often. If we do not try to deliver on his promise of 10 years ago, we shall be in severe trouble in future. There must be greater legislative effort and more resources directed at energy conservation.
There have been exchanges during this debate on the Energy Saving Trust Ltd. I reiterate that it must be properly financed. As the Committee recommended, the Government must adopt a proactive stance, to ensure that all interested parties realise the important role that they should play.
In that context, I was particularly disturbed by the recent comments by the gas industry regulator to the Select Committee on Trade and Industry, in which she appeared to go back on her commitment to the E factor and to energy conservation. I subsequently had an exchange of letters that may be published eventually, but I am still extremely concerned that the regulator is not taking that part of her duties as seriously as she should. I commend to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State the Select Committee's recommendation that a statutory duty should be placed on regulators to have regard to the environment.
100
There is much to be said for public authorities setting a proper example. There are some good stories of energy conservation among Government Departments, but such achievements have not been universal and in some cases, Departments have gone backwards. The new system of green Ministers should not be just a pleasant get-together now and again, but must contribute to ensuring that the laggards pull their weight and deliver energy savings.
The local authority sector is extremely important because of the number of disadvantaged families that it embraces. Local authority and housing association new build and property renovation should be undertaken with energy efficiency in mind. There are still many technical barriers to that in the local government regime—particularly in respect of leasing. I hope that there will be a positive reaction to the Committee's recommendation in due course. I would attach strings to all future capital investment to ensure that energy saving is delivered.
Greater emphasis must be placed on combined heat and power. It is absurd that so much energy is wasted by not co-ordinating power generation and the heating of offices, factories and homes. Proper energy labelling is also important. It is difficult for the public to know when they are purchasing an environmentally friendly piece of equipment or even an environmentally friendly house. In my constituency, Admiral Homes—pioneers in energy conservation—designed a house with a rating of 10, which is an important achievement.
However, lending authorities such as banks and building societies do not take energy efficiency into account when valuing properties or deciding how much to advance individual borrowers. That does not make sense. If people enjoy lower household running expenses because they spend less on energy, they must more easily be able to afford the repayments on the capital borrowed. One way forward would be for building societies and banks to change their lending policies in that regard.
Although I see scope for flexibility in building regulations between one parameter and another, the last thing I want is a dilution of the impact of these regulations on energy efficiency. I was horrified at the statement by the managing director of Bovis Homes when he was appointed to one deregulatory party—that he was out to get the building regulations. That seemed to be prejudging the issue that he was meant to examine, and was quite inappropriate.
Price must play a part in reducing energy consumption. Whatever Opposition Members may say about value added tax on fuel, it did not exist in the past. I remind the House that the Liberal party document, "Costing the Earth", said that it advocated
"as a first priority the imposition of a tax on energy … The United Kingdom is unusual amongst EC members in not applying even standard rates of VAT to domestic fuels … If it proved completely impossible to persuade our international partners to adopt energy taxes, we would nonetheless press forward, but phase them in at lower levels than otherwise—for example, by ending the anomalous zero-rate of VAT on fuel".
No amount of wriggling by the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) will get the Liberals off that hook. We all know that the Liberal party ditches promises whenever there is a convenient by-election. I live in the Millwall ward of the Isle of Dogs, for goodness' sake: I know the sort of literature that comes through the door from the Liberal party. It is disgusting, and the Liberal party's response to it is disgusting. There

101
is no way in which the Liberals could deliver on the energy philosophy they set out in the document I quoted and in others.
It is fair to say that price, although important, is not enough. There have to be carrots as well as sticks. There are schemes in place which benefit some people. I commend the Energy Saving Trust, the home energy efficiency scheme and the Government's extension of that scheme.
However, the middle classes, who could well afford to cut their energy consumption, are complacent about it. Not one constituent who has written to me complaining about VAT who lives in a large house and comes from a well-heeled background has said anything about the environment or about doing anything to their home. Yet I know from what I have done to my home that one can save enormous quantities of electricity, gas or oil if one goes about it in the right way.
I said that it was necessary to move people away from their total dependence on the motor car, so I welcome the increase above the rate of inflation in the tax on fuel. An effective measure that could accompany that is to get rid of the car tax and put the same amount on fuel tax.
That would save on the cost of administration of the car tax. It would deal once and for all with tax dodging. It would provide a powerful incentive to use less fuel. It would not harm pensioners, because on the whole they do much less than the average mileage. The measure would hit those who use cars to drive long distances every year. I catch the eye of my hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Cleethorpes (Mr. Brown) at that point, but I know that he uses the train frequently.
Forestry was an important part of the Rio declaration. It is important internationally. We must remember that sustainability is the key. Nothing is more depressing than seeing so-called environmentalists campaigning for bans on imports of hardwoods. By doing so, they tell a country that what it has is of no value. If what a country has is of no value and it cannot make any money out of it, it will find something to do with the land which will generate an income. That is bound to be bad environmentally.
We must encourage those who have sustainable policies and discourage those who have not. For example, peninsular Malaysia has the British heritage of an excellent 50-year replanting cycle, although there have been problems on the island of Borneo. Other countries in west Africa and south-east Asia do not have sustainable policies. I strongly recommend taking a differential approach not only to countries but to plantations and companies within them.
It is important that we do what we can, but we must do it in practical terms. I remember talking to a leading environmentalist in Brazil when I visited that country a few years ago with the Select Committee. Museo Goldi said that people in the west had to get away from talking about the environment at cocktail parties and start to help countries to do something about improving sustainability. He went on to say that the British had one of the best records that he had come across. The Overseas Development Administration was financing work through the Oxford Forestry Institute to help Brazil to improve its performance.
There is a lot to do. One has to remember that the greatest fire in the history of the world occurred in Brazil. It occurred because of the tax regime in Brazil. The cause of the fire was Volkswagen—a funny sort of company to
102
cause a fire in a forest. Apparently, it owned the land and needed to demonstrate that it was being developed, which was done by burning down the trees.
At home, I think that the Government's response to the report that we produced on forestry and the environment was a little disappointing. There are some positive signs; I welcome the fact that the Government are considering the need for a national forestry strategy. Given our low tree cover ratio, I find it peculiar that the Government rejected our recommendation to establish one-stop shops to provide advice on forestry applications and grants. Landowners who have to go between the Countryside Commission, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, local authorities and other organisations become lost in a maze, and probably put off the idea.
Equally important in the report was our recommendation that England, Scotland and Wales should be considered separately for the purpose of developing forestry strategy. The geography and geology in each of those countries are different, and, although they should be brought together in a national forestry strategy, what is right for Scotland is not necessarily right for England, and vice versa.
Mr. Dalyell: On the subject of Scotland, the hon. Gentleman knows the case of Mar lodge, and he knows Dr. Jim Ratter, the adviser on the Select Committee that went to Brazil. A number of us feel strongly—as does Dr. Ratter—that we must set an example. If we are to make suggestions to the Brazilians about what they should do with their Atlantic rain forests, we had better do something about the ancient forest of Caledon.
Mr. Jones: I have some sympathy with the argument of the hon. Gentleman, who would not expect me to comment specifically on that issue.
In many third-world countries, it has rightly been asked of me, "How can you lecture us about what to do with our forests when you have destroyed the vast majority of yours in the industrialisation process?" It is extremely important not to lecture, but to try to work in co-operation with others, which is why I praised the work of the Overseas Development Administration.
In the almost 11 years that I have been in the House, I have never been involved in a debate with such a long-term impact on the future of not just this country but the world. It is sad that so little seems to have been achieved in the intervening period since the Rio summit. But our Government have done a great deal more than others, for which I commend them.
9.12 pm
Mr. Simon Hughes: The partisan comments of the hon. Member for Hertfordshire, West (Mr. Jones) spoilt his argument and were as invalid as the similar part of the speech of the Secretary of State for the Environment. However, his non-partisan comments contained many sensible suggestions, which I hope that the Government will take up. He also made some mild criticisms of several Government policies, which I hope that the Government will read, hear and act on.
Today's debate is the first since the Energy Conservation Bill passed through the House on Friday. Passing legislation and doing things will also be far more effective than talking—that was the message of Rio. I welcome the fact that the Energy Conservation Bill has not

103
yet been blocked by the Government, and I hope that they do not seek to water it down in Committee—one of the first practical tests of whether we are serious about sustainability.
It is ironic that we are having the debate today—the very day that the Government are defending their position on wanting to start up THORP, the thermal oxide reprocessing plant. They are also trying to defend their unwillingness to have a public inquiry. To many of us, and to huge numbers of people up and down the country, that is one of the most unsustainable of the Government's recent commitments. I hope that the court will be able to provide an effective backstop and order the Government to have a public inquiry.
Today's debate is welcome. I welcome the Minister for the Environment and Countryside to his relatively new responsibilities. I am glad to see him here and look forward to working with him.
The debate should have occurred in the summer. It was scheduled to occur in the last week of term before the summer holiday, but it was hijacked by the Maastricht shenanigans and was lost. That is a reflection of the failure of the system, to which I shall return. Producing documents and then debating policy, as opposed to debating policy and then producing documents, is a funny system and a funny way to govern and consult. It is all too indicative of the way in which we have behaved so far and I am ever hopeful that the system will improve. We should have had the debate here and in the other place well before now so that it could have influenced the content of the Government's documents when they came to produce them.
My premise, to which the hon. Member for Hertfordshire, West alluded, is that the Government should set an example. Whatever the standards of other Governments in following up the Rio summit, we should set an example. Even if others' standards fall short, we should seek to have the higher standards. On that premise, the Government are about to submit their document—a little belatedly, as they committed themselves to producing it by the end of September—to the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development, which was set up at the Rio conference.
We ought to note that the debate, as evidenced by the current consultations between the Whips on the Front Bench, is far too short for the subject. To fit in a debate which will last for no more than two and a half hours and the last of the substantive business after a private Member's motion again indicates a lack of commitment to take the issue as seriously as it merits. It is not that the country is not committed. One of the interesting—and, if we are not careful, misleading—facts displayed in the opinion polls is that people still think environmental issues are less serious. That is not true. Most people have adopted the environmental agenda and have recognised the importance of it. It may not be at the top of their list: if they are out of work, they may have other things to think about. With 3 million people unemployed, it is not surprising that employment or the state of the economy is at the top of the list. But most of the environmental pressures and movements of the 1980s have produced a residual strong commitment and we should not be deluded either by the apparent lack of interest or by the apparent shortness of the
104
debate. We want to take part in the debate, we want to influence the Government and what I shall say will be aimed at trying to get the Government to be stronger, better, quicker, faster and tougher. They have taken some steps, but many of us believe that they have not yet gone far or fast enough.
The fundamental issues have been alluded to and addressed either specifically or indirectly in the documents that the Government produced at their £20,000 jamboree down the road at the Banqueting house during the past month. We are talking about the sort of growth that we achieve and the quality of life that we want and can get. We are also discussing the right level of consumption and not just accepting that there is a demand for more and more consumption. The debate is not only about inter-generational equity, as it is called, but about equity in Britain and equity around the world. These are all big issues.
It is not acceptable that after 14 years of Conservative government the gap between the rich and poor in the country has widened; nor is it justified by the fact that the same has happened in most other countries. It is certainly unacceptable that the gap between the richest 20 per cent. and the poorest 80 per cent. has widened. Those issues were all on the Agenda 21 part of the debates at the Rio summit. This debate addresses that entire range of subjects, including population, housing and quality of life the world over.
Dr. Spink: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Hughes: I shall try to let as many hon. Members intervene as possible, but the hon. Member for Castle Point (Dr. Spink) has intervened twice already.
Ministers are clearly increasingly nervous about the Liberal Democrats; otherwise, they would not have a go at us so often. They must be nervous if they continually have to quote the draft before the final draft before the final document as policy and never allude to the final policy document itself. If they are nervous because we are chasing them, I am happy about that, too.
Dr. Spink rose—
Mr. Hughes: No, I shall not give way on that point because I want to leave time for other hon. Members to speak.
The responses to the White Paper suggested a general disappointment. It contained many coulds, ifs and maybes rather than whys, whats and whens. The Government need not accept my word—the National Society for Clean Air called it
"A Small Step for Sustainability"
and Friends of the Earth said that it had been
"disappointed by the limited extent to which any new approach to marrying the twin objectives of sound economic development and protecting the environment has emerged."
In the days following the Whitehall launch down the road, many newspaper headlines reflected the general disappointment.
Dr. Spink: But what taxes would the Liberal Democrats impose?
Mr. Hughes: I can deal with taxes if the hon. Gentleman wants me to, but I am trying to keep to the central issue. I shall end my remarks by saying yes, we all have to pay. We should be quite straightforward about that.

105
The day after the launch many newspaper editorials reflected the general disappointment. One stated that the gloomy environmental picture posed "hard questions" and would need
"not just a searching scrutiny of the lifestyle of the Great Car Economy but a challenge to familiar assumptions about growth and change"
and suggested that the Secretary of State's reference to Cardinal Newman was not very useful. The Financial Times, hardly a partisan newspaper, judged the White Paper to be "a pale green blockbuster". The Independent said:
"Major gives green light to nuclear industry growth."
Those comments represent incompatible views, but there were also adverse comments from those whom one would expect to be critical, which included:
"Our green hopes, their empty words".
Andrew Marr wrote an interesting commentary in which he made it clear that the documents did, however, highlight some difficult choices.
Let us accept that the Government had generally high expectations. No one thought that they were doing terribly well and the documents told us little new. Indeed, I think that it was Madam Speaker who said that it was not a new policy, which was why there was no statement in the House. Some of us knew already that it contained nothing new.
Let me suggest why we were disappointed and how the Government should respond. First, the White Paper contained an inadequate set of responses. It contains inadequate targets, timetables and proposals for monitoring. I and many others believe that unless we have clear targets and timetables and an objective method of monitoring our attainment of those targets and timetables we shall be partisan and merely whistling in the dark.
We need economic indicators. Many people have worked on indicators that would serve our purpose. We need valid projections, statistics, facts and figures to assess objectively how well the Government are doing. By definition, they are not those produced by the Government in their own defence to justify themselves when, like any Government, they fall short of their objectives.
Secondly, the whole process needs to be much less inadequate. It is not sufficient to have a series of Green and White Papers which regularly fall short of the targets that they themselves set. There can be no doubt that that is what is happening at the moment. We have a process whereby the Government consult, disappoint those whom they have consulted by appearing not to have listened, produce documents and then propose inadequate mechanisms for carrying forward the debate anticipated at Rio. A panel, or round table, on sustainable development and a citizens environment initiative are no substitute for a series of rigorous governmental processes to test the validity of what is and what is not a sustainable policy.
We should establish an entirely free-standing body which is regularly the proactive generator of proposals—a body like a royal commission. Local and central thinking should be integrated into that body. Any draft governmental proposal should be rigorously scrutinised by Select Committees of both Houses before it is concluded and, so far as possible, a consensus should be sought. I am not arguing that my view alone should prevail; I want the best common agreement. I believe that I can persuade the Government of the merit of my case, but I shall not have
106
the opportunity to do so if there is no debate before they produce their documents or if they do not read or take account of people's submissions.
There is much good practice. The Dutch are very good and the Canadians are very good, for example, and the Government know that. It has been suggested to me, and I agree, that if the Government did what the Canadians did last year—passed an Act of Parliament setting up the mechanism for a round table and so on—we would do better. Will the Minister consider the Canadian model and the Dutch model—the American model is not far behind—and provide us with an evaluation of whether we could use those models here?
My third proposal is about inadequate integration. For me, the test of whether we have sustainable development is whether we marry sustainable economic policy into our sustainable environmental policy. For me, that means that the Treasury is central. In Holland, much taxation never passes into law until it is co-signed not only by the Chancellor or the Finance Minister but by the Environment Minister. Unless we debate the sustainable benefit of taxation A compared with taxation B, we shall not bring about that marriage.
The reason why the Government got into such a muddle in connection with VAT on fuel, and the reason why the Liberal Democrats backed off the idea, was that it did not add up as the best way of taxing for green purposes. If the Government had consulted widely about it instead of the Chancellor pulling it out of his red box and saying, "Wow! Here is a good money-raising wheeze and it is also environmentally sound", the Government would not have been in so much hot water and they might not have lost two by-elections to the Liberal Democrats during this Parliament.
There are many ways in which one can test sustainable policies and we each might have our pet test. I can only list some of the ways in which one can test them.
One can test them by considering energy policy. I would argue that one needs a sustainable, coherent energy policy; one cannot have the nuclear review one day, the renewables review the next and decide the future of the coal industry the day after that. We have to ensure that we do what we say we will do. It is no good saying that we will reduce energy consumption if Government buildings then consume more energy. It is no good setting Energy Saving Trust Ltd. a task and then giving it a minimal amount of what it needs to carry it out.
Alternatively, one can use transport as the test. The hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) gave obvious comparable examples. One has to ask oneself whether the motorway widening scheme is acceptable on present tests. Is it acceptable that we lose more than 50 per cent. of our sites of special scientific interest as a result of about half of our motorway schemes? The answer that I and others would give to that is definitely no.
One can use agriculture, planning and the countryside as the test, whether one considers hedgerows or sites of special scientific interest—only five years ago, 3 per cent. of those remaining sites had been destroyed, but now 5 per cent. have been destroyed. I welcome what has been said about planning and out-of-town superstores, and so on, but that was a policy for which some of us argued 15 or 20 years ago and it is now a bit late. The hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury said from a sedentary position earlier that it is a bit like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. We have built all the blessed

107
superstores out of town now; the country has been ploughed up; people have to drive to the stores and they are not near railway stations. It is a bit late now, but I hope that we have learnt the lesson.
We could have had sustainable targets for air pollution as the test. The Government eventually signed up in Rio to a target for carbon dioxide emissions, but with no legal commitment. That is not good enough. There are already serious doubts about whether even the target that the Government set is sustainable and achievable on the basis of their present performance. We have to do better in terms of domestic, vehicular and industrial pollution if we are to achieve even the Government's target for the year 2000.
We can use water pollution as the test. To use a crude test, six of our eight premier bathing resorts still discharge raw sewage. If that is where we have arrived after 14 years of Conservative government, the priorities are wrong.
There are many tests. Those are some of the obvious ones. Population is another one. Trade is one. Aid is one—and in Malaysia recently there have been examples showing the inadequacies of our aid programme.
I was asked the question that we are all asked: are we speaking about hypocrisy or reality? The answer is that we have to speak about reality, and reality requires difficult nettles to be grasped. It requires us to work out how we pay the price. The question about how we pay the price has an answer. We pay the price by making the most worthwhile investment and we make the most worthwhile investment by ensuring that we hand on the same amount of capital in the bank, if not more.
Maurice Strong, the secretary general to UNCED, said;
"We have to make sure that the road from Rio is a fast track, if we are to realise our hope that the United Nations Earth Summit really was a quantum leap forward on that road to sustainable development."
Nobody could call the British road from Rio a fast track. We have started on the road, but unless we go much further, much faster and much more effectively, it will not be we who pay the price, but those who come after. We shall have spoilt their chances of inheriting from us a sustainable world.
9.30 pm
Dr. Robert Spink: The climate change convention commits developed countries to taking measures aimed at reducing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2000. The Government have accepted that commitment and they will meet that commitment. They might even better it. That is real action, not just words. We have already heard tonight that we need real action, not more words, to protect the environment.
A real and positive contribution can be made by nuclear electricity generation to reduce the United Kingdom's emission targets for the year 2000. We currently generate about 22 per cent. of our electrical power through nuclear energy. If we replaced that by gas or coal-burn generation, the UK's emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases would be dramatically increased. The Secretary of State said that there would then be an increase of 6 million to 15 million tonnes of carbon a year.
We must ensure that we retain a balanced energy strategy which allows for the replacement of the old Magnox reactors as they go off stream before the year
108
2000. We need new nuclear stations and new nuclear capacity to come on stream to replace the Magnox stations. I am as anxious as other hon. Members to bring forward the energy debate when we can review the position of nuclear power within our strategy. I urge my hon. Friend the Minister to press his right hon. Friends to bring forward that review. I accept what the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes) said about the need for a co-ordinated and comprehensive strategy which would embrace issues such as waste management. However, I believe that we should bring forward the nuclear review at the earliest possible moment so that we can plan rationally and responsibly how to protect and enhance the environment and to meet our Rio commitments. If we are to meet our Rio commitments, we need a stable nuclear component within a balanced energy strategy. I hope that the Opposition will now accept that fact.
Labour has consistently called for the adoption of more stringent targets than those included in the convention to deal with the problem of climate change. After the Rio summit, the then Labour environment spokesman attacked the Government for dragging their feet. Labour claimed in June 1992 that more could have been achieved and that British Ministers could have played a more positive role, especially in respect of global warming. How could they have done? Where is Labour's policy for achieving more? How could the Labour party achieve more, without imposing taxes on energy, when it wants to destroy the nuclear component of power generation? Will the Minister explain that to me, because I fail to see how it could be achieved?
The Liberal party has also shown a certain amount of inconsistency. It opposes the Government's decision to levy VAT on domestic fuel and power. My hon. Friend the Member for Hertfordshire, West (Mr. Jones) quoted from its 1991 policy document entitled "Costing the Earth", in which it showed itself to be even more hypocritical than the Labour party. Page 31 of the Liberal party's 1992 general election manifesto made a commitment to introducing a Community-wide energy tax on all energy sources.
The Liberal Democrat party reaffirmed that commitment on page three of its Green Paper, "Taxing Pollution, Not People", which was published in September 1992 and stated that it supported
"The European Community proposals for an energy/carbon tax and would press for its immediate implementation at a national level".
I am pleased to see the hon. Member for Southwark and Bermondsey nodding in agreement with that statement.
That document accepted that such a tax would lead to increases of 58 per cent. in the price of coal, of 14 per cent. in the price of gas and of 13 per cent. in the price of domestic electricity. Page nine states that the proposals are
"too timid rather than too radical".
The Liberal Democrat party's support for the EC carbon tax showed its uncritical enthusiasm for all things European. Will the Minister explain that inconsistent element in its policy which I do not understand?
9.36 pm
Mr. Alan W. Williams: I am grateful to have the opportunity to make a few brief comments in the debate and I thank the hon. Member for Castle Point (Dr. Spink) for curtailing his remarks.

109
I am as cynical about the Government's record on the environment as I am about their record on so many other matters. The two main themes at Rio were the developing countries and the global environment. We restated our commitment to the developing countries to reach the United Nations aid target of 0·7 per cent. of GDP, but the Goverment have cut our aid budget from 0·52 to 0·27 per cent. over the past 14 years. Recently, it has been revealed that aid of £254 million for the Pergau dam in Malaysia was partly used for arms. That was a corrupt, improper use of the aid budget. It makes one feel cynical about the Government's aid policy.
Often we hear the Government say one thing but do another. We have a carbon dioxide problem and too little forestation. A major effort should be made to tackle that. With the surplus in agricultural production under the set-aside policy, it is eminently sensible to increase forest cover. The Government have a target to double forest cover by 2050, yet we still face the possibility of privatisation and the danger that forests will be cut down to make a quick profit.
In the documents, the Government talk about promoting the use of public transport, but what have they done? They have privatised the railways, which will hardly help. In the past year, the coal industry in particular has suffered from the dash for gas. I said earlier that I liked the Secretary of State's redefinition of sustainable development—that it would not cheat our children. What else are we doing with the exploitation of North sea oil and gas?
The dash for gas could have been halted and slowed down by imposing combined heat and power regulations on new gas power stations and by insisting that they use their energy efficiently. That would have transformed electricity generation over a 10-year period, with power generated at 80 per cent. efficiency instead of the present 40 per cent. The national rivers survey by the National Rivers Authority in 1990 showed for the first time ever that there has been a net deterioration in the quality of British rivers. What do the Government do? They cut the NRA's budget by 30 per cent. over three years. In a recent European summit, the Government backtracked on EC water quality directives.
Deregulation is threatening environmental protection, and we are still waiting for the environmental protection agency which was promised four or five years ago by the Government. All that we have been promised for this Session is a paving Bill. I feel let down, as do the people of this country, by the Government's record. It is short-sighted in terms of the environmental technology industry and it puts us at the back of a queue behind Japan, Germany and the United States in that tremendous growth market.
I finish by referring to a recent newspaper article by Professor David Pearce, a professor of economics at London university. He said that there was little in the policy papers to suggest that the Government understand the meaning or implications of sustainable development. That comes from an insider who knows more about the Government's policy than any hon. Member in the House this evening. It is sad. The debate concerns taking Rio forward, but I am afraid that the Government just do not have the political commitment to what was discussed in Rio.
Mr. Dalyell: On a point of order, Madam Speaker. Will you hear a point or order from me at 10 o'clock to save
110
time? The point of order will concern the fact that there are a number of hon. Members on both sides of the House who were trying to be called.
Madam Speaker: I will hear the hon. Gentleman's point of order now.
Mr. Dalyell: I make no complaint about those hon. Members who were called. Could it be registered that my hon. Friends the Members for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) and for Denton and Reddish (Mr. Bennett) and other hon. Members would have liked to take part in the debate? Those hon. Members will take it ill to be berated by sections of the press and to be told that there is no interest in Rio and in the environment—far from it.
Madam Speaker: There is a great deal of interest in the matter. Between them, the two Front Benches will, by 10 o'clock, have taken one hour and 40 minutes in a short debate. I would also point out to the hon. Gentleman that two orders were quite properly divided on. Those took 25 minutes, during which time other hon. Members could have been called.
9.42 pm
Mr. George Howarth: It is only fair to point out that the Secretary of State took 52 of those minutes on his own account. The right hon. Gentleman's responses to interventions were often somewhat longer than the interventions.
This has been a good debate, and it is unfortunate that more of my hon. Friends were unable to catch your eye, Madam Speaker, because of the time restraints. I should like to draw the attention of the House to a couple of remarks made by hon. Members. It was significant that the hon. Member for Hertfordshire, West (Mr. Jones), who is respected on both sides of the House for his views on the matter, could not manage to get through his speech without making some minor criticisms of the Government.
My hon. Friend the Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) made a good critique of the documents and of their effectiveness or otherwise. My hon. Friend the Member for Carmarthen (Mr. Williams) as usual made a knowledgeable speech, and brought the benefit of his great expertise on the subject to the House.
The Secretary of State made great play in his opening speech of a piece of work by Gerard Manley Hopkins. I thought that it would be appropriate to look for a response in the form of poetry. [Interruption.] The Minister now may be reticent to get involved in this literary side of the debate. I thought that the words of Wordsworth might be appropriate:
"Blest statesman he, whose mind's unselfish will leaves him at ease among grand thoughts."
The issue at stake during this taking Rio forward debate is whether the Secretary of State has dealt with the grand issues, and, indeed, how at ease he is with them. That seems to be the crucial test.
The Secretary of State made a few interesting points tonight. Over the past few months, I have studied him and I accept that he has a genuine set of green intentions. He feels strongly about some issues, about which he sometimes rants in the Chamber. [Interruption.] Perish the thought that the Secretary of State should ever rant. There appears to be a black hole, however, between what the right hon. Gentleman believes he is doing and what the proposals in the Government's documents are likely to

111
achieve. A good example of that, which the right hon. Gentleman mentioned, is the link between green issues and environmental policy and economic growth and economic policy in general. That is at the core of sustainable development.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, South and Finsbury said, the global market in environmental technologies is worth $300 billion according to the OECD and $600 billion according to other estimates. Either way, it is a massive market, far bigger than the global market for the aerospace industry. I hope that we can agree that that is the case.
We need a sound domestic base on which to develop that market, especially if we are to maximise the export potential that is offered. A survey of 300 United Kingdom businesses, recently carried out by environmental consultants, revealed that, although the global market is growing exponentially, Britain is at the bottom of the league. According to a study conducted by the German Government, Germany has 21 per cent. of the market, while the United States and Japan have taken, respectively, 16 and 13 per cent. of it. The United Kingdom's share is so low, unfortunately, that it does not even figure in the survey. Those consultants concluded:
"The British technology industry is not a world player."
The Government's obsession with privatisation is also threatening the future of our forests. I hope that the Minister will take the initiative tonight, because it is about time that the Government said that they would not pursue that privatisation. I hope that the hon. Gentleman can offer hon. Members that assurance.
I have the honour to represent part of the north-west, but I regret to say that 67 per cent. of the bathing beaches in that region have failed the bathing water directive. The Wirral, on Merseyside, has some of the best beaches, but some are not even recommended for people to use. At the same time as the statistics are published, the Minister dodges his way around Europe trying to get Britain out of that directive. If people use our beaches at all, they are forced to stand alongside raw sewage, sanitary products and other equally appalling objects.
The recent accident at Ellesmere Port reveals that the petro-chemical industry is not safe and has a huge potential for inflicting environmental damage. I support the call of my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Mr. Miller) for a public inquiry into that accident. It is time that we learnt from such disasters about how mistakes are made. We should try to learn how to avoid similar environmental damage in the future.
On all those issues, the Government behave dirty at home, while their record abroad is one of missed opportunities to lead. The British people have lost confidence in the Government's environmental policy, as they have in so many of their other policies. The time is coming when the Government will no longer be trusted to protect our environment, because they are obviously failing to do so now.
9.48 pm
The Minister for the Environment and Countryside (Mr. Robert Atkins): I have been fascinated by this debate. In a former incarnation, I was responsible for matters in Northern Ireland and I was immensely
112
impressed by the quality of the briefing that I received from officials in my Department, as well as by my Secretary of State and other Ministers who have told me about the success story of this country's environmental policy.
I was particularly fascinated by a survey carried out on people's attitudes to environmental problems. It showed that although 85 to 90 per cent. of those canvassed were concerned about matters relating to the ozone layer, greenhouse gases, and so on, the same percentage were entirely opposed to actions to remedy those problems if they involved cost.
We are arguing about a climate of change in public opinion, which means that we must get it across to people that dealing with those concerns will cost money or affect individuals' way of life. Unless we create that climate of change, we shall be unable to fulfil the requirements and targets set out in these immensely important documents.
In Northern Ireland, I was Minister responsible for the Department of Economic Development and the Department of the Environment. Those two Departments were indivisible. The hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) said that this area of environmental activity is an opportunity, not a burden. I could not agree with him more. As a result of my experience in Northern Ireland, we produced a document called "Growing a Green Economy", which dealt with economic growth and environmental protection. That is why I was refreshed and heartened to realise, on taking this new job, that we were trying to do the same thing here.
Ms Walley: Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Atkins: If the hon. Lady will forgive me, I do not have time.
Our task concerns those in industry and business as much as environmentalists. We must encourage each side of the argument—if argument there be—to recognise the virtues on both sides.
As Chairman of the Select Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Hertfordshire, West (Mr. Jones) spoke with great authority on, and interest, in environmental matters. My hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Dr. Spink) made a brief intervention in his speech. I recognise that some of the questions raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Hertfordshire, West were critical in detail. It is right and proper that, on such a wide subject, we should consider a number of activities and we recognise that, whereas the Government are achieving more than many of our contemporaries in other countries, we have some way to go in other areas.
I do not accept, however, the attack by the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury on the Government's transport and roads policy, for example, which he made with great venom, albeit with a twinkle in his eye. None the less, it is a serious point. Labour-controlled Lancashire county council in my constituency is determined to push a motorway through rural areas, affecting rural habitats and parts of my constituency and others. Like the Liberal party, the Labour party says one thing at national level but does another locally. Such action is not untypical of Lancashire council and many other Labour-controlled authorities.
Mr. Dafis: Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Atkins: If the hon. Gentleman will forgive me, I do not have time. I am not referring to his party, but if he wants to take up the matter, he will have an opportunity to do so later.
Leaflets have been posted in my constituency and those of some of my hon. Friends saying that the Liberal party is against VAT on fuel. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said, what the Liberal and Labour parties say in the House is contrary to the policies declared by their spokesmen.
The Government, led by the Prime Minister and supported by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, have taken action to produce documents that have fulfilled a commitment to spell out what was required and what the future holds. We must make it clear that that will bring burdens to bear. The Opposition have not been prepared to do that.
Soon after arriving at the Department, I learnt about the packaging initiative, to which my right hon. Friend referred. It is immensely impressive, and it will be extremely important in getting the industry to realise what needs to be done and in encouraging people in the industry to recognise the lead taken by the group of 28. Today, in another part of Britain—Derbyshire—I launched The Countryside Means Business, which profiles 12 small companies reflecting the sustainable development message and encouraging economic activity in rural areas—activity which is also environmentally sensitive.
This week, the United Kingdom ratifies the Basle convention on the control of the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes and their disposal. The United Kingdom will become a party to the convention in May, and on 1 May the new waste licensing regulations come into force.
Tomorrow marks the first of a series of 10 road shows on the theme of climate change: the challenge and the opportunities. Next week is energy advice week; the following week the Government publish their response to the Select Committee report on energy efficiency in buildings. The Helping the Earth campaign is to be extended for another two years. Here, indeed, is evidence of activity and of a commitment to the targets set. by my right hon. Friend and by the Government throughout the length and breadth of this country. We, therefore, have nothing to be ashamed of.
There is certainly more work to be done, and we must keep at it. The hon. Member for Knowsley, North (Mr. Howarth) mentioned bathing beaches, a subject which I, as a fellow north-west Member, understand well. The sewage outfalls of this country have needed attention for many years, but not much attention has been given them—although hon. Members may have mentioned them from time to time. As a result of the bathing water directive and of the Government's commitment, about ·2 billion is being spent on the problem. Compliance has risen from 56 to 80 per cent. of beaches, and by 1995 the vast majority will meet the mandatory standards of the directive. It is simply not true to say that my right hon. Friend has been going around Europe trying to stop the bathing water directive. We need to nail that canard here and now.
It is worth adding that a four-year study by the universities of Wales and of Surrey showed that more fuss is made about this matter than it merits. As I have said, ·2 billion is being spent to bring our beaches up to the standards that we want.
114
My hon. Friend the Member for Hertfordshire, West referred to a number of points that interested me. I was particularly taken by the idea of the surveys of energy efficiency done before people buy houses. I was associated with that good idea on my first engagement in this job. I am interested to learn that at least one building society has taken it up. Clearly, it would have an effect on owners if, before they bought a house, such a survey were part of the deal. Any encouragement of the practice is to be welcomed.
My hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point asked one or two questions about Labour and Liberal policy. It is not for me to answer those questions—
The Minister for Local Government and Planning (Mr. David Curry): It would not take long.
Mr. Atkins: Indeed not. In our documents, we have set out targets which constitute a challenge to the public, and we have set out ways and means by which round table advice from the great and the good—they understand these matters; they can criticise and advise us on what we need to do—can be elicited. That shows that we recognise that more needs to be done. We recognise that independent, impartial, outside advice can tell us where we need to be moving, to build on our energy efficiency campaign, and so on. We have increased expenditure on that campaign by up to 50 per cent. this year, and the budget for energy efficiency stands at about £100 million. Home energy efficiency scheme expenditure has doubled, and will be about £75 million in 1994–95. All this is more evidence of our commitment and of the tremendous lead given by my right hon. Friend during his tenure of office.
Let me remind the House that we are talking about sustainable development and a strategy to meet it. The strategy builds on the 1990 environment White Paper, which sets out principles of sustainable development and looks ahead 20 years to 2012 to identify the problems and opportunities that we must all work on. It studies processes and the way in which we can achieve sustainable development and who can do what—whether the Government, local authorities, businesses, industry, voluntary bodies or whoever. It also sets out three new Government measures: an independent panel, a national round table and a citizens environment initiative.
As I listened to Opposition Members, it became increasingly clear that the Opposition parties are presenting a fraudulent prospectus—saying what they want in general, but being coy about, or denying, the specifics. They never accept that there is a cost and they pretend that it can all be done without upsetting the voters.
There is a cost and the public deserve—
It being Ten o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.
Mr. Dalyell: On a point of order, Madam Speaker. This is not a complaint about the fact that neither I nor my lion. Friends the Members for Cambridge (Mrs. Campbell) and for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) have been called, but concerns the way in which Parliament operates. You will recollect that on a Monday—after a Banqueting house press conference had taken place in the morning—I raised a point of order, which you most courteously heard, about whether it was proper that a press conference should take place with a great fanfare but that there should be no statement in the House of Commons. I subsequently raised the matter on the Floor of the House and my hon. Friend

115
the Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Smith) supported me from the Opposition Front Bench. He agreed with my point of view and, Madam Speaker, you gave a very sympathetic response on that occasion.
Since I saw the Leader of the House about the matter he has written to me saying that I had no reason to complain because there would be a debate, which he implied was better than a statement by the Secretary of State. However, tonight we have seen exactly what happens in a debate, and that it is not a substitute for a ministerial statement.
Therefore, if on future occasions any Government should spend all that money—I gather that it was a heck of a lot—
Mr. Simon Hughes: It was £20,000.
Mr. Dalyell: Yes. If any Government spend £20,000 on making a statement at the Banqueting house, we should at least have a statement in this House. Tonight's debate has proved that there is no substitute for such a statement, when a Minister can be questioned—
Madam Speaker: Order.
Several hon. Members rose—
Madam Speaker: Order. There are no points of order arising from that matter. I dealt with the point of order raised by the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Dalyell) about 20 minutes ago. I understand exactly what he is talking about; however, it is not a point of order for me but a matter of business. The hon. Gentleman and other hon. Members may wish to raise it during business questions on Thursday.
The debate has been very short and I have enormous sympathy with Back-Bench Members who have been sitting here for the past two or three hours waiting to speak, while Front-Bench Members took about one hour and 40 minutes between them and other Back Benchers also took a considerable time. On such occasions—when several other Back Benchers have a contribution to make—there ought to be a little more understanding and hon. Members' speeches should be more brisk. The hon. Gentleman's point of order is, therefore, a matter for business questions, but I think that I have made my views very clear. I am very disappointed for those Back Benchers who have been sitting in the Chamber for some time and have not been able to speak in the debate.

Cruelty to Greyhounds
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Michael Brown.]
10.3 pm
Mr. Colin Pickthall: I am grateful to have this opportunity to mention the problem of cruelty to greyhounds so soon after the BBC's "On the Line" programme on the subject. That documentary brought the issue to my attention and there has subsequently been much comment in the press—especially the sporting press—and a great deal of supplementary information and evidence has been sent to me, and no doubt to other hon. Members.
I shall make a special mention of Mrs. Anne Shannon of the Isle of Man, who runs the Homesafe Greyhound Rescue outfit, and of Mr. Paddy Sweeney, a prominent veterinary surgeon who is also the father of the hon. Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Mr. Sweeney). The hon. Gentleman has kindly passed information from his father to me.
It is not my intention this evening to criticise greyhound racing as a sport—the second largest spectator sport in the United Kingdom and a very important industry—but I intend to criticise some of the priorities within the sport.
At the most public end of greyhound racing is a vastly profitable public entertainment colossus. I am told that £2 billion a year is gambled on dogs, £14 million is spent on upgrading Hackney stadium, including, I believe, £10 million investment by Saudi Arabia. The cloth cap and half-crown bet image of dog racing has given way to a much more wealthy and upmarket image, with excellent restaurants, bars and relatively luxurious accommodation. It is a multi-million pound entertainment industry at that end.
At the other end are the charities and the volunteers struggling to rescue as many as 30,000 dogs a year, who are either retired from racing or never make the grade. The Retired Greyhound Trust can rescue some 600 dogs a year. One wonders what happens to the other 29,400. The chief trading axis in greyhounds that concerns us is Ireland, the United Kingdom and Spain. More than 25,000 dogs are registered in Ireland every year; 9,000 are exported to the United Kingdom, which totals around 90 per cent. of the United Kingdom runners.
The United Kingdom accounts for 80 per cent. of Irish exports, so conditions and attitudes in Ireland are of direct concern to the authorities and the Government in this country. Some 50 per cent. of Irish greyhound puppies make the grade. Therefore, 50 per cent. do not. One wonders what happens to them. In my view, there is massive over-breeding of greyhounds in Ireland, which is encouraged by an EC grant of some £1 million a year.
The purpose of my speech is to highlight a variety of abuses to which greyhounds are subjected, which were made clear by the television programme and by publicity in the Sunday People and other newspapers around the same time. First, there is the trade in selling greyhounds for use in Spain, for all sorts of purposes—such as inferior meetings or, at worst, to be killed. One hears about them being ground down for dog food, used for vivisection and so on.
In the television documentary, a Mr. John Shields was shown buying dogs in Ireland and transporting them to Spain. Some evidence shows that he transports dogs to

117
Spain not only directly but in a transit van that travels through this country—some 36 dogs at a time, in cages less than 14 in wide. Some of the dogs that are transported to Spain are British-bred; most are not.
Mr. Shields said that he has sold thousands of dogs to Spain, over a period, and that it is not against the law. That is true. It is against National Greyhound Racing Club rules. I believe its integrity and sincerity in trying to maintain those rules, but it is not against the law. Therefore, there is no means of stopping Mr. Shields or others who want to take part in that trade.
Mr. Alan Meale: Is my hon. Friend aware that, as well as its being against NGRC rules to sell greyhounds to Spain, it is against its rules to allow dogs to go to Spain to be used in other activities such as coursing and hunting, to be used on flapping tracks in the United Kingdom, or for them to be bloodied on live animals, including rabbits?
There is a price to pay. My hon. Friend may not be aware that anybody found practising any of those habits with greyhounds in Britian will be barred from participation in any NGRC track in the United Kingdom. That means that they cannot race on registered tracks, which form the majority of race tracks in this country.
Mr. Pickthall: My hon. Friend is an expert, and I take what he says seriously. I shall say more about NGRC sanctions later: on the basis of what my hon. Friend has said, some people who figured in the documentary should be barred from the sport forthwith.
Mr. Walter Sweeney: The mere fact that such practices may contravene NGRC rules does not make them illegal. Legislation is needed to make the rules stick.
Mr. Pickthall: I shall emphasise that point later.
I could describe conditions in Spain at length, but time forbids, the information is readily available and my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield (Mr. Meale) has covered much of it. I can summarise the position by saying that many dogs end up in what approximate to concentration camps. The conditions they must survive have been described in lurid terms; one or two English veterinarians have done sterling work in Spain, trying to alleviate those conditions.
In 1992, the last year for which I have figures, some 55 dogs were subjected to vivisection or experimentation in the United Kingdom, although such action is against the spirit of the law—and against the law itself, as I understand it.
Mr. Meale: I have been told, in reply to my questions to the Home Office, that only 14 of those 55 dogs came from the United Kingdom. Having checked with the NGRC, I understand that, if any person involved in greyhound racing in this country were found to have provided dogs for experimentation, that person would be barred from participating in registered racing.
Has it occurred to my hon. Friend that, if greyhound racing were made illegal in this country—I hope that he does not suggest such a course—the door would be left wide open to another abhorrent practice? I refer to the coursing of live rabbits and hares, which, unfortunately, still takes place here. I hope to God that we do not allow
118
that to happen, rather than organising registered races with proper veterinary c are—which is available, under the guidance of the NGRC.
Mr. Pickthall: I do not remotely suggest that greyhound racing as a sport should be banned. I am simply saying that, if the Government and the industry do not take urgent and drastic action to stop the current abuses, a groundswell of opinion—led by various groups—will suggest just such action. The father of the hon. Member for Vale of Glamorgan made that clear in the documentary.
Mr. Meale: I do not mean to keep interrupting my hon. Friend; I promise him that I shall not do so again. However, he has quoted Mr. Paddy Sweeney a number of times. Mr. Sweeney, unfortunately, must be cited as a relative of an hon. Member who is present in the Chamber.
I have a letter from Mr. Sweeney, quoting a speech in which he said that it was the job of everyone connected with greyhounds
"to work for the welfare of greyhounds and the development of coursing."
Just who are we talking about, and whose word are we taking?
Mr. Picktall: As my hon. Friend knows from my interest in abolishing hare coursing, I totally disagree with the latter part of that sentence.
I will touch briefly on the disposal of what might be termed redundant greyhounds. I am told that a greyhound costs around £2,000 a year to kennel and feed properly, and in the documentary that we all saw the Ulster RSPCA described various horrors. They may have been one-offs, but I suspect that they were not—instances of dogs clubbed to death, having their ears cut off, being dumped in the Foyle and injected with household bleach or other substances—anything to kill them, to avoid paying the £20 its costs to have a dog put down humanely, as if that were not bad enough.
A side issue, but none the less important, is the bailing and training of dogs using live rabbits. The film clearly showed Owen McKenna, the son of Joe McKenna, baiting dogs with live rabbits. Our interviewee said that dogs get bored with artificial bait—the conclusion being that they need live bait from time to time. That was particularly horrific—and if the strictures of my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield are to be taken seriously, I presume that at least Owen McKenna will soon be banned by the NGRC from participating in the sport.
There are two aspects to the drugs question. One is the ready availability to the training industry of black market drugs such as cortisones, amphetamines and anabolics. The documentary showed them to be available at least from a man called Alan Bennett in Yorkshire—not, I hope, the Alan Bennett that we all know and love. He was saying over the telephone that, if those drugs were used, the dogs would be—forgive the language, Madam Speaker—buggered afterwards. In other words, the second problem is the use of drugs to allow injured dogs to run. That may be okay in the short term, but in the longer term it harms dogs and perhaps even finishes them off.
The veterinary surgeon to whom several references have been made graphically illustrated, as he has done in writing, the effect of track racing on the four legs and feet of dogs. Again, that problem is sometimes covered up by drug misuse.

119
I hope that the Government will consider a number of matters, and that the Minister will comment on them tonight. The Select Committee on Home Affairs should reopen its 1991 investigation, which imposed severe strictures that were not followed up. The Government should at least query EC subsidies or overbreeding in Ireland.
The Government should also be involved in talks with their Irish and Spanish counterparts, to agree a joint approach to greyhound welfare and to prevent the export and import of animals other than as runners at proper tracks. I believe that the Irish Government's Agriculture Minister is still Brian O'Shea. So far, he has not been very helpful, although the board has been positive.
The Home Office should tighten up on the exemptions that allow ex-racing greyhounds to be purchased by laboratories where there are no suitable purpose-bred animals. The NGRC will ban for life owners who sell greyhounds that way. The Government should discuss—this is important to the NGRC and to everyone else involved in the sport—the possibility of imposing something like a levy at track level to provide properly for retired greyhounds. I hope that the industry will take that on board. There is surely enough money at the top of the industry to do something effective about it.
The Government should take action against the wrongful sale and use of drugs to enable sick or injured dogs to run. They should insist on enhanced veterinary examination before racing. Again, those guilty of the abuse of drugs should be banned from involvement in the sport.
Exports of greyhounds should be controlled by law. That has already been said by my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield, and by the hon. Member for Vale of Glamorgan. The NGRC takes action against people involved in the sport in Britain, but it cannot invoke the law to stop the trade. That is a matter for the Government.
Lastly, men such as Owen McKenna and others who use live animals to blood greyhounds should be banned by the NGRC from any involvement in racing. The Government should seriously consider whether such people are breaking the law.
It is an irony for me to be raising the subject of greyhound racing. I do not claim to be a dog lover, but I am revolted by the cruelty at the margins of the sport in Britain, and perhaps more than at the margins in other countries. It is no answer to say that most of the cruelty happens in Ireland or Spain. In the European Union we are intimately bound together in the trade that takes place. What happens in the ghastly Spanish concentration camps, where at least some, however few, of the dogs are from the United Kingdom, is our concern, just as it is the concern of the international community.
If the NGRC and the Government in co-operation do not do something about cruelty to greyhounds, Britain will see a sustained campaign against cruelty in sport. That could damage a perfectly legitimate sport, which I would not want to see damaged or become the subject of the attention of, for example, the League Against Cruel Sports.
10.21 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Charles Wardle): I congratulate the hon. Member for Lancashire, West (Mr. Pickthall) on
120
his success in obtaining this debate. His concern about the use of animals in sport is well known. The hon. Member for Mansfield (Mr. Meale) spoke with authority about NGRC rules. His knowledge in that matter is also well known. I noted the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Mr. Sweeney).
As my time is limited, I shall press on. As the hon. Member for Lancashire, West said, his debate has been prompted by a recent television programme in which allegations were made about cruelties in the sport of greyhound racing. The programme referred to practices, as the hon. Gentleman described, such as the feeding of dogs with live rabbits. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the use of drugs to enable injured dogs to run when they should not and the disposal of dogs, when they no longer race, for use in experimentation.
Before dealing with the allegations, it might be helpful if I were to describe the current law against cruelty to animals, without giving a long and descriptive passage. The Protection of Animals Act 1911 makes it an offence to ill-treat or cause unnecessary suffering to any domestic or captive animal. Under the Protection of Animals (Amendment) Act 1988, the court may in addition deprive a person of ownership of an animal for such period as it thinks fit. Section 1 of the 1911 Act was amended by the Abandonment of Animals Act 1960, which makes it an offence to abandon any animal—permanently or not—without reasonable cause or excuse in circumstances likely to cause the animal any unnecessary suffering.
Before I deal with the specific matters that the hon. Gentleman raised about the treatment of greyhounds in racing, I should make it clear that the Government are not responsible for greyhound racing as a sport, as the hon. Member for Mansfield reminded us in his recitation of some of the rules. We have two interests: we are responsible for controls on betting and we are responsible for the statutory framework governing the prevention of cruelty to animals to which I have just alluded.
In relation to the first, our concern is—
Mr. Sweeney: Will my hon. Friend give way?
Mr. Wardle: I am sorry, I must press on. If there is time later, I will give way. The time was over-run, quite understandably. Our concern is to maintain the integrity of betting as it takes place on greyhound racing and to see that the punter is treated fairly.
Turning to the specific issues raised by the hon. Member for Lancashire, West about the treatment of greyhounds in racing, obviously we must all be concerned if any of the allegations that have been made are true of racing in Britain. I heard what the hon. Gentleman said about other countries in the European Union and I understand his feelings, but he will also appreciate that I speak at the Dispatch Box for controls in this country. No doubt what he has said about conditions in other countries will be noted.
We have been in touch with the British Greyhound Racing Board, which says that the practices depicted on television are not tolerated in regulated greyhound racing in this country. I understand it to be its belief that a considerable amount of the footage shown in the television programme was filmed outside the United Kingdom and that most of the allegations involved practices taking place abroad.

121
The NGRC has said that there is no place in greyhound racing for anyone involved in cruel practices. It takes a most serious view of the matter and has made it clear that it does not accept cruelty to animals in the training and preparation of racing greyhounds. I understand that NGRC rules forbid the practice of using rabbits to train greyhounds and any trainers found using live bait to train a greyhound will have their licences withdrawn and not be allowed to train greyhounds for NGRC racing. I see that the hon. Member for Mansfield is nodding in agreement. The NGRC also says that it has a clear line in respect of greyhounds racing while injured. It requires a vet to be in attendance at each race meeting and all greyhounds to be inspected twice before racing. I am assured that the rules are very strictly applied.
Many people are naturally concerned to know what happens to retired greyhounds when their racing life is over. The NGRC cannot speak for independent tracks, which are not under their jurisdiction, but under its rules, the welfare of greyhounds is most important. The NGRC says that its main approach is that owners must be registered with the NGRC and can lose their licence if dogs are ill-treated. Of the £20 registration fee, £5 goes to the NGRC's Retired Greyhound Trust, whose function is to act as a fallback to help owners who cannot meet their responsibility towards the greyhounds in their care by placing dogs in homes.
The subject was touched on by the Select Committee on Home Affairs, which examined the financing of racing in 1991. It recommended that track owners and bookmakers should donate part of their profits to the retired greyhound trust. The Government's response was that the welfare of greyhounds during and after their racing career was the responsibility of the owners. Nevertheless, any support that those involved in the conduct of greyhound racing, or in betting on it, could give would also be welcome.
The Government have played their part in channelling funds towards the sport. The 1992 Budget resulted in a 0·25 per cent. reduction in betting duty. When making the announcement at the time, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer said that he hoped that the bookmakers would channel the portion relating to bets on greyhound racing to a voluntary fund. The two industries have set up the British greyhound racing fund under an independent chairman, Lord Kimball. The fund has benefited integrity services at tracks. In addition, £59,000 was donated in 1993 towards the work of the Retired Greyhound Trust.
It is understood that the track owners are also considering what more might be done to promote the home-finding schemes at their own tracks. It is the industry's intention to give fresh impetus to the work of the trust and in particular to concentrate on expanding and properly financing local home-finding schemes. In addition, it is estimated that 3,000 retired dogs are being kept in kennels by trainers throughout the country.
Whether the industry should be doing more to put money towards the provision of homes must be a matter for it. But I know that the industry is considering those questions most carefully in response to the concerns that have been expressed. I know that there is particular concern about the fate of dogs that are exported—as has been mentioned. The Government have no power to prevent the export of animals to other European Union countries and what goes on in those countries is a matter for them. However, I am sure that the remarks of the hon. Member for Lancashire, West will have been noted. I
122
understand that the NGRC has banned its members from exporting dogs to Spain. Where a dog goes after its racing career has to be the responsibility of the owner.
There have, I know, been suggestions that ex-racing greyhounds may have been used in scientific research. 'The 1986 legislation contains special provisions in respect of laboratory dogs and cats, which must be bred at, and obtained from, a designated breeding establishment. 'The only exception to that is where the Secretary of State is satisfied that animals suitable for the purpose of the programme cannot be so obtained and where there is a clear scientific case for using a non-designated source of supply. That provision is designed as reassurance that stray or stolen dogs will not be used in experiments.
There is now no designated source of supply for greyhounds. For a short period in 1991–92, there was a designated breeder of greyhounds for research purposes. When authority is given by the Home Secretary to acquire greyhounds from non-designated sources, a condition is added to the relevant project licence prohibiting the acquisition of animals from charities seeking homes for ex-racing greyhounds.
The demand for greyhounds for scientific use is very small and appears to be diminishing still further. It is likely that there will always be a residual demand for such animals for very scientific inquiries. For example, studies of the metabolism of drugs in trained, race-fit animals cannot be carried out in animals other than trained, race-fit animals. Therefore, if the scientific question is to be addressed properly, a means of acquiring such animals must be provided.
On the question of abuse of animals at independent tracks, it is already open to any person who believes that a dog has been caused unnecessary suffering in any circumstances to initiate proceedings under the Protection of Animals Act 1911, or to report the matter to the police.
As I seem to have made up a minute or so on time, does my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Glamorgan wish to intervene?
Mr. Sweeney: Given the high incidence of injuries to greyhounds at United Kingdom dog tracks, will my hon. Friend consider introducing controls over the NGRC and other track operators to ensure that tracks are independently inspected so that racing can be stopped if the going is too hard and so that veterinary examinations are conducted by independent vets rather than those employed by dog tracks?
Mr. Wardle: My hon. Friend will have heard my earlier comments' and his remarks will have been noted by the House. As I said, it is a matter for the NGRC. The Government do not propose to introduce legislation that would, in effect, tell the NGRC what to do. It sets its rules, which it expects to be followed. If they are not, the penalties have been made clear to its members. Two inspections are conducted by a vet at each meeting and I see no reason to doubt their integrity. My hon. Friend's comments will have been noted.
We all want to see humane treatment of the animals on which the sport depends. The Government have given full support to legislation to strengthen the Protection of Animals Act 1911. We have supported measures for increased penalties and stronger powers for the courts to disqualify offenders from having custody of any animal.

123
The sport must be ever-vigilant to protect its good name and I commend the hon. Member for Lancashire, West for bringing the matter to the attention of the House. The industry must face the concerns that have been expressed
124
head on and must deal with them. We shall be in touch with the sport's ruling body to report what has been said in the debate.
Question put and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at twenty-eight minutes to Eleven o'clock.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Public Bodies
  Mr. Kilfoyle
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade who are the members currently appointed to the Simpler Trade Procedures Board.

  Mr. Needham
  The information requested is as follows:

  Mr. J. G. Davis, CBE—Chairman

  Mr. J. M. Fetherston, OBE JP—Vice Chairman

  Mr. R. Walker, OBE—Chief Executive

  Mr. R. Dale—Deputy Chief Executive

  Mr. F. R. Mingay, CMG DTI—Ex-Officio

  Mr. M. Brown, HM Customs—Ex-Officio

  Dr. C. J. Bell

  Mr. N. R. Boakes

  Mr. B. J. Kelleher

  Mr. T. B. C. McGuffog

  Mr. M. J. Booth

  Viscount Chelmsford

  Mr. C. J. Clark

  Sir Julian Ridsdale, CBE

  Mr. B. S. Wheble, CBE Hon FCIB

  Mr. M. Williams

  Mr. Kilfoyle
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade who are the members currently appointed to the National Research Development Corporation.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  In answer to the hon. Member's question as to who are the members currently appointed to the National Research Development Corporation, they are:

  Mr. I. Harvey

  Mr. R. Kathoke

  Dr. J. Morton

  Sir R. Riley

  Industrial Research Establishments
  Mr. Ingram
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will place in the Library a copy of the KPMG report on his Department's industrial research establishments.

  Mr. Heseltine
  I will take a decision on whether to place a copy in to the Library of the House when I have received the final report.

  Power Transmission Lines
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what studies his energy technology support unit has conducted or commissioned into the inhibitive effects of oxidative phosphorylation of electric field exposure from power transmission lines.

  Mr. Eggar
  The energy technology support unit has not conducted or commissioned any research into this subject but we are aware of the reported findings of research in the United States which may be related to it.
  2

  Compact Discs
  Sir Michael Neubert
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what recent representations he has received relating to the production and sale of compact discs in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  A small number of representations continue to be received about the price of compact discs. This is an issue currently being considered by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission in its inquiry into the supply of recorded music in the United Kingdom.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in his private office and (b) in his Department.

  Mr. Eggar
  The information is as follows:

  (a) There is no paper shredder in my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade's private office.

  (b) Excluding "next steps" agencies, my Department has approximately 50 paper shredders distributed among the various management units.

  Small Businesses
  Mr. Hendry
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has discussed with the British Standards Institute the report of its policy committee on small businesses on BS5750.

  Mr. McLoughlin
  The British Standards Institution's policy committee for small businesses, chaired by Mr. Roger Dunn, has prepared a report on the application of BS5750, the standard for quality management systems, to small firms. The report is published by BSI today and a copy has been placed in the Library of the House.

  BS5750 is a voluntary standard developed by industry. Many United Kingdom businesses have found it advantageous as a management tool. The report recognises this potential benefit and the overall contribution of the standard to higher and consistent quality in the provision of goods and services. It concludes that the underlying principles are equally applicable to large and small businesses, but that small businesses face particular problems in the course of preparing for and obtaining certification.

  The committee notes that a number of research projects in this field have yet to be completed but goes on to make a number of provisional recommendations to Government, BSI and others. I have discussed these issues with BSI and my officials have consulted other interested parties.

  I accept the recommendation addressed to my Department concerning consultant registration. My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has already announced to the House on 7 December Official Report, column 154, a new consultancy brokerage service which will include computer listings of consultants offering advice on quality improvement. This service will itself operate under a quality assured system which will at least maintain, and where possible build upon, the high standards established under the enterprise initiative consultancy scheme. In particular, we shall ensure that the methods used in selecting consultants who apply to be listed will continue to be rigorous. The new service will actively promote BS5750 certification among management

  3
  consultants in general and ensure that potential clients are made aware of those listed consultants who have themselves already achieved certification to that standard.

  We have also agreed to take the lead in a number of other areas. We shall take action as soon as possible, within the managing in the 90s programme, to publish guidance on BS5750 for small firms and for purchasers. We shall facilitate, through business links, the development by training and enterprise councils, chambers of commerce and others of local self-help schemes for small companies. We shall continue to contribute to the cost of research into the difficulties of small firms in this field and will seek a suitable forum for continued oversight of these issues. We shall also ensure that the European Commission is alert to the problem.

  The report recommends action by certification bodies and the National Accreditation Council for Certification Bodies and urges them to adapt their assessment procedures and to consider how fees and charges for small firms can be modified. My Department has consulted these bodies, who have welcomed the report and its recommendations. The NACCB-Association of British Certification Bodies small firms working party and individual certification bodies are actively preparing positive responses on these aspects.

  Insolvency Service
  Mr. Hendry
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what was the outcome of the review of the future of the Insolvency Service.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  On 22 July 1993,Official Report, column 363, I announced a review to consider the scope for improving the way the Insolvency Service performs its functions and, in particular, to look at ways in which official receivers could concentrate more on their investigatory role by involving the private sector more in the mechanical processing work in insolvencies. The review was carried out by Stoy Hayward Consulting.

  I have considered Stoy Hayward's report—a summary of which has been placed in the Libraries of both Houses—and have decided that its findings provide a sufficient basis for further, more detailed work to be done to assess the costs and benefits of and mechanisms for involving the private sector more in those mechanical, processing tasks undertaken by the official receiver in relation to bankruptcy and compulsory liquidation cases. The specification for this further work has been drawn up and a letter of invitation issued. If this work reveals likely value for money gains in pursuing any of the options identified, I will consider whether there should be live trials in one or more regions.

  Private Pensions
  Mr. Denham
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what estimates he has received from life insurance companies of their liability for compensation payments to people wrongly advised to transfer into private pensions.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  The Department has written to life offices to ask them to indicate their likely exposure to compensation in respect of mis-selling of personal pensions, and to provide guidance on how the Department expects them to reserve for any such exposure in future Companies Act accounts and DTI returns. Individual responses must remain confidential as between the life 4
  offices and the Department. However, where a life office considers that it is likely to have a liability or a contingent liability, in respect of mis-selling of pension business, the Department expects this to be recognised in the published accounts.

  Charles Barker
  Mr. Cryer
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will institute an inquiry into the collapse and resale of the lobbying company Charles Barker; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Neil Hamilton
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: If the hon. Member will provide details of the matters which cause him concern, they will be given full consideration.

  Electricity (Safety)
  Mr. Hunter
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has to ensure that only suitably qualified people advise customers of electricity companies on wiring and safety.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 3 February 1994]: I have no plans for this purpose. The guidelines provided by BS7671—the IEE wiring regulations—are well established and well known in the electrical contracting and associated industries.

  BS7671 applies to the design, selection, erection, inspection and testing of electrical installations. It also makes requirements for safety with the objective of protecting persons, property and livestock against electrical shock, fires, burns and various mechanical hazards. Persons who wish to certify that an installation satisfies the requirements of this standard must be competent for the work. The standard sets out the requirements for competence.

  The safety aspects of this standard are supported by legislation, for example the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974.

  Mr. Hunter
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what guidelines he has issued to companies regarding the qualifications of employees advising customers on rewiring and safety.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 3 February 1994]: I have not issued any guidelines for this purpose. The guidelines provided by BS7671—the IEE wiring regulations—are well established and well known in the electrical contracting and associated industries.

  BS7671 applies to the design, selection, erection, inspection and testing of electrical installations. It also makes requirements for safety with the objective of protecting persons, property and livestock against electrical shock, fires burns and various mechanical hazards. Persons who wish to certify that an installation satisfies the requirements of this standard must be competent for the work. The standard sets out the requirements for competence.

  The safety aspects of this standard are supported by legislation, for example the Health and Safety at Work, etc. Act 1974.
  5

  Rover Group
  Mr. Nicholas Winterton
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement clarifying the Government's strategy for industry; and what assessment he has made of the implications for that strategy of the sale of Rover Group to the German Company BMW.

  Mr. Heseltine
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: The Government's strategy is to help British industry win. The sale to BMW by British Aerospace of its stake in Rover is consistent with that strategy as Rover, while remaining a separate entity with its own manufacturing design and development facilities in the United Kingdom, will also gain increased export opportunities and better access to much-needed funds for further capital reinvestment. BAe will be able to pursue plans for the turbo-prop and regional jet businesses in Prestwick and Manchester.

  Mr. Nicholas Winterton
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what information he has concerning the percentage change in sales in each of the last three years for which figures are available for(a) Rover Group and (b) BMW (i) in the United Kingdom, (ii) in Europe and (iii) in Germany.

  Mr. Heseltine
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: The information requested is set out in the table.

  Rover Group

  Percentage change in sales

  United Kingdom

  Germany

  EC

  1990

  —

  +16·3

  —

  1991

  -18·5

  +59·0

  -9·3

  1992

  -6·0

  +26·0

  -4·0

  1993

  +10·5

  —

  +8·9

  BMW

  Percentage change in sales

  United Kingdom

  Germany

  EC

  1990

  —

  -0·03

  -2·3

  1991

  -10·0

  +16·70

  +12·4

  1992

  +5·0

  +9·90

  +10·7

  1993

  +0·6

  —

  —

  Mr. Nicholas Winterton
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what assessment he has made of the future impact upon the attraction of investment from Japan of the sale of Rover Group to BMW.

  Mr. Heseltine
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: The long-held welcome which this Government and country have given to investment from Japan is as strong as ever. The advantages we offer have led to our securing 40 per cent. of all Japanese investment in the European Community: these remain in place. I am sure that Japanese industry will continue to recognise these benefits and the strength of our relationship and will make its investment decisions accordingly.

  Manufacturing Companies (Sale)
  Mr. Nicholas Winterton
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what is his overall policy on the sale of major manufacturing companies to overseas interests.
  6
  Mr. Heseltine
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: The Government generally welcome foreign investment in United Kingdom companies. Only in exceptional cases would I consider using the powers I possess.

  Overseas Investors
  Mr. Nicholas Winterton
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make it his policy to seek in future to encourage overseas business to invest in existing British companies without seeking to change their ownership.

  Mr. Heseltine
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: We shall continue to maintain our successful policies towards both inward and outward investment.

NATIONAL FINANCE

  Business Support
  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the total value of loans awarded by the European investment bank for investments in the European Community in each year since its establishment; and what proportion of the loans were for the financing of projects in (i) the northern region and (ii) the United Kingdom as a whole.

  Mr. Nelson
  A detailed breakdown of the bank's lending is published in its annual report and accounts, copies of which are available in the Library. The figures sought for 1991 and 1992 can be found in the reports for these years. However, it is not possible to obtain the information requested for previous years, since the bank did not then prepare or publish a full breakdown of lending by region.

  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the total value of European Community loans made at competitive rates to small and medium-sized enterprises in each year since its establishment; and what proportion of these loans were granted to businesses in(a) the northern region and (b) the United Kingdom as a whole.

  Mr. Nelson
  Within the institutions of the European Community, there are two sources of loans for small arid medium sized enterprises, the European investment bank and the European Coal and Steel Community. For the EIB, the information sought can be obtained from its annual report and accounts, copies of which are available in the Library. The ECSC, however, does not compile or publish statistics showing what proportion of its lending is directed to small and medium-sized enterprises.

  Indonesia (Ministerial Visit)
  Mrs. Anne Campbell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the cost to public funds of his trip to Indonesia during the Christmas recess; and how many hours of official business he conducted while he was there.

  Mr. Nelson
  The cost of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's visit to the far east during the Christmas recess, with accompanying Treasury officials, was about £31,500. The Indonesian part of the trip involved four and a half days. During this time, my right hon. and learned
  7
  Friend met the President of Indonesia, a number of senior Indonesian Ministers with responsibility for the economy, the Governor of the Bank of Indonesia and a range of Indonesian and expatriate business people. He also visited a British-funded railway project, together with BP's new polyethylene plant in western Java.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Heppell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer which organisations were consulted by his Department on each of the recommendations of the business deregulation task forces before they were agreed and action proposed in the DTI document "Deregulation: Cutting the Red Tape".

  Mr. Nelson
  Each of the task force recommendations agreed or agreed in principle by the Government has been or will be the subject of appropriate consultation with sector representatives.

  VAT Repayments
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of VAT repayments by Her Majesty's Customs and Excise were made within 30 days of receiving a claim in the last year for which figures are available.

  Sir John Cope
  In the financial year ended 31 March 1993, Her Majesty's Customs and Excise made 98·5 per cent. of VAT repayments within 30 days of having received the claims.

  Executive Agencies
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list the subjects on which his Department formerly answered parliamentary questions but which are now referred by him to an executive agency.

  Mr. Nelson
  The chief executives of the Central Statistical Office, the Office of Her Majesty's Paymaster General, the Valuation Office agency and the Royal Mint have delegated authority to reply to parliamentary questions on day-to-day operational matters within their responsibilities. Since the procedures for publishing chief executives' replies in the Official Report were introduced in October 1992, only three questions have been tabled concerning the operational responsibilities of the executive agencies of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

  Carbon Dioxide Energy Tax
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the fiscal return to the Exchequer during 1994–95 of implementation of the carbon dioxide energy tax as proposed by the European White Paper on employment.

  Mr. Dorrell
  The Commission White Paper on "Growth, competitiveness and employment" refers to the CO2/energy tax proposed by the Commission in June 1992 but does not itself propose such a tax. The revenue which would be raised by implementing a tax as proposed in 1992 would depend on a number of factors, in particular: whether it took the place of other energy taxes, such as fuel duties; and decisions on the nature and size of any of the proposed exemptions to the tax.
  8

  Correspondence
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of written inquiries and customer complaints to Her Majesty's Customs and Excise were replied to within 10 working days.

  Sir John Cope
  The latest available figures show that 90 per cent. of all written inquiries and 65 per cent. of all customer complaints to Her Majesty's Customs were replied to within 10 working days.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in his private office and (b) in his Department.

  Mr. Nelson
  There is one shredding machine in the Chancellor of the Exchequer's private office and seven in use elsewhere in the Treasury.

DUCHY OF LANCASTER

  Scott Inquiry
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what assessment he has made of the implications for open government of the proceedings of the Scott inquiry.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  The Government have provided Lord Justice Scott's inquiry with all the information it has requested. Any assessment of implications awaits Lord Justice Scott's findings.

  Inherited Defects
  Mr. Miller
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what steps he will take to protect the clinical work that relates to the research into inherited defects of connective tissue currently carried out by the dermatology research group at the clinical research centre at Harrow.

  Mr. David Davis
  The dermatology research group at the clinical research centre will be transferring to the department of pathology at the university of Cambridge in the course of the year. The Medical Research Council has funded the research group for a further five years and has funded new accommodation on the Addenbrooke's hospital site. The team will therefore be able to continue its clinical research programme into inherited defects of connective tissue. In addition, links are being formed with the East Anglia regional genetics centre.

  Public Bodies
  Dr. Wright
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster which non-departmental public bodies for which he is responsible have(a) been abolished or (b) created since June 1992.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by the Prime Minister on 1 February,Official Report, column 611.
  9

CHURCH COMMISSIONERS

  Property Investment
  Mr. Clifton-Brown
  To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, if he will list the individuals and firms who have ceased to advise the Church Commissioners on commercial property investments in the last three years.

  Mr. Alison
  No firms other than those listed in my answer on 24 January,Official Report, column 1, have advised the commissioners on commercial property investments in the last three years, although there have naturally been changes of personnel within these firms and in their terms of reference. The group advising the commissioners' assets committee on property matters is a new group and was established in response to one of the Lambeth report's recommendations.

  Board of Governors
  Mr. Clifton-Brown
  To ask the right hon. Member for Selby, representing the Church Commissioners, if he will list the current Church Commissioners' board of governors and the date of their appointment.

  Mr. Alison
  The members of the board of governors and their date of appointment are listed:

  Member

  Date of appointment

  The Most Revd and Right Hon. G. L. Carey Archbishop of Canterbury (Chairman)

  Ex-officio1 (19 April 1991)

  The Most Revd and Right Hon. J. S. Habgood Archbishop of York

  Ex-officio1 (18 October 1993)

  The Right Revd J. Waine Bishop of Chelmsford (Deputy Chairman)

  25 February 1982

  Sir Michael Colman First Church Estates Commissioner

  Ex-officio1 (1 April 1993)

  The Right Hon. Michael Alison MP Second Church Estates Commissioner

  Ex-officio1 (19 June 1987)

  Mrs. M. H. Laird Third Church Estates Commissioner

  Ex-officio1 (1 January 1989)

  The Right Revd and Right Hon. D. M. Hope Bishop of London

  30 June 1993

  The Right Revd A. D. Chesters Bishop of Blackburn

  224 September 1992

  The Right Revd P. J. Nott Bishop of Norwich

  30 June 1993

  The Right Revd A. M. A. Tumbull Bishop of Rochester

  28 April 1988

  The Right Revd D. R. Lunn Bishop of Sheffield

  27 June 1984

  The Very Revd J. M. Moses Provost of Chelmsford

  28 April 1988

  The Very Revd B. H. Lewers Provost of Derby

  28 April 1988

  The Venerable G. G. Gibson Archdeacon of Auckland

  1 April 1993

  The Venerable J. Richards Archdeacon of Exeter

  1 April 1993

  The Venerable J. S. Gaisford Archdeacon of Macclesfield

  21 June 1991

  The Venerable G. B. Austin Archdeacon of York

  1 January 1980

  The Revd Canon J. A. Stanley

  28 April 1988

  The Revd Prebendary R. N. Inwood

  1 April 1993

  The Viscountess Brentford

  1 April 1993

  Mr. A. Cooper

  1 April 1993

  Mr. H. Gracey

  21 June 1991

  10

  Member

  Date of appointment

  Mrs. P. R. Granger

  1 June 1991

  Sir John Herbecq

  1 August 1982

  Mr. P. A. Lovegrove

  28 April 1988

  Mr. E. G. Nugee QC

  23 August 1993

  Mr. J. F. M. Smallwood

  17 November 1966

  Mr. D. H. L. Hopkinson (co-opted)

  228 April 1988

  The Very Revd T. E. Evans (co-opted)

  223 February 1989

  Dean of St. Pauls

  1 Ex-officio.

  2 Also served previous terms of office.

LORD CHANCELLOR'S DEPARTMENT

  Judges (Training)
  Mrs. Golding
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how much training judges are having on the implementation of the Children Act 1989.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The Children Act 1989 requires that cases arising under the Act are heard by judges specifically authorised for the purpose by the Lord Chancellor. Before granting this authorisation, the Lord Chancellor requires that the judge should have had the appropriate training arranged by the Judicial Studies Board. For public law, this involves attending a seminar on the subject of care cases. District judges who handle such cases also receive training. In addition, family work is included in induction and refresher training for district judges and guidance on both public and private law work is given at one-day family law seminars held on circuits and attended by all levels of the judiciary involved in this work. The Judicial Studies Board also holds a conference each year for the family division liaison judges and the designated family judges, which is chaired by the president of the family division.

  Shared Residency Orders
  Mrs. Golding
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many shared residency orders have been made since the Children Act 1989 came into force; and how many have been contested.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  This information is not available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Shared Access Orders
  Mrs. Golding
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many shared access orders have been made since the Children Act 1989 was implemented; and how many of these have been contested.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  Contact—formerly access—orders are made on the basis of one application and one order. There is no provision under the Children Act 1989 for shared contact applications or orders. The figures for the number of cases in which multiple contact orders have been made and which of those were contested are not available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
  11

  Judiciary
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will update the information given in his answer of 12 February 1993,Official Report, column 784, to the hon. Member for Nottingham, North regarding the composition of the judiciary.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The information—as at 1 January 1994—is set out. The figures for black or Asian office

  Number

  Average age (years)

  Men

  Women

  1Barrister

  Solicitor

  Black/Asian

  Lords of Appeal in Ordinary

  10

  66·5

  10

  —

  10

  —

  —

  Lords Justices

  29

  63·0

  28

  1

  29

  —

  —

  Heads of Division (excludes Lord Chancellor)

  4

  63·0

  4

  —

  4

  —

  —

  High Court Judges

  95

  57·6

  89

  6

  94

  1

  —

  Circuit Judges (includes Official Referees)

  499

  57·8

  472

  27

  439

  60

  2

  Recorders

  813

  52·0

  775

  38

  740

  73

  9

  Assistant Recorders (excludes Assistant Recorders in training)

  432

  45·7

  375

  57

  357

  75

  8

  Stipendiary Magistrates

  78

  53·1

  70

  8

  36

  42

  1

  Industrial Tribunal Chairmen

  73

  56·4

  61

  12

  35

  38

  2

  Value Added Tax Tribunal Chairmen

  4

  60·3

  4

  —

  3

  1

  —

  Social Security Appeal Tribunal Chairmen

  33

  50·3

  23

  10

  8

  25

  —

  1 Or member of the faculty of advocates.

  Landlord Mortgages
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what changes have been agreed following the Law Commission report on transfer of landlord mortgages.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The extensive recommendations in the Law Commission's report on "Transfer of Land: Land Mortgages"—Law Com. No. 204—are still under consideration by the Government.

  Statutory Sick Pay
  Mr. Ingram
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will provide figures for the amount his Department has been reimbursed by the Department of Social Security in respect of statutory sick pay provision for each of the past three years.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The total reimbursement by the Department of Social Security in the 1992–93 financial year was £542,025·79; and up to the end of December 1993 was £472,052·53. No earlier figures are available.

PRIME MINISTER

  European Investment Fund
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his oral answer of 1 February,Official Report, column 734, concerning the accountability of the managers of the European investment fund, for what period funds at their disposal have been part of the annual budget of the European Community; what are the names of those who have the duty of appointing the managers of the fund and who appoints them and what are the names, experience, current employment and other relevant interests of the managers already appointed and the number of vacancies.

  The Prime Minister
  The proposed European investment fund cannot be established until the necessary treaty
  12
  holders are believed to be correct, but the formal recording of the ethnic background of applicants for judicial office only began on 1 October 1991, so such information may be incomplete. Aggregated information is not generally kept on the average ages of judges or on their school and university background. However, the results of a recent special exercise in relation to average ages are set out.

  amendment has been ratified by all the European Community's member states. Only then can managers for the fund be appointed. Meanwhile, the situation will remain as follows:

  (a) No funds are at the disposal of the managers of the fund. The funding referred to in my answer of 1 February is the provision taken by the European Community for its planned subscription to the share capital of the fund. This subscription will be paid over four years. The Community's 1994 Budget contains provision for the first tranche and was adopted on 16 December 1993.

  (b) The draft statute of the fund places the ultimate responsibility for appointing the managers of the fund with the fund's general meeting. This meeting would comprise representatives of the fund's shareholders: the European investment bank, the European Community and financial institutions from member states. The EIB and the EC would hold the majority of the share capital, and their representatives at the meeting would be accountable to the EIB's board of governors, and the ECOFIN Council, respectively.

  (c) The draft statute envisages that day-to-day management would be in the hands of a financial committee. This would have three members, one of whom would be a representative of the EIB, one a representative of the EC, and one a representative of the financial institutions. No nomination to this committee can be made until the fund is established.

  Child Nutrition
  Mr. Alfred Morris
  To ask the Prime Minister what recent representations he has received from the National Children's Home in regard to child nutrition; what reply he is sending; what action he is taking; and if he will make a statement.

  The Prime Minister
  I have received a letter from the N.C.H. Action for Children. A reply will be sent in due course.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Prime Minister how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in 10 Downing street and (b) in the Cabinet Office.
  13
  The Prime Minister
  There are five paper shredding machines in 10 Downing street, and five in the Cabinet Office.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  Radioactive Wastes (Dumping)
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will place document A/C1/48/L.17 on prohibition of dumping of radioactive wastes, presented to the United Nations General Assembly in 1993, in the Library.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The document has been placed in the Library.

  Indonesia
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he knew about the proposed sale of Hawk aircraft to Indonesia when he visited Jakarta in April 1993; and whether this was discussed.

  Mr. Goodlad
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs was aware of the proposed sale of Hawk aircraft when he visited Jakarta in April 1993. It was referred to during that visit.

  UN Register of Conventional Arms
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will use the description of item column to give details of model type of the equipment, when making the United Kingdom's 1993 return to the UN register of conventional arms.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  There are no plans to do so. This is not currently a requirement of the UN arms register.

  Military Equipment Embargoes
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the countries currently subject to embargoes on the export of British military equipment, when in each case the embargo was imposed and which equipment is covered.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  We observe embargoes imposed by the United Nations on Iraq, imposed in 1991; Libya, 1992; Somalia, 1993; Liberia, 1992; Haiti, 1993; South Africa, 1977; and former Yugoslavia, 1991. The scope of United Nations embargoes is not defined; decisions on their application are made at national discretion on a case-by-case basis. We apply all these embargoes to all military equipment.

  We also observe embargoes imposed by the European Union on China, 1989; Syria, 1986; Burma, 1991; and Zaire, 1993. We apply the embargoes on Burma, Zaire and Syria to all military equipment. We apply the embargo on China to weapons and any equipment which could be used for internal repression.

  We also observe a voluntary embargo agreed by the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe on Armenia and Azerbaijan, 1992, which we consider applies to all military equipment.

  In addition, as a matter of declared national policy we refuse to supply military equipment to Argentina, since
  14
  1982,and to Israel, since 1982—in the case of Israel, we decided in 1983 to allow the export of electronic and small non-lethal components provided they did not form part of equipment due to be put into service with the Israeli armed forces in Lebanon.

  In the case of Iran, there have been restrictions since 1979. Stricter guidelines were introduced in 1984 relating to the export of all defence-related equipment. Following a review of export licensing criteria for Iran announced by the President of the Board of Trade in December 1992, new guidelines were announced to Parliament in my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs' statement of 1 March 1993.

  In the case of the United Nations embargoes on Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Liberia, Haiti and the former Yugoslavia, the Government have introduced Orders in Council under the United Nations Act 1946. In all other cases, controls are effected under the Export of Goods (Control) Order 1992, and its predecessors.

  Export licences have been issued in respect of equipment for United Nations and EC peacekeeping activities and for the protection of those undertaking humanitarian and media work, for example, journalists in former Yugoslavia.

  Biodiversity Action Plan
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the reason, for not including the British Indian ocean territory and the Great Chagos Bank Atoll in the areas covered by i.he biodiversity action plan published on 25 January.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  It was decided that given the special circumstances of the British Indian ocean territory—BIOT—it would not be appropriate for the islands to be included in the national plan for biodiversity.

  Access to Diego Garcia is restricted because of the defence facility on the island. Nevertheless, legislative and other measures have been implemented to protect the territory's environment. BIOT has a conservation consultant who is developing a comprehensive programme for the territory and has close links with the charity, the Friends of the Chagos, an organisation concerned with the conservation of the Chagos archipelago.

  Executive Agencies
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the subjects on which his Department formerly answered parliamentary questions but which are now referred by him to an executive agency.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The framework documents of the Natural Resources Institute and the Wilton Park executive agency set out the responsibilities delegated to the respective chief executives. They will normally be responsible for answering questions on those matters for which they are responsible.

  UNESCO
  Mr. Dowd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is his policy towards renewed membership of UNESCO; and if he will make a statement.
  15
  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  We are continuing to keep this matter under close review, but for the moment have taken no decision on whether to rejoin UNESCO.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in his private office and (b) in his Department.

  Mr. Goodlad
  There is one paper shredding machine in the private office and an estimated 548 machines in the Department's home and overseas offices.

  United Nations
  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what has been the United Kingdom's annual contribution to the funding of the United Nations in each of the last four years.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  Details of the United Kingdom's contributions to the United Nations regular budget over the past four years are as follows:

  1991—$44,775,548

  1992—$49,437,654

  1993—$51,229,662

  1994—$51,067,778—provisional

  Sheikh Riaz Ahmad
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what substantive reply he has received from the French authorities concerning Sheikh Riaz Ahmad who was refused leave to enter France in December 1992; how many representations he has now made to the French authorities; how many replies he has now received from the French authorities; what further action he intends to take; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The British embassy has yet to receive a satisfactory explanation as to why Mr. Ahmed was refused entry to France. The embassy has sent eight notes verbales to the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs to which it has received four replies, none of which was regarded as satisfactory. On 11 January 1994 the consul-general called at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to discuss Mr. Ahmed's case further. The Ministry agreed to look into the matter again.

  I shall write to the hon. Gentleman as soon as I have anything further to report.

  Nuclear Weapons
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is Her Majesty's Government's policy towards a cut-off convention for fissile materials available for nuclear warhead manufacture.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  We supported the United Nations General Assembly resolution last year which called for the negotiation of a convention prohibiting the production of plutonium and highly enriched uranium for nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. Although we shall wish to consider very carefully the implications of such a convention for our nuclear deterrent, we recognise the potentially valuable contribution which a multilateral 16
  convention could make to non-proliferation. On 1 February, the conference on disarmament appointed a special co-ordinator to seek the views of its member states on the most appropriate arrangements for a cut-off convention.

  Yugoslavia
  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his answer of 28 January,Official Report, column 424, what has been the total amount received from the United Nations for Britian's contribution of troops, equipment and expertise to the UNPROFOR mission in former Yugoslavia in each year since the operation began.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  UNPROFOR Croatia—UNPROFOR I—began in February 1992, UNPROFOR Bosnia-Hercegovina Command—UNPROFOR II—in September 1992.

  United Nations reimbursements for UNPROFOR I in the financial year 1992–93 totalled £191,663·25. Reimbursements for UNPROFOR I and II in the financial year 1993–94 to date now total £17,120,698·94.

  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his answer of 28 January,Official Report, column 425, if he will list the payments made to his Department by the United Nations in respect of UNPROFOR in the last three financial years covering (a) military observers, (b) military contingents, (c) other costs pertaining to contingents, (d) civilian police monitors, (e) civilian staff costs, (f) international contractual personnel salaries, (g) engineering salaries and material, (h) helicopter operations, (i) fixed-wing aircraft, (j) aircrew subsistence allowance, (k) ground handling, (l) transport operations, (m) other equipment, (n) supplies and services, (o) integrated management information systems, (p) support for peacekeeping mission and (q) technological; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  As my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces explained in his answer of 28 January,Official Report, column 424, United Nations reimbursements to date have been made up of standard rate payments for troop costs and rations only. UNPROFOR Croatia—UNPROFOR I—began in February 1992 and UNPROFOR Bosnia-Hercegovina Command—UNPROFOR II—in September 1992. UNPROFOR II was only brought on to United Nations assessed contribution funding from 1 April 1993. The MoD Operation Hanwood withdrew from Croatia in September 1993. United Nations reimbursements have therefore been made in the financial years 1992–93 and 1993–94 to date as follows:

  £

  Financial Year 1992–93

  UNPROFOR I progress payments for troop costs for the period to 31 July 1992

  July 1992

  117,726·45

  February 1993

  73,936·80

  Total

  191,663·25

  Financial Year 1993–94 to date

  UNPROFOR I balance of refunds due for troop costs March to July 1992

  May 1993

  131,899·88

  17

  £

  UNPROFOR I troop costs for the month of August 1992

  June 1993

  216,526·76

  UNPROFOR I troop costs for the months of September and October 1992

  July 1993

  414,643·55

  UNPROFOR I troop costs for the month of November 1992

  August 1993

  190,521·39

  UNPROFOR I troop costs for the month of December 1992

  September 1993

  179,233·43

  UNPROFOR I troop costs for the months of January to March 1993

  October 1993

  535,084·08

  UNPROFOR I and II progress payments for troop costs April to June 1993

  November 1993

  5,419,567·12

  UNPROFOR II rations for the period April to June 1993

  November 1993

  1,038,928·80

  UNPROFOR II rations for the period July to September 1993

  December 1993

  974,359·39

  UNPROFOR I and II progress payment for troop costs for July to September 1993

  December 1993

  5,112,072·48

  UNPROFOR II progress payment for troop costs for October 1993

  January 1994

  1,578,704·56

  UNPROFOR II progress payment for troop costs for November 1993

  February 1994

  1,329,157·50

  Total

  17,120,698·94

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Immigration Laws (Employment)
  Mr. Bradley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which EC countries have laws criminalising employers for employing workers who do not have permission to work under the immigration laws of the country; and for each country how long such legislation has been in existence.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  From the information readily available we understand that most member states of the EC have penalties which involve fines and/or imprisonment for employers who employ foreign nationals who do not have the requisite permission to work. Information as to how long such legislation has been in existence is not available.

  Committal Proceedings
  Sir Ivan Lawrence
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what conclusion he has reached on the Royal Commission on criminal justice's recomrnendations regarding committal proceedings.
  18
  Mr. Howard
  The Government have accepted the arguments put forward by the Royal Commission and agreed that committal proceedings should be abolished.

  "Old style" or "full" committals are a costly and cumbersome process. They are open to abuse by the defence, particularly where the witness is also a victim. The much larger number of so-called "paper " committals are largely a formality, serving little purpose.

  Abolishing committals would reduce, in most cases, the time taken by pre-trial procedures and should allow savings to be made in court and legal aid costs.

  In place of committal hearings, we propose there should be a procedure allowing cases to be transferred to the Crown court administratively. This would apply in all indictable-only cases, and in triable either-way cases once a decision on mode of trial has been reached in the magistrates court.

  As recommended by the royal commission, there would still be a procedure under which the defence could argue that there was no case to answer in advance of trial at the Crown court.

  Under the proposed new "transfer for trial" procedure, such an application would in most cases be considered by the magistrates on the papers. But the court would have a discretion to admit oral argument by the defence on application.

  Again as recommended by the royal commission, no witnesses would be called to give evidence in these proceedings. This means there will be no question of vulnerable witnesses being requested to give evidence twice.

  A new clause will shortly be tabled as an addition to the Criminal Justice and Public Order Bill, which, if approved, will give effect to these proposals.

  Police Performance Targets
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list those police forces which had and had not(a) published targets and indicators of performances and (b) published target times for answering telephone calls and responding to incidents requiring rapid reaction by July 1993.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The information is not centrally available. Police forces will be expected to publish performance indicators and targets for 1993–94 during the course of 1994–95. Local authorities will also be publishing the Audit Commission performance indicators.

  Immigration
  Mrs. Wise
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what is the current waiting time for interview in relation to settlement applications from spouses or fiances or fiancees in Pakistan;

  (2) what is the current waiting time for interviews in relation to settlement applications from spouses or fiances or fiancees in India.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The information requested is published in table 10 of Home Office Statistical Bulletin Issue 33/93 "Control of Immigration: Statistics—First and Second Quarters 1993", a copy of which is in the Library. Statistics for the third and fourth quarters of 1993 will be published in April.
  19

  Overseas Electors
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many citizens living overseas have applied to be registered to vote in elections in each parliamentary constituency.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Information on the number of British citizens overseas applying to register as overseas electors is not collected centrally. Information on the number of overseas electors included in the 1993–94 register for each constituency was published by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys in "Electoral Statistics 1993"—EL No. 20—copies of which are in the Library. Figures for the 1994–95 register will be published in the summer.

  Taylforth Libel Case
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will call for a report from the Metropolitan Commissioner on the release to The Sun newspaper of the facts of the arrest and caution which were the subject of the recent Taylforth libel case; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  I understand from the Commissioner that a reporter from The Sun telephoned the Metropolitan police press bureau seeking confirmation of the details of an incident on 17 June 1992 on a slip road of the Al. The press bureau confirmed that an incident had occurred, but did not volunteer the names of the persons involved.

  Proxy Voting
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make the application form to vote by post or proxy due to disability or physical incapacity available in braille.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  We have no plans to do so.

  Crime Statistics
  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what guidance is issued to chief constables on the reporting of criminal activity on police command and control systems and in published rates of recorded crime;

  (2) whether each police force throughout England and Wales uses the same criteria in recording criminal activity on police command and control systems and in the publishing of statistics of recorded crime.

  Mr. Maclean
  Statistics of recorded crime are based on rules for classification and counting which are standard for all the police forces in England and Wales. A comprehensive set of counting rules is used by police forces in order to maintain the consistency of recording multiple, continuous and repeated offences. Although these rules are issued centrally, many decisions still have to be taken locally about the recording and counting of criminal incidents.

  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the report of a crime on a police command and control system which is reported for information only is included in the published crime statistics.
  20
  Mr. Maclean
  The recording process starts when someone reports to the police that an offence has been committed or when the police observe or discover an offence. The police make an initial examination of the facts to determine if there is prima facie evidence that an offence has been committed; if so, a crime report will be made out and if that offence is deemed "notifiable", it will be included in the Home Office crime statistics.

  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the reporting of a series of criminal acts as a continuous crime on a police command and control system is recorded as a single crime in published crime statistics.

  Mr. Maclean
  Notifiable offences deemed by the police to be of a continuous nature, in accordance with Home Office instructions, will be notified to the Home Office as a single offence and published as such.

  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the report of a crime on a police command and control system as tampering is recorded in the published crime statistics.

  Mr. Maclean
  The recording of "tampering" offences is dependent on the interpretation of the circumstances surrounding each individual incident. An offence regarded as being attempted theft of/from a vehicle is a "notifiable" offence and would be published in the crime statistics. However, an offence deemed to be interference with a motor vehicle is not "notifiable" and would not be shown in the crime statistics.

  Fire Fighting, Cleveland
  Mr. Bates
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he intends to make a decision on the provision of fire fighting services in Cleveland.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  In the light of advice which my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary has received from the Central Fire Brigades Advisory Council and from Her Majesty's chief inspector of fire services, he proposes when local government in Cleveland is reorganised, to establish a combined fire authority for Cleveland. The combined authority will take over the functions under the Fire Services Act 1947 which are currently exercised by Cleveland county council, and will consist of members drawn from the four unitary authorities which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment proposes to establish in the Cleveland area when the county council is abolished.

  Statutory Sick Pay
  Mr. Ingram
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will provide figures for the amount his Department has been reimnbursed by the Department of Social Security in respect of statutory sick pay provision for each of the past three years.

  Mr. Howard
  The amounts are as follows:

  £

  1990–91

  3,408,180·95

  1991–92

  2,771,581·37

  1992–93

  2,850,542·04

  21

  Public Bodies
  Dr. Wright
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which non-departmental public bodies for which he is responsible have been(a) abolished or (b) created since 1979.

  Mr. Howard
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 1 February 1994,Official Report, column 611.

  Dr. Wright
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) which of the public appointments for which he is responsible require advance notice to and consultation with the Chief Whip's Office; and which appointments made since 1979 have been so notified and consulted upon;

  (2) which appointments since 1979 to public bodies or posts for which he is responsible have included candidates nominated by the Chief Whip's Office; if any nominees by this source have been appointed; and if he will give details.

  Mr. Howard
  It is not the practice of Her Majesty's Government to answer parliamentary questions about discussions and consultations between Departments and offices of Government relating to public appointments.

  Mandatory Life Sentences
  Mr. Forman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what procedures he follows before he decides what tariff period should be set for persons sentenced to mandatory life imprisonment.

  Mr. Howard
  I refer my hon. Friend to the answer which I gave on 27 July 1993,Official Report, column 863, in response to a question from my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Burton (Sir I. Lawrence).

  Metropolitan Police

  Area establishment and strength profile by rank as at 31 December 1993

  DAC

  Commander

  Chief Superintendent

  Superintendent

  Chief Inspector

  Inspector

  Sergeant

  Constable

  Total

  Variation

  1 Area

  Establishment

  1

  2

  13

  18

  47

  136

  507

  2,525

  3,249

  Strength

  1

  2

  12

  18

  47

  146

  501·4

  2,508·96

  3,326·36

  -12·46

  2 Area

  Establishment

  1

  2

  11

  22

  39

  132

  470

  2,360

  3,037

  Strength

  1

  2

  7

  19

  43

  135

  462

  2,326·14

  2,995·14

  -41·86

  3 Area

  Establishment

  1

  2

  13

  19

  46

  128

  470

  2,527

  3,206

  Strength

  1

  1

  11

  19

  49

  129

  438·15

  2,487·33

  3,180·48

  -25·52

  4 Area

  Establishment

  1

  2

  10

  18

  34

  113

  424

  2,117

  2,719

  Strength

  1

  2

  10

  16

  38

  110

  433·7

  2,018·29

  2,628·99

  -90·01

  5 Area

  Establishment

  1

  2

  11

  16

  37

  121

  399

  1,866

  2,453

  Strength

  1

  2

  11

  14

  35

  124·6

  432·2

  1,987·85

  2,607·65

  154·65

  6 Area

  Establishment

  1

  3

  13

  20

  44

  148

  481

  2,400

  3,110

  Strength

  1

  2

  12

  14

  41

  140

  509·6

  2,400·46

  3,120·06

  10·06

  7 Area

  Establishment

  1

  2

  12

  17

  43

  123

  475

  2,203

  2,876

  Strength

  1

  1

  11

  17

  37

  126

  480·4

  2,170·3

  2,843·7

  -32·3

  22

  Metropolitan Police
  Sir Ivan Lawrence
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what are the priorities of the Metropolitan police for 1994–95; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Howard
  The priorities of the Metropolitan police for 1994–95 are:

  (i) to deliver the standards defined in the Metropolitan police service charter;

  (ii) to increase the number of notifiable offences solved to 190,000;

  (iii) to increase the detection rate for burglary to a minimum of 15 per cent.;

  (iv) to improve performance against terrorism;

  (v) to improve performance against the criminal use of firearms; and

  (vi) to improve policing performance and quality of service by restructuring the Metropolitan police service.

  Details of each of the priorities and the way in which they address the key objectives for policing I announced on 3 December, Official Report, columns 786–87, are set out in a corporate strategy document which the Commissioner is, with my approval, issuing today. I am sending copies today to all right hon. and hon. Members whose constituencies fall wholly or partly within the Metropolitan police district and I am arranging for copies to be placed in the Library.

  Ms Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will list for each division of the Metropolitan police the establishment number by rank and the number of people in post by rank at the latest available date;

  (2) if he will list (a) the sectors created in each division of the Metropolitan police, (b) the establishment level by rank for each sector, and (c) the number of people in post by rank in each sector, at the latest available date.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  I understand from the Commissioner that information in the form requested is not held centrally. The table shows the figures for police officers in post by rank at area level as at 31 December 1993.
  23

  DAC

  Commander

  Chief Superintendent

  Superintendent

  Chief Inspector

  Inspector

  Sergeant

  Constable

  Total

  Variation

  8 Area

  Establishment

  1

  2

  10

  14

  34

  122

  406

  1,77

  2,366

  Strength

  1

  2

  8

  15

  32

  118

  402·8

  1,829·2

  2,408·08

  42·08

  Total Establishment

  8

  17

  93

  144

  324

  1,023

  3,632

  17,775

  23,016

  Total Strength

  8

  14

  82

  132

  322

  1,029

  3,705·33

  17,729·53

  23,020·46

  4·46

  Informers
  Mrs. Helen Jackson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what payments have been made by the City of London police to Mr. Totterington-Jarvis for information supplied by him; and over what period he was acting as an informer.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  The use of informants is an operational matter and entirely the responsibility of the chief officer of the police force concerned.

  Racial Incidents
  Ms Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when data will be available on the number of racial incidents recorded by each police force in England and Wales for 1993.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  In common with other statistics, information on reported racial incidents is now provided by police forces on a financial year basis. Information on the number of racial incidents reported to police forces in England and Wales for the year April 1993 to March 1994 will be available in mid-April.

  Ms Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what procedures his Department has adopted to monitor the incidence of racial harassment and racial attacks in England and Wales; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Every police force in England and Wales is required to monitor the occurrence of racially motivated incidents using a standard definition agreed with the Association of Chief Police Officers, and taking account of Home Office guidance on ethnic classification issued as Home Office circular 70 of 1992. Data are supplied annually to the Home Office via HM inspectorate of constabulary.

  Since April 1993, as part of the national package of core performance indicators for the police, each force will be expected to publish annual data on the total number of reported racial incidents in the force area, and the percentage of these in which further investigative action was taken. This information will be used by HM inspectorate of constabulary to monitor police performance.

  In addition, the British crime surveys of 1988 and 1992 asked ethnic minority victims of crime about racial motivation. A paper on ethnic minorities' experience of crime, including the incidence of racial motivation, is due to be published shortly. The inter-departmental racial attacks group will be considering the latest available data on racial incidents as part of its continuing work programme.

  Ms Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will give the number of homicides in 1992 in which racial motivation was a factor.
  24
  Mr. Maclean
  The information requested is not available. The police are required to make returns of each known homicide to the Home Office, but are not specifically requested to note whether they consider racial motivation to be a factor.

  Animal Experimentation
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make it his policy that no future licences will be awarded under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 which would allow ex-pets to be used in research.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  All applications for the use of animals in scientific procedures are considered on their merits, and against the criteria and constraints set out in the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. The Act contains strict provisions to guard against the possibility of stray or stolen dogs and cats being used in experiments.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make it his policy that his Department will not grant licences for research on Dartmoor ponies; and what account he has taken of article 7(3) of directive 86/609 in considering this matter.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  A blanket prohibition would not be appropriate. All applications for the use of animals in scientific procedures are considered on their merits, and against the criteria and constraints contained in the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, which is operated in accordance with the requirements of directive 86/609.

  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proposals he has to ban the import of wild-caught primates for the use in scientific experiments; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  Substantial progress has been made in reducing the use of wild-caught primates in British laboratories. The Animal Procedures Committee is considering the practical problems in the way of eliminating such use altogether, and I look forward to receiving its advice in due course.

  Prison Statistics
  Ms Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 31 January,Official Report, column 574, what is the expected date of publication of "Prison Statistics, England and Wales 1992".

  Mr. Peter Lloyd
  Publication of "Prison Statistics, England and Wales 1992" is now planned for June 1994. Summary information was published in March 1993 in Home Office statistical bulletin 7/93 "The Prison Population in 1992".
  25

  Young Offenders
  Mr. Michael
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what consideration he has given to the second report of the Children's Society and Advisory Committee on Young Offenders, "A False Sense of Security", since it was published on 25 November 1993; and what proposals he has for action on the findings and recommendations of that report.

  Mr. Maclean
  The report made 20 recommendations. They were aimed at preventing and reducing youth crime, improving the youth justice system, dealing with persistent offenders and protecting the public from serious offenders. They have all been carefully considered. In brief, the Government's response is as follows:we have longsupported both community-based crime prevention initiatives—including youth crime prevention panels which directly involve young people themselves—and also local inter-agency co-operation in the juvenile justice system;
  we were already taking action in relation to some of the committee's concerns, such as making funding available for bail support schemes and setting time limits for the stages in court proceedings;
  we agree that the report has made some useful comments on improving the effectiveness of community supervision programmes; this is an objective of the review of national standards—announced by my right hon. and learned Friend on 6 October 1993—for such programmes;
  we think that the report places a proper emphasis on the need for independently inspected high standards of care in secure accommodation for children and for throughcare programmes aimed at rehabilitating such children: we intend that those standards and those objectives should apply in relation to the new secure training centres;
  we think that the independent sector can play a part in the provision of secure accommodation for young people;
  we do not accept the report's recommendation that plans for secure training centres should not be implemented.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in his private office and (b) in his Department.

  Mr. Howard
  In the Home Secretary's private office there are three shredding machines. The other information sought is not centrally recorded and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Killings
  Dame Peggy Fenner
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many murders, how many unlawful killings and how many cases of manslaughter were committed in each of the last five years for which figures are available; and how many killings were committed by people found to have been of diminished responsibility.

  Mr. Maclean
  The information requested is published in "Criminal Statistics, England and Wales, 1992"—Cm 2410—chapter 4 and table 4.2.

  A copy of this publication is in the Library.

  Criminals (Employment Status)
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information he has on the employment status of persons convicted of crimes in England and Wales in the last five years for which figures are available.
  26
  Mr. Maclean
  [holding answer 3 February 1994]The information readily available is given in the table and is taken from a special data collection exercise undertaken in a small number of courts to monitor the implementation of the Criminal Justice Act 1991. The statistics are subject to sampling error and may not be representative of all courts in England and Wales. They will also reflect changes in employment status from the date of arrest. Some research studies on this issue were listed in my reply to the hon. Member on 1 February,Official Report, column 650.

  Employment status on date of sentence, for persons sentenced in selected courts1 for indictable offences

  Percentage of total offenders sentenced

  Employment status on date of sentence

  July to August 1992

  January to February 1993

  Currently employed (including self and part time employment)

  19

  18

  Youth or other training scheme

  1

  1

  Unemployed

  63

  70

  Full-time education

  3

  3

  Other

  2

  2

  Not known

  11

  6

  Total number sentenced [=100 per cent.]

  3,100

  3,600

  1Magistrates courts—Bow Street, Bradford, Bristol, Cardiff Leicester, Maidstone, Newcastle, Portsmouth and York.

  Crown court centres—Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Doncaster, Kingston, Knightsbridge, Maidstone, Newcastle, Preston and Wolverhampton.

  Deportations
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have been deported from the United Kingdom in each of the last three years; and what was the nationality of each person who has been deported.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  [holding answer 27 January 1994]The information requested is given in the table.

  Persons removed from the United Kingdom under the deportation process1

  Geographical region and nationality

  1991

  1992

  19933

  All nationalities

  2,616

  2,583

  2,254

  European Community

  Belgium

  7

  10

  4

  Denmark

  —

  2

  2

  France

  4

  5

  6

  Germany

  5

  5

  10

  Greece

  2

  2

  3

  Ireland

  8

  11

  5

  Italy

  5

  14

  11

  Luxembourg

  3

  —

  —

  Netherlands

  29

  30

  23

  Portugal

  —

  4

  2

  Spain

  3

  3

  2

  Other Western Europe

  Austria

  —

  —

  3

  Cyprus

  12

  16

  11

  Finland

  2

  —

  1

  Malta

  1

  1

  1

  Norway

  2

  2

  1

  Sweden

  2

  1

  2

  Switzerland

  1

  1

  3

  Turkey

  60

  58

  35

  Former Yugoslavia

  37

  13

  10

  Eastern Europe

  Bulgaria

  8

  1

  13

  27

  Geographical region and nationality

  1991

  1992

  19933

  Former Czechoslovakia

  6

  4

  25

  Hungary

  4

  7

  4

  Poland

  128

  126

  155

  Romania

  2

  5

  1

  Former USSR

  1

  —

  6

  Americas

  Argentina

  1

  —

  1

  Barbados

  4

  3

  2

  Brazil

  67

  76

  51

  Canada

  8

  18

  10

  Chile

  4

  3

  6

  Colombia

  72

  78

  67

  Guyana

  6

  5

  12

  Jamaica

  129

  141

  147

  Mexico

  4

  1

  1

  Peru

  12

  10

  8

  Trinidad and Tobago

  2

  9

  5

  United States of America

  45

  42

  32

  Venezuela

  2

  2

  2

  Africa

  Algeria

  156

  115

  64

  Angola

  1

  2

  2

  Egypt

  39

  30

  27

  Ethiopia

  2

  —

  1

  Ghana

  137

  140

  132

  Kenya

  12

  10

  14

  Libya

  3

  5

  2

  Mauritius

  20

  29

  11

  Morocco

  99

  73

  50

  Nigeria

  640

  623

  440

  Sierra Leone

  43

  20

  20

  Somalia

  —

  —

  —

  South Africa

  22

  23

  44

  Sudan

  2

  2

  3

  Tanzania

  12

  19

  11

  Tunisia

  10

  10

  10

  Uganda

  11

  9

  8

  Zaire

  1

  3

  3

  Zambia

  11

  23

  15

  Zimbabwe

  10

  11

  28

  Indian sub-continent

  Bangladesh

  50

  62

  64

  India

  105

  117

  132

  Pakistan

  127

  159

  138

  Middle East

  Iran

  4

  10

  4

  Iraq

  52

  —

  1

  Israel

  14

  10

  10

  Jordan

  4

  1

  5

  Kuwait

  —

  —

  —

  Lebanon

  4

  1

  3

  Saudi Arabia

  1

  —

  —

  Syria

  2

  1

  4

  Yemen

  2

  1

  7

  Remainder of Asia

  China

  1

  3

  7

  Indonesia

  2

  2

  3

  Japan

  16

  7

  9

  Malaysia

  94

  116

  85

  Philippines

  20

  25

  43

  Singapore

  1

  1

  3

  South Korea

  2

  —

  1

  Sri Lanka

  7

  7

  6

  Thailand

  30

  23

  8

  Hong Kong2

  49

  68

  42

  Australasia

  Australia

  14

  5

  9

  New Zealand

  10

  9

  16

  Others

  British Overseas citizens

  —

  2

  —

  Other countries not elsewhere specified

  78

  88

  81

  Less or nationality doubtful

  8

  9

  5

  28
  1 Including persons who departed voluntarily, but excluding illegal entrants removed. In total, some 6,100 persons were removed illegal entrants or under the deportation process, including 400 who departed voluntarily, in the 12 months ending June 1993.

  2 British dependent territories citizens and British nationals (overseas) only.

  3 Provisional.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

  Murdered Service Men (France)
  Mr. Winnick
  To ask the Attorney-General what discussions he has had with his German counterpart on the prosecution of those responsible for the murder of British service men in France in 1940.

  The Attorney-General
  None. The issue is one for the prosecuting authorities in Germany which have received full co-operation from the Ministry of Defence and our police.

  Group Libel
  Mr. Booth
  To ask the Attorney-General what representations he has received on group libel.

  The Attorney-General
  In March 1992 the then Attorney-General and the Lord Chancellor received a copy of a report on group defamation from the board of deputies of British Jews.

  Prosecution Costs
  Mr. Evennett
  To ask the Attorney-General to what extent the cost of prosecution is taken into account when the Crown Prosecution Service decides whether to prosecute.

  The Attorney-General
  Cost is not a specific factor to be taken into account in the decision whether or not to prosecute. However, as the code for Crown prosecutors makes clear at sections 8(i) and (viii), it may be considered in relation to offences where the penalty is likely to be merely nominal or the guilt of the defendant minimal in relation to that of the principle offenders.

  Crown Prosecution Service
  Dr. Twinn
  To ask the Attorney-General how many cases were committed to Crown court for trial by the Crown Prosecution Service in 1993; and how many resulted in a conviction.

  The Attorney-General
  During the period January to September 1993, 76,404 defendants were committed for trial in the Crown court in cases where the Crown Prosecution Service had conduct of the prosecution and, over the same period, 60,758 convictions were recorded.

  Mr. Jenkin
  To ask the Attorney-General to what extent the public interest is considered by the Crown Prosecution Service when a decision to prosecute is made.

  The Attorney-General
  The decision to prosecute is based, first, on whether there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction. Only if there is such evidence is the public interest considered.

  Mr. Brazier
  To ask the Attorney-General whether a record is kept by him of the reasons for discontinuance of prosecution by the Crown Prosecution Service; and if he will make a statement.
  29
  The Attorney-General
  No central record of the reasons for discontinuance of prosecutions is maintained. The Crown Prosecution Service conducted a survey in November 1993 on all cases discontinued by them in that month and I refer my hon. Friend to my written answer to him on 26 January 1994,Official Report, column 246.

  Fraud
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Attorney-General what further proposals he has to improve the effectiveness of the prosecution in cases of financial fraud.

  The Attorney-General
  The review of the handling of serious fraud cases which I anounced in October is due to be completed at the end of this month. It will then be considered by the Law Officers and the two directors.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Attorney-General how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in his private office and (b) in his Department.

  The Attorney-General
  There are no paper shredding machines in my private office.

  In the Departments for which I am responsible the numbers are as follows:

  Number

  The Legal Secretariat to the Law Officers

  1

  The Treasury Solicitor's Department

  13

  The Crown Prosecution Service

  84

  The Serious Fraud Office

  3

SOCIAL SECURITY

  Statutory Sick Pay
  Mr. Ingram
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will provide figures for the amount his Department has been reimbursed by the Department of Social Security in respect of statutory sick pay provision for each of the past three years.

  Mr. Scott
  The information is in the table.

  Statutory sick pay recovered

  £

  1990–91

  5,783,839

  1991–92

  4,589,107

  1992–93

  4,378,963

  Income Support
  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many persons without accommodation were income support recipients in England at May 1992 and at the latest available date, breaking down the figures by age and by employment status.

  Mr. Burt
  The figures fo May 1992 are not available Since publication of these statistics for May 1991, collation of income support information in local benefit offices is no longer undertaken by clerical means but by the income 30
  support computer system. However, although all main functions are in place, work is incomplete on some functions less central to everyday operation. This includes the process to retrieve information on claimants without an address. Steps are being taken to introduce an appropriate retrieval process from the May 1994 statistical inquiry, information from which is expected to be available in early 1995.

  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many(a) families with children are in receipt of income support and (b) how many children are living on income support in the Greenock and Port Glasgow area; and what were the comparable figures for 1979.

  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.

  Letter from Mr. Michael Bichard to Dr. Norman Godman, dated 4 February 1994:
  The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking about families in receipt of income support in the Greenock and port Glasgow area.
  The complete range of information you requested is not available and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost. This is because statistics which reflect the number of families with children are not collected locally on a routine basis. Children are treated as dependants of their parents and their needs are included within their parents claim.
  However, I am able to provide information for Scotland as a whole and this is outlined below. The data has been obtained from the Supplementary Benefit Annual Statistical Enquiry for 1979 and the Income Support Quarterly Statistical Enquiry for February 1993 (These are the latest available figures and are based on a 1% sample of cases).

  Year

  Families with children

  Number of children

  1993

  142,000

  255,000

  1979

  55,000

  109,000

  I hope that this reply is helpful.

  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many households, from data taken from the annual statistical inquiry, in 1991, 1992 and 1993, are having weekly deductions made from their income support as appropriate, for(a) electricity and (b) gas of (i) under £2 per week and (ii) in each £1 band above £2 per week up to £40 per week.

  Mr. Burt
  The available information is in the tables:

  Income support recipients with deductions for direct payment of fuel costs—May 1991 ASE

  £ per week

  Cases with deductions for electricity

  Cases with deductions for gas

  0·01 to2·00

  1,000

  2,500

  2·01 to 3·00

  2,500

  2,000

  3·01 to 4·00

  5,500

  4,500

  4·01 to 5·00

  7,500

  6,500

  5·01 to 6·00

  7,000

  11,500

  6·01 to 7·00

  9,500

  12,500

  7·01 to 8·00

  7,500

  15,000

  8·01 to 9·00

  8,500

  20,000

  9·01 to 10·00

  8,000

  16,000

  10·01 to 11·00

  6,500

  17,500

  11·01 to 12·00

  6,500

  12,000

  31

  £per week

  Cases with deductions for electricity

  Cases with deductions for gas

  12·01 to 13·00

  5,000

  8,000

  13·01 to 14·00

  4,500

  6,500

  14·01 to 15·00

  4,000

  4,500

  15·01 to 16·00

  2,000

  2,000

  16·01 to 17·00

  2,500

  1,500

  17·01 to 18·00

  2,000

  1,000

  18·01 to 19·00

  1,000

  500

  19·01 to 20·00

  1,500

  500

  20·01 to 21·00

  500

  500

  21·01 to 22·00

  500

  —

  22·01 to 23·00

  500

  —

  23·01 to 24·00

  500

  —

  24·01 to 25·00

  500

  —

  25·01 to 26·00

  500

  —

  26·01 to 27·00

  —

  —

  27·01 to 28·00

  —

  —

  28·01 to 29·00

  —

  —

  29·01 to 30·00

  —

  —

  30·01 to 31·00

  —

  —

  31·01 to 32·00

  —

  —

  32·01 to 33·00

  —

  —

  33·01 to 34·00

  —

  —

  34·01 to 35·00

  —

  —

  35·01 to 36·00

  —

  —

  36·01 to 37·00

  —

  —

  37·01 to 38·00

  —

  —

  38·01 to 39·00

  —

  —

  39·01 to 40·00

  —

  —

  Over 40·00

  —

  —

  Total number of cases with deductions

  96,000

  146,000

  Note The figures have been rounded to the nearest 500, and so do not necessarily add to the totals given.

  Source Income support statistics annual inquiry, May 1991.

  Income Support Recipients with deductions for Direct Payment of Fuel Costs—May 1992 ASE

  Cases with deductions for electricity

  Cases with deductions for gas

  0·01–2·00

  500

  1,000

  2·01–3·00

  2,500

  1,500

  3·01–4·00

  3,500

  4,000

  4·01–5·00

  5,500

  8,000

  5·01–6·00

  7,500

  14,500

  6·01–7·00

  8,000

  19,500

  7·01–8·00

  10,000

  20,500

  8·01–9·00

  7,000

  21,500

  9·01–10·00

  8,500

  27,500

  10·01–11·00

  7,500

  23,500

  11·01–12·00

  7,000

  14,500

  12·01–13·00

  6,000

  10,500

  13·01–14·00

  4,000

  6,500

  14·01–15·00

  2,500

  5,000

  15·01–16·00

  3,000

  4,000

  16·01–17·00

  2,500

  2,500

  17·01–18·00

  1,500

  1,500

  18·01–19·00

  1,000

  1,000

  19·01–20·00

  1,000

  1,000

  20·01–21·00

  1,000

  1,000

  21·01–22·00

  1,000

  1,000

  22·01–23·00

  1,000

  500

  23·01–24·00

  —

  —

  24·01–25·00

  —

  500

  25·01–26·00

  500

  500

  26·01–27·00

  500

  500

  27·01–28·00

  500

  —

  28·01–29·00

  —

  —

  29·01–30·00

  —

  —

  30·01–31·00

  500

  —

  31·01–32·00

  —

  —

  32·01–33·00

  —

  —

  32

  Cases with deductions for electricity

  Cases with deductions for gas

  33·01–34·00

  —

  —

  34·01–35·00

  —

  —

  35·01–36·00

  —

  —

  36·01–37·00

  —

  —

  37·01–38·00

  —

  —

  38·00–39·00

  —

  —

  39·01–40·00

  —

  —

  Over 40·00

  —

  —

  Total number of cases with deductions

  95,000

  192,000

  The figures have been rounded to the nearest 500, and so do not necessarily add to the totals given.

  Source: Income support statistics annual inquiry, May 1992.

  Invalidity Benefit
  Mr. Bradley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how man claimants of invalidity benefit(a) under the age of 35, (b) between 35 and 45, (c) between 45 and 55 and (d) over 55 years, receive both an additional pension and an occupational pension; how many of these in ach age group are (i)women and (ii) men.

  Mr. Scott
  Information is not available in the form requested. Such information as is available is the tables.

  Invalidity Benefit claimants receiving Additional Pension as at 4 April 1992—latest date information is available

  Age

  Total

  Men

  Women

  Under 35

  112,000

  56,000

  56,000

  35 to 44

  142,000

  86,000

  57,000

  45 to 54

  257,000

  165,000

  93,000

  55 and over

  719,000

  609,000

  109,000

  Total

  1,230,000

  916,000

  314,000

  Notes:

  1. Age as at 31 march 1992.

  2. Based on a 1 per cent. Sample of claimants of invalidity benefit in Great Britain, rounded to the nearest thousand.

  3. Figures may not total due to rounding.

  Estimated proportion of invalidity benefit recipients receiving occupational pension:

  Age

  Total Per cent.

  Men Per cent.

  Women Per cent.

  Under 45

  5

  5

  10

  45 to 54

  30

  30

  30

  55 and over

  55

  55

  35

  Total

  40

  45

  25

  Notes:

  Source: 1990 and 1991 family expenditure surveys, figures rounded to nearest 5 per cent.

  2. Sample too small to breakdown under 45 age group further.

  Mr. Bradley
  To ask the Secretary of state for Social Security what is the average amount of(a) additional pension and (b) occupational pension paid to invalidity benefit claimants who are (i) men and (ii) women.

  Mr. Scott
  As at 4 April 1992, the latest date for which information is available, average amounts of additional pension and occupational pension paid to invalidity benefit claimants was as follows:
  33

  Additional pension1

  Occupational pension2

  £

  £

  Men

  15·21

  65

  Women

  8·13

  65

  1 Based on a 1 per cent, sample of invalidity benefit claimants in Great Britain.

  2 Estimated using data from the family expenditure surveys. Estimate subject to significant margins of error.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Heppell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security which organisations were consulted by his Department, on each of the recommendations of the business deregulation task forces before they were agreed and action proposed in the DTI document "Deregulation: Cutting the Red Tape".

  Mr. Hague
  Each of the task force recommendations agreed or agreed in principle by the Government have been or will be the subject of appropriate consultation with interested parties.

  Unemployment Benefit
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was, in each year since 1991,(a) the number and (b) the percentage of claimants of sickness and invalidity benefit in (i) the north of England and (ii) in the United Kingdom who had transferred from unemployment benefit; and what was the numbers of claimants of unemployment benefit in each standard region who in each year since 1991, ceased claiming unemployment benefit and were not returned to either work, income support or other benefits.

  Mr. Scott
  The information requested is not available.

  Executive Agencies
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will list the subjects on which his Department or its predecessors formerly answered parliamentary questions but which are now referred by him to an executive agency.

  Mr. Scott
  Next steps agency chief executives are usually asked to reply to parliamentary questions about the

  Table 1

  Uprating date

  Rate of Child Benefit plus Child Dependency Increase for first child1

  Gross adult weekly average earnings2

  As a percentage of gross adult weekly average earnings

  Equivalent value of benefit at April 1993 prices

  £

  £

  £

  November 1979

  11·10

  100·60

  11·0

  25·90

  November 1980

  12·25

  120·20

  10·2

  24·79

  November 1981

  12·95

  132·40

  9·8

  23·40

  November 1982

  13·80

  142·40

  9·7

  23·47

  November 1983

  14·10

  156·70

  9·0

  22·87

  November 1984

  14·50

  167·00

  8·7

  22·42

  November 1985

  15·05

  178·70

  8·4

  22·06

  July 1986

  15·15

  189·10

  8·0

  21·84

  April 1987

  15·30

  198·90

  7·7

  21·13

  April 1988

  15·65

  218·40

  7·2

  20·80

  April 1989

  16·20

  239·70

  6·8

  19·93

  34
  day-to-day operational matters of their agency and on subjects for which they have delgated responsibility, as set out in their agency's framework document.

  Benefits Agency
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will set out(a) the list of tendering organisations, (b) the successful organisation, (c) the value of the contract and (d) the criteria used for determining the successful organisation, in relation to the provision of health screening for Benefits Agency staff at their headquarters at Quarry house, Leeds.

  Mr. Burt
  The health screening exercise currently being carried out at Quarry house, Leeds, is part of a three-year DSS nationwide health screening programme due to be completed by March 1994.

  For reasons of commercial confidentiality, it is not possible to provide a list of the tendering organisations, but they comprised four private sector health care providers and one national health service regional health authority1.

  The successful tenderer was the British United Provident Association—BUPA.

  The Department is contractually obliged to pay for each screening carried out on volunteer personnel, aged 35 and over. BUPA's success in encouraging take-up therefore dictated the final cost, which will total almost £3 million.

  The criteria used to determine the successful tenderer were:

  (i) financial stability;

  (ii) overall approach to quality to ensure integrity of service;

  (iii) logistical planning;

  (iv) quality of mobile units;

  (v) previous experience of similar programmes;

  (vi) capacity to meet the Department's specification;

  (vii) overall value for money within a predetermined budget.

  1 The NHS regional health authority withdrew its bid as it could not provide fully equipped and self-contained mobile screening units.

  Child Benefits
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what was the combined value of child dependency addition and child benefit for the child of a widow or invalidity pensioner at current and April 1993 prices and as a percentage of average earnings in November 1979 and at each subsequent uprating date.

  Mr. Burt
  The information is in the tables:
  35

  Uprating date

  Rate of Child Benefit plus Child Dependency Increase for first child1

  Gross adult weekly average earnings2

  As a percentage of gross adult weekly average earnings

  Equivalent value of benefit at April 1993 prices

  April 1990

  16·90

  263·10

  6·4

  18·99

  April 1991

  17·95

  284·70

  6·3

  18·96

  April 19923

  19·40

  304·60

  6·4

  19·65

  April 1993

  19·80

  316·70

  6·3

  19·80

  Table 2

  Uprating date

  Rate of Child Benefit plus Child Dependency Increase for subsequent children1

  Gross adult weekly average earnings2

  As a percentage of gross adult weekly average earnings

  Equivalent value of benefit at April 1993 prices

  £

  £

  £

  April 19923

  18·65

  304·60

  6·1

  18·89

  April 1993

  19·05

  316·70

  6·0

  19·05

  Source: The abstract of social security statistics 1993

  1 The figures apply to both widows and invalidity pensioners.

  2 Rounded to the nearest 10p.

  3 From April 1992, the combined rate of child benefit and child dependency increases for the first child and subsequent children diverged. Table 2 reflects the rate in payment for subsequent children from that point.

  Private Pensions
  Mr. Denham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what action he is taking to ensure that employers take back into occupational schemes staff who have been wrongly advised to transfer to a private pension.

  Mr. Hague
  Whether employees who have transferred out of an occupational pension scheme are allowed to rejoin the scheme is for the trustees of individual schemes to decide in the light of their scheme's rules.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in his private office and (b) in his Department.

  Mr. Hague
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has no paper shredding machines in his private office. The information for his Department is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Maternity Pay
  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when he intends to announce the changes to statutory maternity pay required by the EC pregnancy directive.

  Mr. Hague
  We have analysed the responses to the consultation document and will be making an announcement shortly.

  Child Support Agency
  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what has been the cost of the various leaflets produced by the Child Support Agency explaining the child maintenance scheme.
  36
  Mr. Burt
  The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from Ros Hepplewhite to Mr. Peter L. Pike, dated 31 January 1994:
  Dear Mr. Pike
  I am replying to your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security asking for details about the cost of the leaflets produced by the Child Support Agency.
  To date, the total cost of the first editions and, if appropriate, reprints of the leaflets published by the Agency has been £769,716·23. I have provided a breakdown of the figures on the attached Annex.
  I hope that you find this information useful.
  Yours sincerely.

  Leaflets and brochures

  Cost £

  Parents who live apart

  356,239·00

  Advice for employers

  23,114·00

  Reviews and Appeals

  39,450·00

  Guides to Child Support

  82,696·00

  Notes for advisors

  84,669·00

  Feedback

  14,758,87

  Maintenance assessment information

  72,914·10

  Framework document

  14,633·88

  Business Plan

  16,491·38

  CSA Charter

  30,644·00

  Paying child maintenance direct from earnings

  8,595·00

  Proposed changes to legislation

  25,511·00

  TOTAL

  769,716·23

NATIONAL HERITAGE

  National Lottery
  Mr. Dunnachie
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what consultations he has held with the Sports Council with regard to the effective distribution of national lottery moneys.
  37
  Mr. Sproat
  My Department is in regular contact with the Sports Council to discuss matters relating to the distribution of national lottery funds. I shall soon be formally consulting the chairman of the Sports Council on directions under section 26 of the National Lottery etc. Act 1993 regarding matters to be taken into account when distributing lottery proceeds.

  Sir Anthony Grant
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage how many organisations have expressed an interest in running the national lottery.

  Mr. Sproat
  I understand that the director general has received seven letters of intent. Although I cannot give details of these, I can confirm that six organisations have made public their intention to bid for the main licence to run the lottery. These are:

  Camelot Group plc

  Games for Good Causes plc

  The Great British Lottery Company

  N. M. Rothschild

  Rainbow UK Ltd.

  The UK Lottery Foundation

  I understand that the director general will make public the list of those who have bid after tenders have been returned on 14 February.

  Mr. Bryan Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will meet representatives of the Sports Council to discuss distribution of national lottery moneys.

  Mr. Sproat
  In accordance with my statutory obligations, I will be consulting all the distributing bodies, including the Sports Council, on the directions I intend to issue to them under section 26 of the National Lottery etc. Act 1993. I will consider whether to meet the Sports Council as part of that process.

  News Accuracy
  Mr. Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what representations he has received about the accuracy of news film reports on television and pictures in newspapers.

  Mr. Brooke
  I am not aware of any recent representations about the accuracy of news or film reports on television, but I do receive representations from time to time about pictures in newspapers.

  Tourism
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans he has to bring public funding of tourism promotion in England up to the levels per tourist head awarded to other parts of the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Sproat
  We have no such plans. My right hon. Friend will continue to set the level of tourism funding in England according to his judgment of relative spending needs and priorities in England. The levels of spending in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are matters for the respective Secretaries of State.

  Mr. Simon Coombs
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans he has to reduce the current deficit on tourism.

  Mr. Sproat
  The long-term growth in the number of United Kingdom residents going abroad for their holidays 38
  is a consequence of increasing affluence and improved travel services. My Department will continue to support the work of the British Tourist Authority and the English tourist board in ensuring that both overseas residents and our own citizens are aware of what this country has to offer.

  Mr. Booth
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what plans he has to promote tourism in London and the south-east.

  Mr. Sproat
  The south-east, especially London, is one of the country's most important destinations for both domestic and overseas visitors. It is the role of the tourism industry, with support from the English tourist board and the regional tourist boards, to maximise the visitor potential. The British Tourist Authority features the south-east, and particularly London, strongly in its overseas promotion activities.

  The London tourist board has created a London visitors council to strengthen the input of its commercial members to the work of London First.

  On 14 January we launched a royal parks competition asking for ideas and designs for refurbishing the Marble arch area including Speakers' corner. This area has international importance with hundreds of thousands of people visiting it each year.

  On 28 January, I announced plans to encourage more public events within the royal parks. The royal parks will soon be unveiling its largest ever programme of summer entertainment. To complement this, I intend to encourage medium to large-scale events that would add to the public's enjoyment of the royal parks, while not detracting from their unique character.

  D-Day (50th Anniversary)
  Mr. Willetts
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what discussions he has had with the Southern tourist board about celebrating the 50th anniversary of D-day; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Sproat
  My officials and I have been in regular contact with the Southern tourist board about the organisation and promotion of D-day commemoration events in the south of England, and will continue to do so.

  Arts Council
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will make a statement on the progress of his monitoring of the Arts Council's efficiency.

  Mr. Brooke
  I refer to the answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Romsey and Waterside (Mr. Colvin) on 26 November 1993,Official Report, columns 211–12.

  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what further representations he has had about the level of Government grant to the Arts Council.

  Mr. Brooke
  My Department continues to receive a number of representations about the level of Government support for the arts.

  Grant Write-offs
  Mr. Spellar
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what criteria his Department uses in deciding whether to write off a particular grant.
  39
  Mr. Sproat
  In accordance with the criteria set out in "Government Accounting", a grant is written off by my Department only after a most careful appraisal of the facts, if there is no feasible alternative and once all reasonable action has been taken to effect recovery.

  Royal Palaces
  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what was the total cost of maintenance and running costs of the royal palaces in each of the last five years; and how much his Department has received for each of those years from the royal household to assist with those costs.

  Mr. Brooke
  The cost of maintaining the occupied royal palaces has been as follows:

  £ million

  1988–89

  19·7

  1989–90

  17·2

  1990–91

  22·5

  1991–92

  24·0

  1992–93

  21·9

  As part of the bargain struck with successive sovereigns, all surplus revenue from the Crown estates is surrendered to the Exchequer. This income is around £70 million a year.

  ITV Company Mergers
  Mr. Grocott
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what assessment he has made of the consequences for viewers and for employees of the recent merger of ITV companies.

  Mr. Brooke
  Changes in ownership do not alter the provisions of the Broadcasting Act 1990 and the terms of the Indepedent Television Commission licences. These should ensure original programmes nationally as well as regional programmes and production.

  "News At Ten"
  Mr. Khabra
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what recent discussions he has had with the chairman of the Independent Television Commission over proposals to alter the timing of "News at Ten".

  Mr. Brooke
  None. The chairman of the Independent Television Commission is well aware of the views of Parliament on this issue.

  Sports Council
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage when he next intends to meet the chairman of the Sports Council to discuss the public funding for athletics.

  Mr. Brooke
  I have no plans to meet the chairman of the Sports Council to discuss the funding of athletics. Financial support for individual sports is a matter for the Sports Council to determine in accordance with its own policies and priorities.
  40

  British Library
  Ms Mowlam
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will publish the report of his Department's consultants Kennedy and Donkin into the British Library project; if he expects the completion date for the project set to be adhered to; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Brooke
  Construction of the first phase of the project is substantially complete. A start has been made on the final phase of construction, and its structural frame is 75 per cent. complete. This completion phase is on schedule and I do expect the building to be completed in 1996 as planned.

  The handover of the first phase of the building to the library has been delayed, first by problems with the bookshelving and more recently by problems with the electrical wiring. The bookshelving problem has been overcome, at the contractors' expense, and the installation is now complete. The essence of the wiring problem is that inspections have revealed installed low voltage wiring with damaged insulation. Plans for rectifying the faults in the installation of the wiring are being agreed with the contractor concerned.

  I do not propose to publish the Department's report commissioned from the consultants Kennedy and Donkin. It is a contractually sensitive document.

  English Heritage
  Ms Mowlam
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage for how many of English Heritage's properties there have so far been negotiations concerning the transfer of their management to local authorities.

  Mr. Brooke
  Since the publication of its forward strategy in October 1992, English Heritage has held negotiations for the alternative management of 102 sites, of which 46 would involve the transfer of management to local authorities. Of these, 40 are currently the subject of active discussion with 28 local authorities and one agreement has been completed. For the remaining five, interest has either been withdrawn or negotiations are in abeyance. Prior to October 1992, English Heritage had reached agreement with local authorities over some form of local management for 11 properties.

  Elstree Film Studios
  Ms Mowlam
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what action he proposes to safeguard the future of Elstree film studios in Hertfordshire.

  Mr. Brooke
  There is nothing I can usefully add to the answer I gave on 6 December to a question on the same subject by my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton),Official Report, column 2.

HEALTH

  Consultancies
  Ms Abbott
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the(a) accountancy firms and (b) merchant banks to which her Department awarded private consultancy work in 1992 and 1993, together with a list of the consultancies concerned and the amount paid.
  41
  Mr. Sackville
  The Department has employed the following accountancy firms in 1992 or 1993 for consultancy work:

  Coopers Lybrand Deloit

  Ernst and Young

  KPMG

  Price Waterhouse

  Robson Rhodes

  Touche Ross

  We are unable to list the consultancies concerned and the amounts paid as this would breach contractual agreements and jeopardise future value for money.

  Dr. Wright
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health on which occasions since 1979 her Department has employed the services of external consultants; and if she will give details of the purposes for which they were employed and the cost of employing them.

  Mr. Sackville
  It is not possible to list the use of external consultants back to 1979 and to list them giving details of purpose and cost would require commercial in confidence information to be made public in a way that would breach contractual agreements and jeopardise future value for money. We can however state that the use of external consultants in the Department must be justified under one of the following headings:

  (i) Specialist skills required that do not exist in the Department,

  Number of children born with missing or deformed limbs1—ICDs 775.0–755.9—notified to office of population of censuses and surveys in each year 1983 to 1992 for the Northern RHA and individual DHAs

  Residence

  1983

  1984

  1985

  1986

  1987

  1988

  1989

  1990

  1991

  1992

  Northern RHA

  96

  128

  109

  118

  105

  112

  95

  65

  87

  56

  Hartlepool

  4

  5

  6

  0

  2

  4

  5

  1

  2

  3

  North Tees

  6

  10

  4

  6

  6

  8

  5

  2

  1

  2

  South Tees

  10

  8

  12

  10

  9

  13

  6

  7

  7

  7

  East Cumbria

  4

  1

  3

  5

  6

  6

  3

  1

  5

  3

  South Cumbria

  5

  10

  4

  5

  6

  9

  8

  0

  6

  10

  West Cumbria

  5

  8

  6

  6

  6

  6

  1

  5

  3

  5

  Darlington

  2

  4

  7

  11

  2

  2

  4

  1

  6

  0

  Durham

  9

  9

  11

  14

  14

  14

  13

  7

  2

  0

  North West Durham

  0

  1

  6

  4

  3

  3

  2

  2

  0

  0

  South West Durham

  0

  3

  4

  6

  4

  7

  11

  4

  8

  4

  Northumberland

  9

  17

  11

  8

  7

  15

  8

  6

  17

  5

  Gateshead

  2

  10

  8

  5

  7

  4

  5

  7

  6

  6

  Newcastle

  4

  5

  5

  6

  3

  4

  4

  7

  8

  4

  North Tyneside

  2

  4

  2

  9

  7

  7

  7

  5

  3

  2

  South Tyneside

  8

  13

  8

  9

  6

  2

  3

  4

  5

  1

  Sunderland

  26

  20

  14

  14

  15

  8

  10

  6

  8

  2

  North Durham

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  2

  1 ICD (International Classification of Disease) ninth revision.

  Note: Prior to 1990 all malformations, however minor, were reportable to OPCS. In January 1990 an exclusion list was introduced. As a result minor malformations of the toe, coded to ICD 755.6 were no longer notifiable.

  To protect the confidentiality of individuals we are unable to provide information on a single village or town.

  Grantham and Kesteven Hospital
  Ms Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information she has received relating to nursing and medical staffing levels at Grantham and Kesteven hospital in each of the last five years.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Data on staffing levels at this level of detail are not available centrally.

  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many full-time consultant paediatricians are currently
  42

  (ii) Specialist skills exist but they are needed for higher priority objectives,

  (iii) Where management have taken a decision to contract out the work,

  (iv) Where impartiality is fundamental to the success of the project.

  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health on which occasions since 1990 her Department has employed the services of external consultants; and if she will give details of the purposes for which they were employed and the cost of employing them.

  Mr. Sackville
  There have been numerous occasions since 1990 that the Department has found the need to employ the assistance of external consultants. Detailed information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Birth Defects
  Mr. Cummings
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if she will investigate the number of children in the Northern region who have been born with missing or defective limbs over the last 10 years;

  (2) how many children have been born with missing or defective limbs in the Northern region in each year since 1989; and if she will list the village or town of each child.

  Mr. Sackville
  The information is shown in the table.

  employed at the Grantham and Kesteven hospital; and how many were employed at the time of the Beverley Allitt case.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Data on medical staff at local level are not available centrally.

  Clinical Complaints Procedure
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list for each year since 1990 for each hospital in England, by department, how many complaints have been pursued and have succeeded under the clinical complaints procedure.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The information held centrally about complaints is categorised as follows:
  43

  —by region.

  —whether a complaint is about a hospital or community service.

  —whether wholly or partly clinical or other.

  —whether the complaint was investigated by health authority officers or referred for further investigation.

  The information is available in the booklet "Written complaints by or on behalf of patients, England", copies of which will be placed in the Library.

  Prostate Cancer
  Ms Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many men died from cancer of the prostate in each of the last five years.

  Mr. Sackville
  The information is shown in the table.

  Numbers of deaths from cancer of the prostate—ICD 185—for England and Wales, 1988–1992

  Number

  1988

  7,458

  1989

  7,861

  1990

  8,098

  1991

  8,570

  1992

  8,735

  1International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision.

  Private Patients
  Ms Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what has been the private patient income of trust hospitals in each year since 1990–91.

  Mr. Sackville
  Information on private patient income of National Health Service trust hospitals for 1991–92 and 1992–93 will be placed in the Library. There are no figures for 1990–91 as NHS trusts did not exist in that year. The overall increase in private patient income for trusts is partially due to the increased number of trusts in 1992–93. The income raised is used to improve services for all patients.

  GP Fundholders
  Ms Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many(a) general practitioner fundholders, (b) general practitioner fundholding practitioners and (c) general practitioners were involved in fundholdings in the first, second, third and fourth wave by (i) region and (ii) FHSA.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Information given in the tables is the number of fundholding units, and numbers of the practices and general practitioners who make up these units in the first, second and third waves by region. Fourth wave figures are not yet available and information at family health services authority level is not collected centrally.

  First wave

  Region

  Fundholding units

  Practices

  GPs

  Northern

  27

  29

  168

  Yorkshire

  34

  39

  208

  Trent

  28

  28

  115

  East Anglia

  9

  9

  57

  North West Thames

  22

  23

  123

  North East Thames

  13

  13

  73

  South East Thames

  15

  15

  85

  South West Thames

  21

  21

  125

  Wessex

  17

  18

  98

  44

  Region

  Fundholding units

  Practices

  GPs

  Oxford

  25

  25

  155

  South Western

  20

  21

  127

  West Midlands

  26

  26

  144

  Mersey

  20

  21

  107

  North Western

  16

  17

  88

  Totals

  293

  305

  1,713

  Second Wave

  Region

  Fundholding units

  Practices

  General Practitioners

  Northern

  11

  11

  63

  Yorkshire

  25

  27

  154

  Trent

  28

  32

  157

  East Anglia

  4

  4

  27

  North West Thames

  21

  26

  110

  North East Thames

  8

  8

  43

  South East Thames

  15

  15

  77

  South West Thames

  17

  18

  100

  Wessex

  17

  18

  109

  Oxford

  21

  23

  124

  South Western

  18

  20

  108

  West Midlands

  31

  33

  178

  Mersey

  24

  30

  121

  North Western

  13

  15

  72

  Totals

  253

  280

  1,443

  Third Wave

  Region

  Fundholding units

  Practices

  General Practitioners

  Northern

  31

  34

  161

  Yorkshire

  54

  57

  249

  Trent

  84

  102

  420

  East Anglia

  35

  38

  193

  North West Thames

  45

  46

  223

  North East Thames

  25

  29

  122

  South East Thames

  48

  59

  227

  South West Thames

  28

  30

  135

  Wessex

  22

  23

  128

  Oxford

  28

  28

  152

  South Western

  31

  33

  170

  West Midlands

  73

  80

  357

  Mersey

  40

  51

  196

  North Western

  37

  49

  168

  Totals

  581

  659

  2,901

  Source: Regional Health Authorities.

  Market Testing
  Ms Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what advice she has issued in respect of what comprises acceptable levels of detail in any specification issued in respect of national health service contracts subject to market testing; and if she will make a statement;

  (2) what guidance she has issued in respect of market testing in the national health service;

  (3) if she will list her criteria for ensuring that procedures used in respect of the contract tendering procedure for market testing are of an acceptable standard;

  (4) to whom she has delegated responsibility to ensure compliance of contracts let under national health service market testing guidance; and in what circumstances she may intervene.
  45
  Mr. Sackville
  Guidance to the national health service was first issued in June 1993 under cover of executive letter EL(93)55. This document "Market Testing in the NHS Revised Guidance" sets out the standards expected. Additional guidance was issued in November 1993 as an attachment to a letter to all chief executives who are responsible for market testing. Both documents are available in the Library.

  Ms Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if she will publish full details of the arbitration procedure to be used in respect of disputed contracts let under the national health service market testing guidance;

  (2) what action she has taken to ensure the justice of the arbitration procedure in respect of national health service market testing contract procedures.

  Mr. Sackville
  "Market Testing in the National Health Service Revised Guidance" issued in June 1993 provides a disputes and complaints procedure. In addition, the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990 section 4(3) provides for the determination of any dispute in an NHS contract by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.

  Bjork-Shiley Heart Valve
  Mrs. Bridget Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when her Department became aware of the United States Food and Drug Administration's(a) suspension and (b) withdrawal of the export licence for the Bjork-Shiley 70 deg convexo-concave valve.

  Mr. Sackville
  The first departmental record indicating the suspension and subsequent withdrawal of export permission is dated 15 January 1985.

  Mrs. Bridget Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients have been fitted with(a) a 60 deg convexo-concave heart valve and (b) a 70 deg convexo-concave heart valve since 1980.

  Mr. Sackville
  Approximately 5,000 60 deg Bjork-Shiley convexo-concave heart valves and 42 70 deg Bjork-Shiley convexo-concave heart valves.

  Mrs. Bridget Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients fitted with(a) 60 deg convexo-concave valves and (b) 70 deg convexo-concave valves have had them replaced.

  Mr. Sackville
  Information on the replacement of Bjork-Shiley heart valves is not held centrally. However, a Bjork-Shiley convexo-concave heart valve registry has recently been established and it will be possible to obtain data on future valve replacements.

  Mrs. Bridget Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she first became aware of faults in the Bjork-Shiley heart valve; and what action was taken.

  Mr. Sackville
  The Department was informed of the possibility of the failure of a small proportion of Bjork-Shiley convexo-concave heart valves in May 1982. The Department reviewed the information provided by the manufacturer and ensured that the action taken in identifying and withdrawing this group of valves was consistent with the extent of the problem as perceived at the time.
  46

  Pacemaker Leads
  Mrs. Bridget Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what was the source of the information in her answer of 4 November, Official Report, column 452, that 235 pacemaker leads have been replaced;

  (2) who runs the national pacemaker database and register;

  (3) pursuant to her answer of 2 December, Official Report, column 700, what is the explanation for the different figures for the number of pacemaker leads fitted in that answer and in the answer given on 4 November 1993, Official Report, column 452.

  Mr. Sackville
  The figure of 235 replacement pacemaker leads was obtained from the national pacemaker database—NPD—which is managed by Dr. A. F. Rickards, consultant cardiologist, at the Royal Brompton heart and lung hospital.

  The NPD is continually being updated and the figures referred to on 2 December 1993 reflect the updated situation.

  Pacemakers and Heart Valves
  Mrs. Bridget Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which companies manufacture(a) pacemakers and (b) artificial heart valves currently in use in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Sackville
  According to information held by the national pacemaker database, pacemaker manufacturers with products currently in use in the United Kingdom are: Biotec; Biotronik GmbH & Co; Cardiac Pacemakers Inc.; ELA Medical; Intermedics Inc.; Medico Italia SRL; Medtronic Inc.; Osypka; Siemens; Sorin Biomedica SPA; Telectronics Inc.; Vitatron Medical BV.

  According to information held by the United Kingdom heart valve registry, the following companies currently supply heart valves to the United Kingdom:

  Aortech Ltd.

  ATS Medical Ltd.

  Baxter Healthcare

  Carbomedics Inc.

  Manley Western Ltd.

  Medtronic Inc.

  Cambridge Biomedical Ltd.

  Sorin Biomedica

  St. Jude Medical

  Tissuemed Ltd.

  Anophthalmia
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will publish the conclusions of the research into the distribution of anophthalmia referred to in her answer to the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett) of 20 May 1993,Official Report, column 259.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  The study commissioned by the Department into the incidence of anophthalmia began on 1 January 1994 and is due to be completed by 30 September 1995. The Department of Health would usually expect the results of research it has commissioned to be published either as a separate scientific report or in a scientific journal.

  Clothier Inquiry
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) when she intends to publish the report of the Clothier inquiry; and if she will make a statement;
  47
  (2) if she has received the report of the Clothier inquiry.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave the hon. Member for Bristol, South (Ms Primarolo) on 2 February,Official Report, columns 718–19.

  NHS Contracts
  Ms Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health in what circumstances she is able to call in cases of national health service contracts subjected to arbitration for her further consideration.

  Mr. Sackville
  There is provision within the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990 section 4(3) for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to act to determine cases where a dispute arises within a national health service contract.

  Ms Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list those national health service contracts worth over £140,000, where the arbitration procedure has been invoked.

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not required centrally to monitor market testing in the national health service and is therefore not collected.

  Smoking
  Mr. Janner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what percentage of(a) men and (b) women in the United Kingdom aged (i) 15 to 20 years, (ii) 20 to 25 years, (iii) 25 to 30 years, (iv) 30 to 35 years, (v) 35 to 40 years, (vi) 40 to 45 years, (vii) 45 to 50 years, (viii) 50 to 55 years and (ix) 55 years and over smoke.

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

  Cigarette smoking among adults aged 16 and over Great Britain 1992

  Age

  Men

  Women

  16–19

  29

  25

  20–24

  39

  37

  25–34

  34

  34

  35–49

  32

  30

  50–59

  28

  29

  60 and over

  21

  19

  Notes:

  (1) Data published in General Household Survey 1992—OPCS.

  (2) Cigarette smokers are those respondents who affirmed that "they smoked cigarettes at all nowadays".

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

  Mr. Clifton-Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what action is being taken to achieve the targets on smoking set out in "The Health of the Nation" White Paper; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  We are publishing today "Smoke-Free for Health—An Action Plan to achieve the Health of the Nation targets on Smoking". Copies are available in the Library.

  The action plan sets out the Government's comprehensive approach to reducing smoking, involving a range of inter-related measures, including action on price, health education, tackling parental influence and controls on
  48
  tobacco advertising and promotion. As part of this wide-ranging programme, the Government will open negotiations with the tobacco industry to strengthen the existing voluntary agreement on tobacco advertising and promotion.

  NHS Procurement
  Ms Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps she has taken to incorporate the EC services directive in respect of public procurement of national health service-related services.

  Mr. Sackville
  The Management Executive has incorporated advice on the EC services directive in their advice "Market Testing in the NHS Revised Guidance" published in June 1993, copies of which are available in the Library.

  Medical Devices (Faults)
  Mrs. Bridget Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how her Department, through the medical devices directorate, assesses the effects of faults in medical devices.

  Mr. Sackville
  Adverse incidents related to medical devices are reported to the national reporting and investigation centre. Scientific and technical experts fro the medical devices directorate investigate these incidents, taking advice from medical and nursing advisors and, where necessary, from relevant specialists in academia and the Health Service.

  Mrs. Bridget Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions she has had with the United States Food and Drug Administration regarding faulty medical devices.

  Mr. Sackville
  Officers of the medical devices directorate are in frequent contact with their counterparts in the United States Food and Drug Administration. This includes discussion of faulty medical devices where necessary.

  Pacemakers
  Mrs. Bridget Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to her answer of 6 December,Official Report, columns 59–60, which of the 17 pacemaker technical notes and one hazard circular issued by the medical devices directorate relate to specific manufacturers; and what are the names of the manufacturers.

  Mr. Sackville
  One hazard circular and 16 of the 17 pacemaker technical notes issued by the medical devices directorate relate to specific manufacturers. The names of these manufacturers are: Cardiac Pacemakers Inc; Intermedics Inc; Medtronic Inc; Siemens; Sorin Biomedica SPA; Telectronics Inc; and Vitatron Medical BV.

  Deregulation
  Mr. Heppell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which organisations were consulted by her Department, on each of the recommendations of the business deregulation task forces before they were agreed and action proposed in the DTI document "Deregulation: Cutting the Red Tape".
  49
  Mr. Sackville
  Each of the task force recommendations agreed or agreed in principle by the Government have been or will be the subject of appropriate consultation with interested parties.

  Cash Limits
  Mr. Bates
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what changes are proposed to the cash limits and the running costs of her Department for 1993–94.

  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate the cash limit for class XII, vote 3—Department of Health, administration, miscellaneous health services and personal social services, England—will be reduced by £1,255,000, from £1,437,247,000 to £1,435,992,000. This reduction allows for transfers of £493,000—£484,000 running costs—to class XIII, vote 4—Department of Social Security, administration and miscellaneous services—for accom—modation and word processing; £886,000 to class XII, vote 1—Hospital, community health, family health services (part) and related services, England—£318,000 to class XIV, vote 14—Hospital, community health, family health (part) and other services, Scotland—£148,000 to class XV, vote 8—Hospital, community health, family health services (part) and related services, Wales—and £80,000 for the Department of Health and Social Services, Northern Ireland for work of the national health service estate management and health building agency; and £10,000 to class III, vote 5—Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food: departmental research, advisory services and administration—for the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes. The overall decrease is partially offset by transfers of £348,000 from class XIII, vote 4—Department of Social Security, administration and miscellaneous services—for security functions and £332,000 £326,000 running costs—from class VII, vote 6—Department of the Environment: property holdings and other services to Government—for maintenance charges.

  The Department's gross running cost limit will be increased by £180,000 from £253,084,000 to £253,264,000. This reflects the transfers mentioned above.

  All increases will either be offset by savings, increased receipts or transfers to or from other votes and will not therefore add to the planned total of public expenditure.

  Public Appointments
  Dr. Wright
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which appointments since 1979 to public bodies or posts for which she is responsible have included candidates nominated by the Chief Whip's Office; if any nominees by this source have been appointed; and if she will give details.

  Mr. Sackville
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave him on 3 February at column 852.

  NHS Trusts
  Mr. Hicks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what guidance her Department have given to regional health authorities as to the selection procedures that should be followed, for considering possible names for consideration as non-executive directors of NHS trusts; what assessment she has made of the procedures adopted by the South West regional health authority; and if she will make a statement.
  50
  Dr. Mawhinney
  In the past, regional health authority chairmen have adopted selection procedures they considered appropriate in order to identify the best candidates to meet Ministers' aim of appointing people from a variety of backgrounds and with a range of skills and experience.

  Ministers will be discussing with the recently announced regional chairmen the procedures for identifying and selecting candidates for national health service appointments, with a view to adopting a common process in all regions which continues to identify the most able people available for appointment.

  We have no reason to believe that the selection processes adopted by South Western regional health authority have been unsatisfactory.

  Mr. Hicks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what are the guidance and terms of reference provided by her Department to regional health authorities for prospective appointments as non-executive directors of NHS trusts; and if she will make a statement.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Appointments to the boards of prospective national health service trusts are made in accordance with general guidance from Ministers to the chairmen of regional health authorities. The appointment processes will be the subject of discussion with the recently announced regional chairmen, with a view to adopting a common process in all regions which continues to identify the most able people for appointment.

  Health Service, Greenwich
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the total paid or projected to be paid in salaries, fees, other remuneration and expenses to(a) members of the Greenwich health authority and (b) members of the Greenwich healthcare trust in each of the financial years 1990–91, 1991–92, 1992–93 and 1993–94.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Figures for members of Greenwich health authority are shown for 1990–91 to 1992–93. Greenwich healthcare trust did not exist in these years as it is a third wave trust. Figures for 1993–94 are not yet available.

  £

  1990–91

  246,451

  1991–92

  344,808

  1992–93

  365,383

  Source:

  Annual accounts and pay and records files of Greenwich health authority.

  Notes:

  1. Payment to non-executive members was introduced part way through 1990–91. Only six months costs are reflected for that financial year.

  2. One executive member only took up post near the end of 1990–91 which is partly why costs for that year are low compared with subsequent years.

  3. Full year costs for executive members in post in 1990–91 have been reflected although the status of member was only conferred from October 1990. Prior to this the people concerned were employees of the authority.

  4. The figures shown include employer's national insurance contributions and superannuation payments. Lease car allowance costs have been apportioned from the published figure for Greenwich health authority.

  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what salaries or other remuneration were paid or are
  51
  projected to be paid to the chairman and chief executive of Greenwich health authority and the chairman and chief executive of Greenwich healthcare trust in each of the years 1991–92, 1992–93 and 1993–94.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  Figures for the remuneration of the chairman and general manager of Greenwich health authority are shown for 1991–92 and 1992–93. Greenwich healthcare trust did not exist in these years as it is a third wave trust. Figures for 1993–94 are not yet available.

  1991–92

  1992–93

  (£)

  (£)

  Chairman

  19,120

  19,285

  General manager

  92,266

  97,702

  Source: Annual accounts and pay and records files of Greenwich health authority.

  Notes:

  1. Greenwich health authority had a general manager rather than a chief executive.

  2. The figures shown for the general manager include employer's national insurance contributions and superannuation payments. Lease car allowance costs have been apportioned from the published figure for Greenwich health authority.

  Link
  Mrs. Ray Michie
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations she has received regarding the application of a section 64 core grant by Link, the British Centre for Deafened People; when she expects to make a decision on the matter; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Bowis
  We have received several letters about Link. We shall be deciding on this and a very large number of the applications for section 64 funding in due course.

  Diabetes
  Mr. Pickthall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what funding is being made available by the NHS for the St. Vincent joint task force for diabetes;

  (2) if she will make a statement on the progress of the St. Vincent joint task force for diabetes.

  Mr. Sackville
  The joint Department of Health—British Diabetic Association St. Vincent task force for diabetes is not funded directly by the national health service, although it includes a number of members who are NHS staff. Support costs for the task force are met by the British Diabetic Association and by the Department.

  The task force is expecting to produce advice for the Secretary of State's consideration by mid-summer this year.

  Mr. Pickthall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what use is being made of the chronic disease management scheme to collect data on the incidence of diabetes.

  Mr. Sackville
  General practitioner practices are collecting information on diabetes. This information will in time show both the incidence and prevalence of diabetes. This has considerable potential value and a number of medical audit advisory groups have already used these data to facilitate the improvement of the care of patients with diabetes in primary care.
  52

  Chemotherapy
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the applications of cannabis for the treatment of the side effects of chemotherapy.

  Mr. Sackville
  None. However, certain synthetic compounds of cannabis, cannabinoids, have been found to be of use against nausea and vomiting associated with cancer chemotherapy. An independent report into the use of nabilone, a semisynthetic cannabinoid developed for the treatment of chemotherapy-induced emesis, has concluded that it is no more effective than standard anti-emetic treatments and has a higher degree of toxicity.

  Hypnosis
  Mr. Pickthall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is her policy regarding the investigation and monitoring of the medical effects of stage hypnotism.

  Mr. Sackville
  The Department has not investigated the medical effects of stage hypnotism and currently has no plans to do so.

  GP Fund Holders
  Ms Primarolo
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list for each year since 1990 the expenditure on the purchase of health care from non-NHS bodies by general practitioner fund holders.

  Dr. Mawhinney
  General practitioner fund holders have the freedom to purchase the best possible health care for their patients from whichever provider unit they judge best. They must be able to satisfy the regional health authority that the contracts offer value for money and a high quality service for patients.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in her private office and (b) in her Department.

  Mr. Sackville
  (a) None, (b)

  West Country Ambulance Services Trust
  Mr. Jamieson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information regarding the resignation of Neil McCalley, a divisional director of the West Country ambulance services trust she is prepared to communicate to representatives of health service trade unions; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  This is a matter for the trust.

SCOTLAND

  NHS Trusts
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, further to his answer of 24 January,Official Report, column 71, if he will list the actual amounts spent by (a) the north Ayrshire and Arran NHS trust, (b) the south Ayrshire trust and (c) the Community healthcare trust in dealing with their public relations agencies; and what services these bodies receive for this expenditure.
  53
  Mr. Stewart
  For the period April-December 1993, the amounts spent on public relations were as follows:

  £

  North Ayrshire and Arran

  21,600

  South Ayrshire Hospitals

  21,000

  Ayrshire and Arran Community Healthcare

  9,000

  The services received varied in each case but included support in relation to communications with patients, local communities, general practitioners, staff, and the media on the services provided by each trust and on issues such as health promotion.

  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list the persons appointed to each national health service trust and authority showing(a) their name, (b) their present employment or unemployment and (c) the remuneration for duties entailed in such posts.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 2 February 1994]: The information requested, in respect of non-executive appointments by my right hon. Friend, has been placed in the Library.

  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received on the procedures adopted by(a) the North Ayrshire and Arran NHS trust, (b) the South Ayrshire trust and (c) the Community healthcare trust in awarding contracts for the provision of public relations services; what action he has taken; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  None. Such procedures are a matter for individual trusts to determine and apply.

  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what were the actual amounts of money spent by each of the NHS trusts in Scotland on their public relations; and what companies are employed by each of the trusts to provide these services.

  Mr. Stewart
  The information requested is not available centrally.

  Health Boards
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of Stale for Scotland if he will make a statement indicating for each health board in Scotland, with the exception of Ayrshire and Arran health board; which agencies are employed to deal with their public relations; how much each health board pays for this service; and what changes have been made within each health board area for dealing with public relations inquiries following the introduction of NHS trusts.

  Mr. Stewart
  The information requested is not available centrally.

  Local Government Reorganisation
  Mr. Dewar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981 will apply to employees of regional and district authorities affected by the reorganisation of local government if they transfer to the employment of the proposed new authorities; and if he will make a statement.
  54
  Mr. Lang
  The question of the extent to which the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981 as amended will apply in the context of local government reorganisation is a matter of law. It is not for the Government to determine whether and how the law applies; that must be a matter for the courts. Whether the regulations apply in any particular case will depend on the detailed circumstances, and it will be for local authorities as employers to take a view on the likelihood of 'the regulations applying where a new authority appears to have taken over a function of an existing authority.

  Fisheries Policy
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussion he has had regarding the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food department in which decision making on United Kingdom fisheries policy should be vested; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Hector Monro
  Ministerial responsibilities and departmental functions are matters for the Prime Minister. The existing system of four Fisheries Departments working closely together is a long-standing one, which has been shown to work effectively.

  Planning Applications
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make it his policy not to implement the changes proposed to the Scottish Office's revised fee scale for applications for planning permission.

  Mr. Stewart
  My right hon. Friend has no plans at present to alter his policy on revised fees scales approved by Parliament in December 1993.

  Legal Actions
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list the legal actions which are outstanding between his Department and any company or contractor which is bankrupt or which has gone into receivership or liquidation; what is the value of his Department's claims in each case; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  There are no outstanding actions in court which seek recovery of sums due under contract to my Department by any company which has gone into receivership or liquidation or any contractor who is bankrupt.

  Special Advisers
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give the former occupations of each special adviser attached to his office.

  Mr. Lang
  Both my special advisers were recruited as graduates.

  GP Fundholders
  Mrs. Fyfe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) on what date it became his practice that general practitioner fundholders were sent circulars for information that were not sent to non-fundholders;

  (2) if he will make it his policy to include general practitioners who are not fundholders on the list of those

  55
  who are to receive NHS management executive circulars on accountability reviews, "Priorities and Planning Guidance 1994–95 and after."

  Mr. Stewart
  There is no fixed practice or distribution list for NHS Management Executive letters; they are distributed to those who need to be aware of the content. This varies from letter to letter. In the particular case of the circular (NHS MEL(1993)155) GP fundholders were included as recipients because the letter set out guidance directly applicable to them as NHS purchasers. However, the guidance is clearly of interest to other GPs and arrangements have already been made to provide copies to all GP practices in Scotland.

  Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act 1854
  Mrs. Ray Michie
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what proposals he has to amend the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act 1854; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  My right hon. Friend proposes to amend the Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act 1854 in accordance with the terms of clause 139 of the Local Government Etc. (Scotland) Bill. The clause as it stands will give power to my right hon. Friend by regulations—(subject to annulment of either House of Parliament)—to prescribe the classes of plant and machinery to be subject to rating, in parallel with English regulations. It will also enable the regulations, if so made as to take effect other than at the beginning of a year of revaluation, to provide for the revaluation of any lands and heritages affected by the regulations. The provisions will permit harmonisation of rating liability of plant and machinery and the related law and practice throughout Great Britain.

  Treasure Trove
  Mr. Kynoch
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the administration arrangements relating to treasure trove in Scotland.

  Mr. Lang
  With the agreement of the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, formal responsibility for the administration of treasure trove in Scotland has been transferred from HM Treasury to the Scottish Office. This is a further step in developing the policies set out in the White Paper "Scotland in the Union: A Partnership for Good".

  I have taken this opportunity to make some changes to the membership of the advisory panel on treasure trove. I have increased the membership of the advisory panel from three to four members, and I am pleased to announce that Dr. Barbara Crawford has agreed to be its first independent expert chairperson. At the same time a number of procedural changes are being introduced.

  This package of measures will improve the effectiveness and standing of the advisory panel and open up the treasure trove procedures in general.

  Greenock Prison
  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many persons are detained in Her Majesty's prison, Greenock, and, of these, how many are(a) serving prison sentences, (b) on remand and (c) awaiting deportation.
  56
  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 26 January 1994]: I have asked Mr. E. W. Frizzell, the chief executive of the Scottish Prison Service, to arrange for a reply to be given.

  Letter from Mr. E. Frizzell to Dr. Norman Godman, dated 7 February 1994:
  The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your Question about the number of people detained in HM Prison, Greenock, and how many are serving prison sentences, on remand and awaiting deportation.
  The information is given in the table:

  Persons locked up on Wednesday 19 January 1994

  Number

  Serving a prison sentence

  94

  On remand

  100

  Awaiting deportation

  13

  Total persons locked up

  207

  Woodland
  Mr. Macdonald
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is his estimate of the number of hectares of woodland he expects to be planted next year in Scotland by(a) the Forestry Commission, (b) private foresters and (c) crofting townships.

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: The information is given in the table. The figures include new planting and restocking.

  Estimated woodland planting 1994–95

  Hectares

  Forestry Commission

  4,600

  Private woodlands

  15,000

  Crofters' common grazing land

  160

  In addition, the Forestry Commission expects to pay grants to private owners for work intended to encourage natural regeneration on about 3,000 hectares.

  Public Bodies
  Dr. Wright
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland which non-departmental public bodies for which he is responsible have been(a) abolished or (b) created since 1979.

  Mr. Lang
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the Prime Minister on 1 February 1994 at column 611.

  Mr. Kilfoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland who are the members currently appointed to the Common Services Agency of the Scottish health service management committee.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: The members of the Common Services Agency Board are as follows:

  G. Scaife (Chairman)

  Non Executive Directors

  Mr. J. A Barrie

  Mrs. J. Jolly

  Mrs. C. Leniha

  Mrs. F. A. Stephenson

  Mr. V. Wood

  57
  Executive Directors

  Mr. T. Callaway

  Mr. J. T. Donald

  Mr. G. W. Tucker

  Mr. Kilfoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland who are the members currently appointed to the Health Education Board for Scotland.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: The current members of the Health Education Board for Scotland are:

  Mr. Ernie Walker OBE (Chairman)

  Dr. Nancy Loudon OBE (Vice-Chairman)

  Mr. David Campbell

  Mr. John Christie

  Miss Wilma Craigmile MBE

  Professor Charles Forbes

  Dr. Gillian Mcllwaine

  Professor Doreen Parry

  Mr. Jimmy Reid

  Dr. Andrew Tannahill (General Manager)

  Mr. Raymond Watkins

  Mr. David Woods

  Mr. Kilfoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland who are the members currently appointed to the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: The current membership of the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland is:

  Chairman

  Sheriff Hazel Aronson QC

  Full-time Medical Members

  Dr. J. A. Dyer (Director)

  Dr. A. W. Drummond

  Full-time Social Work Member

  Mrs. C. E. McGregor

  Part-time Members

  Mrs. P. A. Baxter

  Dr. E. D. A. McCall-Smith

  Mr. P. H. Brodie QC

  Mr. R. G. Davis

  Mrs. A. H. M. Glen

  Mrs. A. M. Green

  Mrs. H. L. Grieve

  Mrs. J. I. D. Isbister

  Mrs. M. Jeffcoat

  Dr. R. G. McCreadie

  Dr. M. G. Livingston

  Mr. J. C. Murray (Vice-Chairman)

  Miss L. Noble

  Mr. M. O'Reilly

  Mr. J. G. Sutherland OBE

  Mr. Kilfoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland who are the members currently appointed to the Scottish Council for Postgraduate Medical and Dental Education.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: The current members are:

  Professor D. C. Carter

  Dr. E. G. Buckley

  Dr. J. S. Rennie

  Dr. I. J. T. Davies

  Professor R. M. Harden

  Professor N. MacKay

  Professor A. L. Muir

  Professor R. A. Wood

  Mr. J. S. Clyde

  Dr. M. Church

  Dr. J. F. Calder

  Dr. I. Davidson

  Professor H. Dick

  58

  Professor E. Johnstone

  Dr. B. D. Keighley

  Mr. J. Lusby

  Dr. G. G. Shirriffs

  Dr. D. Thomas

  Dr. A. D. Toft

  Dr. H. Zealley

  Community Charge
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how much community charge remains unpaid within(a) Scotland, (b) Strathclyde region and (c) Cunninghame district.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 3 February 1994]: The amount of net budgeted community charge income uncollected by local authorities at 30 November 1993—the most recent date for which information is available—is, for Scotland, £371 million and, for Strathclyde region, £224 million. Information for Cunninghame district is not separately identifiable.

  Council Tax
  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many appeals have been lodged against council tax banding in each region and islands area; how many have been determined and how many are still outstanding; and how many of those appeals relate to tied housing.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 3 February 1994]: Details of the numbers of appeals lodged and the status of these as at 30 November 1993 are given in the table.

  Information about the number of appeals relating to tied housing is not collected centrally.

  Proposal's lodged

  Proposals/appeals:

  1 April 1993 to 30 November 1993

  Settled

  Still to be dealt with

  Borders

  2,996

  254

  2,742

  Central

  2,719

  422

  2,297

  Dumfries and Galloway

  3,048

  1,077

  1,971

  Fife

  6,411

  3,139

  3,272

  Grampian

  11,221

  3,956

  7,265

  Highland

  5,991

  1,470

  4,521

  Lothian

  11,739

  2,093

  9,646

  Strathclyde

  39,463

  15,606

  23,857

  Tayside

  11,171

  1,113

  10,058

  Orkney

  211

  166

  45

  Shetland

  159

  114

  45

  Western Isles

  837

  227

  610

  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what guidance he has given to assessors as to the calculation of council tax bands for tied housing in agriculture and other sectors.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 3 February 1994]: No detailed guidance has been issued to assessors. The special assumptions to be made in valuing dwellings occupied in connection with agriculture or fish farming are set out in the Council Tax (Valuation of Dwellings) (Scotland) Regulations 1992. The regulations were issued with Finance Circular No. 20/1992 which was copied to regional assessors. Annex B of the circular explains that these provisions are designed to ensure that the valuation of these dwellings will be undertaken on the basis that the dwelling may be occupied only along with the associated land.
  59
  There are no special provisions for tied housing in other sectors.

  Prisoners
  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many prisoners convicted for(a) theft, (b) burglary and (c) violent crimes against the person were (i) unemployed at or (ii) in receipt of income support at the time of their arrest in each of the past four years.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: I have asked Mr. E. W. Frizzell, the chief executive of the Scottish Prison Service, to arrange for a reply to be given.

  Letter from Mr. E. Frizzell to Dr. Norman Godman, dated 7 February 1994:
  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton has asked me to reply to your Question about the number of prisoners convicted for (a) theft, (b) burglary and (c) violent crimes against the person who were (i) unemployed or (ii) in receipt of income support at the time of their arrest in each of the past four years.
  The information is not available in the form requested. For each reception into a penal establishment information is collected on whether or not the person involved was employed or unemployed immediately prior to their reception. Information on whether a person was unemployed or on income support at the time of their arrest is not collected centrally.
  The table below sets out the number of receptions to penal establishments in Scotland (excluding receptions as a result of fine defaults) of persons who were unemployed and had been convicted of theft, burglary (housebreaking in Scotland) or violent crimes against the person. These figures have been obtained using the best available approximations in The Scottish Office Home and Health Department's classification of crimes and offences to produce the categories requested in your question.

  1989

  1990

  1991

  1992

  (a) Theft

  2,754

  2,602

  2,879

  3,313

  (b) Burglary (housebreaking)

  1,549

  1,604

  1,697

  1,715

  (c) Violence against the person

  1,330

  1,306

  1,353

  1,547

  This information is supplied by the prisoner on arrival at the establishment and should therefore be treated with some caution.

  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many prisoners originally sentenced for murder had their sentences(a) subsequently reduced or (b) quashed on appeal while serving their sentences since 1970; and what sums of money were paid, by way of compensation, to those released from prison in such circumstances.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: The mandatory sentence to be imposed on a person convicted of murder is imprisonment for life. Information prior to 1981 is not held centrally, nor is information on the results of retrials, but since 1981 three prisoners originally sentenced for murder had their sentence subsequently reduced, a further four had their sentence quashed on appeal and a retrial was authorised for two prisoners.

  Compensation is not payable in cases where a conviction for murder is reduced or quashed on appeal within the normal time limits. Since 1970, two payments of compensation of £77,000 and £50,415 have been made to persons originally convicted of murder and whose sentences were subsequently quashed or reversed outside the normal time limits.
  60

  "Safe from Harm"
  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if it is his intention to issue a guidance document for voluntary organisations similar to the one published by the Home Office entitled "Safe from Harm"; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]The Home Office code of good practice, "Safe from Harm", contains useful information which will assist voluntary organisations in England and Wales in the selection of staff and volunteers to work with children. We are presently examining the advice in the document for its relevance to Scotland and will consider the need to issue a similar document in Scotland when that examination is complete.

  Homosexuals
  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what recent guidelines have been issued to police forces concerning the issue of consenting homosexual relation-ships among males aged 16 years or more; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 7 February 1994]None.

OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT

  General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
  Mr. Skinner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent meetings he has had with third-world Ministers to discuss the effects of GATT on third-world trade.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  My right hon. Friend discussed the GATT negotiations in detail with Commonwealth Ministers at the Heads of Government meeting in Cyprus last October. They all supported a declaration in favour of the Uruguay round. There has been a wide range of positive comment from third-world representatives about the outcome of the negotiations.

  Non-governmental Organisations
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how the Overseas Development Administration is supporting the work of non-governmental organisations in helping to meet the long-term needs of the poorest communities in developing countries.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  In 1992–93 the ODA gave a total of £77 million to support the long-term development programmes of British non-governmental organisations.

  Aid-Trade Provision
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the operation of the aid-trade provision.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The ATP is a separate allocation within Britain's overseas aid programme. It is designed to support, in certain countries, development projects with industrial and commercial importance for the United Kingdom.
  61

  Aid
  Mr. Barnes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will outline the Government's key objectives for overseas aid; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  My right hon. and noble Friend the Minister for Overseas Development outlined the future direction of the overseas aid programme in her Chatham house speech on 18 October 1993. Copies are in the Library of the House.

  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the aid awarded from the overseas aid budget to each recipient country in(a) 1979, (b) 1980 and (c) 1993; and if he will set out the gross national product for each recipient country in each such year.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Information on bilateral aid by country, and on GNP, is available in the 1981, 1982 and 1993 editions of "British Aid Statistics" which are in the Libraries of the House. The latest available figures for bilateral aid are for 1992–93 and for GNP 1991.

  Levels of bilateral aid 1983 to 1992–93

  Thousands

  Population

  Country programme

  ATP

  Disaster relief/ Food aid

  ODA programme total

  CDC

  Other1

  Gross bilateral aid

  Total

  Per capita

  Total

  Per capita

  Indonesia

  Calendar year

  1983

  155,669

  4,355

  0·03

  2,882

  5

  7,422

  2,843

  2,273

  12,358

  0·08

  1984

  158,915

  4,663

  0·03

  5,868

  15

  10,546

  15,473

  2,273

  28,292

  0·18

  1985

  162,212

  9,788

  0·06

  19,793

  16

  29,507

  1,869

  2,273

  33,649

  0·21

  1986

  166,627

  5,139

  0·03

  51

  —

  5,190

  1,435

  2,273

  8,898

  0·05

  1987

  171,443

  6,079

  0·04

  1,042

  —

  7,121

  2,829

  2,273

  12,223

  0·07

  Financial year2

  1987–88

  171,443

  6,043

  0·04

  1,807

  —

  7,850

  4,537

  2,273

  14,660

  0·09

  1988–89

  174,832

  8,333

  0·05

  2,410

  —

  10,743

  4,350

  2,273

  17,366

  0·10

  1989–90

  178,211

  7,444

  0·04

  2,192

  —

  9,636

  9,707

  2,273

  21,616

  0·12

  1990–91

  181,580

  10,689

  0·06

  6,342

  —

  17,031

  5,550

  2,273

  24,854

  0·14

  1991–92

  181,388

  10,372

  0·06

  10,828

  —

  21,200

  10,952

  2,273

  34,425

  0·19

  1992–93

  184,274

  11,916

  0·06

  9,778

  178

  21,872

  9,041

  2,251

  33,164

  0·18

  NIGERIA

  Calendar year

  1983

  93,642

  5,480

  0·06

  —

  —

  5,480

  —

  —

  5,480

  0·06

  1984

  96,485

  5,584

  0·06

  —

  —

  5,584

  —

  —

  5,584

  0·06

  1985

  99,669

  6,240

  0·06

  —

  —

  6,240

  —

  —

  6,240

  0·06

  1986

  103,147

  5,580

  0·05

  —

  —

  5,580

  —

  —

  5,580

  0·05

  1987

  106,638

  6,554

  0·06

  —

  30

  6,584

  —

  —

  6,584

  0·06

  Financial year

  1987–88

  106,638

  8,133

  0·08

  —

  30

  8,163

  —

  —

  8,163

  0·08

  1988–89

  110,068

  6,310

  0·06

  —

  —

  6,310

  —

  —

  6,310

  0·06

  1989–90

  113,665

  67,698

  0·60

  —

  —

  67,698

  —

  5

  67,703

  0·60

  1990–91

  117,510

  34,864

  0·30

  —

  —

  34,864

  —

  606

  35,470

  0·30

  1991–92

  118,811

  14,440

  0·12

  —

  13

  14,453

  —

  6

  14,460

  0·12

  1992–93

  101,884

  13,951

  0·14

  —

  —

  13,951

  1,900

  4

  15,855

  0·16

  INDIA

  Calendar year

  1983

  733,248

  121,019

  0·17

  6,336

  245

  127,600

  —

  —

  127,600

  0·17

  1984

  749,184

  122,077

  0·16

  24,423

  37

  146,537

  —

  —

  146,537

  0·20

  1985

  765,147

  87,419

  0·11

  8,879

  168

  106,466

  —

  —

  106,466

  0·14

  1986

  781,367

  134,913

  0·17

  8,553

  15

  143,481

  —

  —

  143,481

  0·18

  1987

  797,526

  78,042

  0·10

  115

  307

  78,464

  —

  —

  78,464

  0·10

  Financial year

  1987–88

  797,526

  82,586

  0·10

  7,851

  403

  90,840

  8,257

  —

  99,097

  0·12

  1988–89

  815,59

  69,411

  0·09

  1,911

  20

  71,342

  13,305

  —

  84,647

  0·10

  62
  In addition to our bilateral assistance, countries receive substantial amounts of assistance from multilateral bodies to which the United Kingdom makes a major contribution.

  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he expects the aid provided to developing nations to reach 0·7 per cent. of gross national product.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The Government have agreed to reach the international aid target of 0·7 per cent. of GNF' as soon as possible, but are not prepared to set a timetable for reaching it. Future levels of aid will continue to depend upon our economic circumstances and on other calls for public expenditure.

  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will set out the levels of aid to(a) Indonesia, (b) Nigeria, (c) India, (d) Thailand, (e) Oman, (f) Malaysia and (g) Jordan over each of the last 10 years, (i) in totals each year and (ii) per head of the population.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  [holding answer 3 February 1994]: The information is as follows:
  63

  Population

  Country programme

  ATP

  Disaster

  ODA

  CDC

  Other1

  Gross bilateral aid

  Total

  Per capita

  relief/Food aid

  programme total

  total

  per capita

  1989–90

  832,535

  68,881

  0·08

  7,240

  —

  76,121

  11,531

  —

  87,652

  0·11

  1990–91

  849,510

  82,679

  0·10

  5380

  65

  88,324

  11,791

  700

  100,815

  0·12

  1991–92

  865,020

  121,893

  0·14

  6,542

  112

  128,547

  7,832

  7

  136,386

  0·16

  1992–93

  883,473

  93,107

  0·11

  867

  7

  93,981

  21,340

  49

  115,370

  0·13

  THAILAND

  Calendar year

  1983

  49,169

  1,228

  0·02

  —

  —

  1,228

  4,325

  —

  5,553

  0·11

  1984

  50,023

  1,880

  0·04

  225

  15

  2,120

  17,916

  —

  20,036

  0·40

  1985

  50,950

  1,516

  0·03

  233

  30

  1,779

  5,658

  —

  7,437

  0·15

  1986

  52,642

  1,440

  0·3

  404

  —

  1,844

  2,371

  —

  4,215

  0·08

  1987

  53,605

  1,836

  0·03

  251

  —

  2,087

  3,271

  —

  5,358

  0·10

  Financial year

  1987–88

  53,605

  1,879

  0·04

  426

  —

  2,304

  2,620

  —

  4,924

  0·09

  1988–89

  54,469

  1,937

  0·04

  774

  77

  2,788

  21,091

  —

  23,879

  0·44

  1989–90

  55,200

  2,121

  0·04

  3,212

  6

  5,339

  6,190

  46

  11,575

  0·21

  1990–91

  55,801

  2,108

  0·04

  2,854

  6

  4,968

  4,373

  42

  9,383

  0·17

  1991–92

  56,679

  2,057

  0·04

  207

  6

  2,270

  1,675

  57

  4,002

  0·07

  1992–93

  57,992

  1,881

  0·03

  200

  54

  2,135

  32,035

  151

  34,321

  0·59

  OMAN

  Calendar year

  1983

  1,131

  641

  0·57

  —

  —

  641

  —

  —

  641

  0·57

  1984

  1,138

  570

  0·50

  —

  —

  570

  —

  —

  570

  0·50

  1985

  1,181

  500

  0·42

  —

  —

  500

  —

  —

  500

  0·42

  1986

  1,294

  610

  0·47

  —

  —

  610

  —

  —

  610

  0·47

  1987

  1,347

  457

  0·34

  —

  —

  457

  —

  —

  457

  0·34

  Financial year

  1987–88

  1,347

  740

  0·55

  —

  —

  740

  —

  —

  740

  0·55

  1988–89

  1,421

  773

  0·54

  —

  —

  773

  —

  —

  773

  0·54

  1989–90

  1,486

  815

  0·55

  —

  —

  815

  —

  —

  815

  0·55

  1990–91

  1,554

  825

  0·53

  —

  —

  825

  —

  —

  825

  0·53

  1991–92

  1,618

  1,044

  0·65

  —

  —

  1,044

  —

  —

  1,044

  0·65

  1992–93

  1,647

  750

  0·46

  —

  —

  750

  —

  —

  750

  0·46

  MALAYSIA

  Calendar year

  1983

  14,863

  2,201

  0·15

  797

  —

  2,998

  874

  —

  3,872

  0·26

  1984

  15,270

  2,399

  0·16

  54

  —

  2,453

  519

  2,020

  4,992

  0·33

  1985

  15,611

  2,562

  0·16

  1,660

  —

  4,222

  3,232

  —

  7,454

  0·48

  1986

  16,110

  2,098

  0·13

  50,128

  —

  52,226

  3,268

  —

  55,494

  3·44

  1987

  16,528

  2,673

  0·16

  5,801

  —

  8,474

  1,305

  —

  9,779

  0·59

  Financial year

  1987–88

  16,528

  4,922

  0·30

  6,697

  —

  11,619

  905

  —

  12,524

  0·76

  1988–89

  16,921

  2,683

  0·16

  3,925

  —

  6,608

  1,692

  —

  8,300

  0·49

  1989–90

  17,340

  2,693

  0·16

  5,305

  —

  7,998

  —

  28

  8,026

  0·46

  1990–91

  17,752

  2,624

  0·15

  17,336

  —

  19,960

  7,924

  23

  27,907

  1·57

  1991–92

  18,294

  2,911

  0·16

  12,231

  —

  15,142

  693

  15

  15,850

  0·87

  1992–93

  18,610

  2,665

  14

  17,798

  —

  20,463

  526

  6

  20,995

  1·13

  JORDAN

  Calendar year

  1983

  3,247

  2,747

  0·85

  —

  —

  2,747

  —

  —

  2,747

  0·85

  1984

  3,385

  2,665

  0·79

  3,440

  —

  6,105

  —

  —

  6,105

  1·80

  1985

  3,512

  2,332

  0·66

  —

  —

  2,332

  —

  —

  2,332

  0·66

  1986

  3,620

  5,641

  1·56

  —

  —

  5,641

  —

  —

  5,641

  1·56

  1987

  3,790

  4,679

  1·23

  130

  —

  4,809

  —

  —

  4,809

  1·27

  Financial year

  1987–88

  3,790

  4,235

  1·12

  260

  —

  4,495

  —

  —

  4,495

  1·19

  1988–89

  3,903

  2,421

  0·62

  401

  —

  2,822

  —

  —

  2,822

  0·72

  1989–90

  4,041

  4,653

  1·15

  452

  —

  5,105

  —

  —

  5,105

  1·26

  1990–91

  3,154

  2,254

  0·71

  475

  2,720

  5,450

  —

  5,476

  10,925

  3·46

  1991–92

  3,453

  2,649

  0·77

  473

  —

  3,122

  —

  —

  3,122

  0·90

  1992–93

  3,949

  3,777

  0·96

  472

  —

  4,249

  —

  10,468

  14,717

  3·73

  1This is mainly debt relief, but also includes small amounts of drug-related assistance funded by the Home Office and FCO.

  2From 1987–88 data on aid spending have been compiled on a financial year basis.

  64 65
  Mr. Meacher
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what was the total value of the aid trade programme for each year since 1979; what were the dozen highest value projects assisted under this programme in each of these years and the value of each of these projects; which was the main company or companies involved in each of these projects each year and what was the level of aid they received under this programme or in any related form; and in each case which of these contracts were let without tender in each of these years.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  [holding answer 3 February 1994]: The total value of the aid and trade provision—cash expenditure—for each year since 1979 was as follows:

  £ million

  1979–80

  29

  1980–81

  26

  1981–82

  53

  1982–83

  47

  1983–84

  28

  1984–85

  59

  1985–86

  36

  1986–87

  81

  1987–88

  49

  1988–89

  58

  1989–90

  62

  1990–91

  94

  1991–92

  101

  1992–93

  93

  All the other information requested, with one exception, is contained in the detailed list of ATP projects placed in the Library of the House in October 1993 pursuant to the reply my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary gave the right hon. Member for Copeland (Dr. Cunningham) on 28 October, Official Report. column 732.

  The one exception relates to aid received by companies in any related form, this information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Commonwealth Development Corporation
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list all projects and programmes funded by the Commonwealth Development Corporation in the last five years; what projects and programmes are(a) legally committed and (b) planned in the current year; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Details of CDC's equity holdings, loans and commitments are given in its annual report and accounts, copies of which are laid before the House. Additions from January 1993 are shown. For reasons of commercial confidentiality information is not available on project proposals on which CTC is conducting negotiations with clients and co-investors.

  We intend to make a statement shortly on the outcome of a quinquennial review of CDC, and to publicise a further progress report on recommendations made by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission in 1992.

  Country

  Project

  Belize

  Belize Electricity Company

  Dominican Republic

  Hotel Flamenco Playa Puerto Plata

  Dominica

  Dominica Agricultural Industrial and Development Bank

  India

  Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd.

  66

  Country

  Project

  India

  Modern Woollens Ltd.

  India

  Mysore Paper Mills Ltd.

  India

  Square D Software Ltd.

  India

  Tata Ceramics Ltd.

  India

  CESC Ltd.

  India

  CG Glass Ltd.

  Indonesia

  PT Samudera

  Indonesia

  PT Gunung Raja Paksi

  Indonesia

  PT Wiraswasta Gemilang Co. Ltd.

  Malta

  Malta Mariculture Ltd.

  Mozambique

  Grafite de Ancuabe Ltda

  Nicaragua

  Camarones Del Pacifico

  Nigeria

  Cadbury Nigeria plc

  Nigeria

  Heleena Farms Ltd.

  Pakistan

  International Housing Finance Ltd.

  Pakistan

  Ravi Chemicals Ltd.

  Pakistan

  Sarah Textiles Ltd.

  Pakistan

  Fauji Marine Oil Terminal Distribution Co.

  Pakistan

  Fauji Cement Co. Ltd.

  Pakistan

  Hub Power Co. Ltd.

  Pakistan

  Pearl Continental Lahore

  Philippines

  Bukidnon Resources Co. Inc.

  Philippines

  Hopewell Power (Philippines) Corporation

  Tanzania

  Tourism Promotion Services (Tanzania) Ltd.

  Thailand

  Thai Rural Equity Fund

  Thailand

  United Palm Oil Ind. Co. Ltd.

  Zambia

  Nanga Farms Ltd.

  Zimbabwe

  Hippo Valley Estates Ltd.

  Zimbabwe

  Triangle Ltd.

  Zimbabwe

  Wankie Colliery Co. Ltd.

  Zimbabwe

  Victoria Falls Safari Lodge (Pvt) Ltd.

  Malawi
  Sir Thomas Arnold
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list by cost each bilateral aid project in Malawi.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  A list of ODA's current bilateral aid projects in Malawi will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

  Nigeria
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list each project funded by the Overseas Development Administration in Nigeria over the last five years.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  I have placed a list of all projects in the Library of the House.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what water projects the Overseas Development Administration is current), funding in Nigeria; and which companies have won those contracts.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  None.

  Indonesia
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he last reviewed the application of the good governance criterion governing the provision of aid by the Overseas Development Administration to the programme of aid to Indonesia.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The position for all countries is reviewed at least annually and was last reviewed for Indonesia in autumn 1993.
  67
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which United Kingdom company was involved in providing the flight simulator supported under the British aid programme to Indonesia.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The United Kingdom company supplying the flight simulator to the Indonesian domestic airline, Merpati, is Aeronautical Systems Designers Ltd.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what stage has been reached in the tendering process for the power plant in East Kalimantan, Indonesia, which is being funded under the aid trade provision.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The bids received by the Indonesian electricity authority for the Samarinda power station in East Kalimantan are currently being evaluated by the Government of Indonesia.

  The bid documents for the associated transmission line were issued by the electricity authority in mid-January with a return date of 24 March 1994.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what water projects the Overseas Development Administration is currently funding in Indonesia; and which companies have won those contracts.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  ODA is currently funding a small project that forms part of a general research programme into canal systems maintenance in a number of countries including Indonesia. ODA is also supporting five village-based water self-help supply schemes.

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which United Kingdom companies are involved in the Jambi power plant in Indonesia supported by the Overseas Development Administration.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The United Kingdom company which supplied equipment for the Jambi power plant was Mirrlees Blackstone Ltd.

  Malaysia
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what water projects the Overseas Development Administration is currently funding in Malaysia; and which companies have won those contracts.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The Overseas Development Administration is currently not funding any water projects in Malaysia.

  St. Helena
  Dr. Marek
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will place in the Library a copy of the Wright report on privatisation in St. Helena.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Copies of the 1990 report by David Wright on the expansion of the private sector in St. Helena have been placed in the Library of the House.
  68

  Thailand
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what water projects in Thailand are currently funded by the Overseas Development Administration.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The Overseas Development Administration is currently not funding any water projects in Thailand.

  Oman
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what scholarships and training have been provided under the British aid programme to Oman in the last five years; and in which subject areas.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The number of scholarships and training awards provided under the British aid programme to Oman since 1990–91 are as follows. Details prior to this can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  1990–91

  English Language training

  2

  Infrastructure

  5

  Planning, Administration and Finance

  4

  1991–92

  Teacher Training

  2

  English Language Training

  1

  Renewable Natural Resources

  10

  Health

  1

  Infrastructure

  6

  Planning, Administration and Finance

  1

  1992–93

  English Language Training

  10

  Teacher Training

  1

  Renewable Natural Resources

  6

  Planning, Administration and Finance

  1

  Infrastructure

  3

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many expatriate personnel were funded by the Overseas Development Administration to work in Oman in each year since 1980; and on which projects they work.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The following numbers of expatriate personnel have been funded by the Overseas Development Administration to work in Oman since 1988–89. Information prior to this can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Ministry of Agriculture Livestock Project

  Number

  1988–89

  6

  1989–90

  3

  1990–91

  4

  1991–92

  4

  1992–93

  2

  Ministry of Electricity and Water

  Number

  1988–89

  1

  1989–90

  1

  1990–91

  1

  1991–92

  1

  69

  Ministry of Commerce and Industry

  Number

  1988–89

  1

  1989–90

  1

  1990–91

  1

  1991–92

  1

  Oman Technical and Industrial College

  Number

  1988–89

  10

  1989–90

  13

  1990–91

  13

  1991–92

  9

  1992–93

  6

  Educational Curriculum Reform

  Number

  1988–89

  4

  1989–90

  3

  1990–91

  2

  1991–92

  2

  1992–93

  1

  Vocational Training Institute

  Number

  1988–89

  7

  1989–90

  8

  1990–91

  12

  1991–92

  12

  1992–93

  10

  Institute of Health

  Number

  1988–89

  2

  1989–90

  1

  1990–91

  1

  Tissue Culture

  Number

  1988–89

  1

  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which projects other than scholarships and training have been funded under the British aid programme to Oman in the last five years.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  The following projects other than scholarships and training have been funded under the British aid programme to Oman in the last five years:

  Assistance to the Ministry of Agriculture in livestock control and marketing.

  Advice to the Ministry of Electricity and Water on electricity safety rules and the operation of a drawing office in the electricity supply industry.

  Advice to the Ministry of Commerce and Industry on investment promotion and industrial diversification.

  A training needs analysis for the Ministry of Commerce and Industry.

  Assistance to improve English language teaching at the Oman technical and industrial college.

  70

  Assistance to the Ministry of Education in curriculum development.

  Assistance in teacher education at the Vacational Training Institute.

  Assistance to improve English language teaching at the Institute of Health Sciences.

  A study of the opportunities for tissue culture of date palms and other traditional crops.

  Arms Expenditure
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether it is the policy of his Department that developing countries should be encouraged to spend less on armaments; and whether levels of spending on arms is taken into account in the allocation of aid.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  It is for each country to assess and provide for its own legitimate defence needs. The United Kingdom actively supports the increased emphasis placed by the International Monetary Fund and the World bank in their relations with developing countries on the implications for economic and social development of an excessive level of military expenditure. We have made it clear that we consider the setting of an appropriate level of military expenditure to be an important part of good government. It is one of the factors we take into account when deciding our allocations of bilateral aid.

  Jordan
  Mr. Tom Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list each project funded by the Overseas Development Administration in Jordan over the last five years.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Projects funded by the Overseas Development Administration in Jordan over the last five years are as follows:

  Provision of a livestock expert to assist the Ministry of Agriculture sheep husbandry project.

  Financial assistance to farmers to replant fruit trees in the Jordan valley following the severe storms of January and February 1992.

  Provision of advice to the Jordan Industrial Consortium Engineering Company.

  Senior advisory assistance to the Jordanian Electricity Authority and to the Irbid District Electricity Company.

  Provision of equipment to the Jordan Meteorological Department for monitoring weather systems and locust swarms.

  Advice on air traffic control to the Jordan Civil Aviation Authority.

  Feasibility study for the Government of Jordan on the restructuring of telecommunications.

  Provision of equipment and advice to the geological mapping section of the Natural Resources Authority for compiling and printing maps.

  Advice on computerising the Jordanian passport system.

  Study of an aquifer at Qa Disi in southern Jordan to enable the Water Authority of Jordan to determine sensible abstraction rates.

  Study for a possible professional link between the Water Authority of Jordan and a United Kingdom water company.

  Diagnostic study into pollution at the King Talal dam.

  Study of possible contamination of groundwater in the Amman Zarka basin.

  Feasibility study into centralising the Water Authority of Jordan's maintenance facilities on a single site.

  Advice to develop in-service teacher training and textbook production.

  Provision of equipment to the structures testing laboratory at the Jordanian university of science and technology.

  Assistance to develop teaching English for specific purposes at the Jordan university of science and technology.

  71

  Provision of computers and consultants to increase computer awareness among secondary school pupils.

  Provision of equipment and advice to develop the national centre for occupational safety and health, and advice on industrial safety legislation.

  Provision of equipment to vocational secondary schools.

  Provision of a walking dragline for the Jordan Phosphate Mines Company.

  The heads of mission small projects scheme is administered by the British ambassador to Jordan and funds four to six small projects each year.

  The joint funding scheme has contributed to 11 Oxfam projects in Jordan over the last five years.

  Water and Sanitation Projects
  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the breakdown of spending on clean water and sanitation projects within the Overseas Development Administration in 1991–92; how much of the total is allocated to basic water supply and sanitation for use by the public; and how much for services to private dwellings.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Total specific spending on clean water and sanitation projects by the Overseas Development Administration in the financial year 1991–92 was £24·529 million. Data are not available to enable a separation to be made between expenditure on water supply and sanitation for public or communal use, and services directly connected to private dwellings.

  Many non-governmental organisations have clean water projects as part of their wider rural development schemes.

  Cash Limits
  Mr. Heald
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what changes have been made in the 1993–94 cash limit for expenditure by the Overseas Development Administration.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit on the external assistance vote—class II, vote 5—will be increased by £3,736,000 from £1,811,060,000 to £1,814,796,000. The increase includes a transfer of £88,000 from the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for assistance to the St. Petersburg potato industry and £3,337,000 in respect of a rollover of underspending against 1992–93 EC attribution. The gross running costs limit for the ODA has been increased by £311,000 from £51,771,000 to £52,082,000. This includes £235,000 in respect of an end of year flexibility entitlement and a transfer of £76,000 from Property Holdings for a maintenance club subscription. The net running costs limit for the Natural Resources Institute has been increased from nil to £3,788,000 to cover a revised forecast of income, and restructuring and relocation costs. The increases will be offset by transfers from other Government Departments and charges to the reserve and will not, therefore, add to the planned total of public expenditure.

  Aid Categories
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what cash is distributed as tied aid; how much aid is untied; what other categories of aid exist; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lennox-Boyd
  There are three main categories of tying status for official development assistance reported to 72
  the development assistance committee of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: tied, partially tied and untied.

  In 1992, £650 million of the United Kingdom's bilateral aid commitments to developing countries were tied, £500,000 were partially tied and £324 million were untied.

EMPLOYMENT

  Deregulation
  Mr. Heppell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment which organisations were consulted by his Department, on each of the recommendations of the business deregulation task forces before they were agreed and action proposed in the DTI document "Deregulation: Cutting the Red Tape".

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Matters covered by task force recommendations on administration of training programmes, handling of unfair dismissal claims, and industrial tribunal procedures have been discussed with training and enterprise councils, the Advisory Conciliation and Arbitration Service, presidents of the industrial tribunals, the Council on Tribunals and other interested bodies as appropriate. A provision in the Deregulation and Contracting Out Bill relating to redundancy selection implements a proposal of the task forces, which represent business.

  I have asked the Health and Safety Commission to consider the task forces' recommendations on health and safety at work as part of a general review of health and safety legislation. Decisions on these recommendations will be taken when the commission has made its report.

  Wages Inspectorate
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many complaints from employees were received by the wages inspectorate in March, April and May 1993; and in how many of these cases the inspectorate's investigation was completed within four weeks.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth: The information is as follows:

  1993

  Number of complaints received

  Number of complaint inspections completed within four weeks

  March

  113

  78

  April

  100

  69

  May

  93

  65

  Employees were told the results of investigations into their complaint. If the investigation could not be completed within four weeks, the employee was told about the progress of the investigation.

  Labour Statistics
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many people were in temporary employment at the latest available date; and what is the proportion of those in temporary employment as a percentage of the total number registered for employment for England as a whole and for each standard region within England.
  73
  Miss Widdecombe
  Latest estiamtes from the summer 1993 labour force survey of the number and proportion of employees in temporary employment for standard regions within England are given in the table:

  Standard region

  Employees in temporary employment (thousands)

  Proportion of employees in temporary employment (percentage)

  South East

  477

  7·0

  Greater London

  196

  7·8

  East Anglia

  67

  8·0

  South West

  107

  6·0

  West Midlands

  117

  5·9

  East Midlands

  101

  6·2

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  128

  6·7

  North West

  145

  6·2

  North

  83

  7·4

  England

  1,224

  6·6

  Executive Agencies
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will list the subjects on which his Department formerly answered parliamentary questions but which are now referred by him to an executive agency.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  The chief executive of the Employment Service Agency is usually asked to reply to parliamentary questions concerning the day-to-day operational matters of the agency and on subjects for which he has delegated responsibility, as set out in the agency's framework document, a copy of which is available in the Library.

  Work Permits
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many applications for a work permit to employ a non-EC national were received in April 1993; what proportion of these applications were decided within eight weeks; and what proportion of applications on behalf of entertainers, sports people and models were decided within four weeks.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Four thousand, three hundred and ninety-nine applications for work permits were received in April 1993. Of the 2,850 cases processed in the month, 91·9 per cent. had been decided within eight weeks of receipt.

  One thousand, four hundred and eleven of the total applications decided in April 1993 were for entertainers, sports people and models. Fifty-seven per cent. of these cases were decided within four weeks and 92 per cent. within eight weeks of receipt.

  This exceeds the Department's published standard of 75 per cent. within eight weeks and was achieved at a time when the section responsible for work permits was in the process of moving between sites in Sheffield.

  Employment Agencies
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many applications for new licences were received from employment agencies in April 1993; and in what proportion of these cases a licence was issued to the applicant within eight weeks.
  74
  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  In April 1993, 241 applications for new licences were received, 83·8 per cent. of which resulted in a licence being offered to the applicant within eight weeks.

  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many employment agencies have(a) been licensed, (b) had applications for licensing as an employment agency refused and (c) had their licences revoked in each year since 1973.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  The Employment Agencies Act 1973, which requires all employment agencies and employment business to be licensed, came into force in mid-1976. The available records commence from 1977, the first full year of the Act's operation, and are provided in the table:

  Year

  Number of current licences

  Applications refused

  Licences revoked

  1977

  5,057

  10

  —

  1978

  5,896

  4

  1

  1979

  6,550

  2

  —

  1980

  6,990

  3

  —

  1981

  6,645

  5

  2

  1982

  6,624

  7

  —

  1983

  6,950

  3

  —

  1984

  7,668

  —

  —

  1985

  8,499

  1

  —

  1986

  9,984

  3

  1

  1987

  11,379

  3

  2

  1988

  13,541

  —

  —

  1989

  16,023

  5

  —

  1990

  17,227

  3

  —

  1991

  15,887

  5

  1

  1992

  14,701

  3

  2

  1993

  14,482

  1

  —

  Totals

  58

  9

  Training and Enterprise Councils
  Mr. David Porter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how much funding has been made available to each TEC in East Anglia in 1992–93 and 1993–94 for youth training, adult training, long-term unemployed and business start-up schemes; and if he will make a statement.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The table provides the information requested in respect of youth and adult training and business start-up allowances.

  Separate figures are not available for the long-terrn unemployed. People unemployed for at least a year who have been through a jobplan workshop are given priority for places on the training for work programme, and the long-term unemployed also have access to a wide range of other opportunities available through the training and enterprise councils.

  Details of TEC budgets

  TEC Names

  Youth Training/ Credits

  Training for work

  Business Start Up Allowance

  £ million

  £ million

  £ million

  1992–93

  Bedfordshire

  5·14

  2·94

  0·36

  Cambridgeshire

  2·60

  1·06

  0·31

  Essex

  16·02

  6·08

  0·82

  Greater Peterborough

  4·60

  2·22

  0·20

  75

  TEC Names

  Youth Training/ Credits

  Training for work

  Business Start Up Allowance

  £ million

  £ million

  £ million

  Hertfordshire

  13·52

  4·03

  0·82

  Norfolk and Waveney

  10·78

  5·58

  1·26

  Suffolk

  9·78

  2·16

  0·93

  1993–94

  Bedfordshire

  5·16

  2·60

  0·43

  Cambridgeshire

  3·44

  1·20

  0·34

  Essex

  16·71

  6·13

  0·86

  Greater Peterborough

  5·09

  2·45

  0·27

  Hertfordshire

  13·28

  4·00

  1·03

  Norfolk and Waveney

  10·04

  5·89

  1·11

  Suffolk

  9·31

  2·37

  0·72

  Notes:

  1 Funds are paid to TECs on the basis of a negotiated contract. The figures given above for both years are based on contracted amounts. The actual amount spent depends on claims made by the TEC.

  2 TFW figures include the programmes replaced by TFW, including employment training, employment action and HTNT.

  3 BSU figures are based on the amounts paid for starts and survivors.

  Employment Service
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what guidance is given to the Employment Service on the giving of information on claimants to hon. Members' staff.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  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. E. G. Fogden to Mr. Terry Rooney, dated 7 February 1994:
  The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question about guidance to Employment Service (ES) staff on providing information about claimants to honourable Members' staff.
  It may help if I explain the background. The rules of confidentiality are long established, having been in operation since the start of the National Insurance Scheme in 1911, when the Government of the day decided that information obtained about members of the public in connection with its administration should be regarded as confidential between the person concerned and the Ministry, and would not be released without the consent of that person. Successive Governments have continued since then to apply this policy. There are however specific groups of people who may receive personal information about a client without written consent; these include MPs, provided that they are acting on behalf of the client concerned. If however an enquiry about a client is received from someone claiming to be acting on behalf of the MP, we do not reply until the written consent of the client is produced.
  The policy on issues concerning disclosure of information, is set out in the ES Disclosure Guide and other internal memos. This guidance is issued to all ES Jobcentres and updated regularly as necessary.
  I hope this is helpful.

  Protection of Young People at Work Directive
  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what reason Italy and Spain gave for abstaining on the protection of young people at work directive in the Council meeting of 23 November 1993.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Explanations of voting on the common position concerning the protection of young people at work are in the annex to European Council document 10237/93—Presse 199-G. I have arranged for a copy to be placed in the Library.
  76

  After-school Care
  Mr. Chisholm
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how much money was allocated to each training and enterprise council in 1993–94 for after-school care in accordance with the Department of Employment's after-school care initiative; ane what each TEC's estimated out-turn expenditure is in 1993–94 in that area of activity.

  Miss Widdecombe
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Ladywood (Ms Short) on 3 December 1993,Official Report, column 821, which lists the funding made available for 1993–94 by training and enterprise councils including that for the out of school child care grant.

  TECs are not asked to provide estimated outturn expenditure.

  Health and Safety
  Mr. Barnes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will list the organisations and individuals consulted or to be consulted by the Health and Safety Commission in its current review of health and safety legislation.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: No definitive list is available. The core of consultation rests with the Health and Safety Commission's task groups, part of whose remit is, in turn, to consult widely. A list of task group members has been placed in the Library.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

  Legislation
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Lord President of the Council how many Government Bills have been defeated at(a) Second Reading and (b) Third Reading in the House of Commons since 1979.

  Mr. Newton
  The information is as follows:

  (a) One—Shops Bill [Lords], Session 1985–86.

  (b) None.

  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will list the number of Bills passed in each Session since 1979.

  Mr. Newton
  The information is given in the table.

  Bills passed by the Commons

  Session

  11

  22

  33

  44

  1992–93

  68

  68

  29

  52

  1991–92

  47

  46

  15

  33

  1990–91

  71

  69

  18

  49

  1989–90

  46

  45

  14

  34

  1988–89

  47

  46

  16

  37

  1987–88

  63

  62

  16

  49

  1986–87

  53

  51

  19

  36

  1985–86

  70

  70

  23

  49

  1984–85

  76

  75

  26

  54

  1983–84

  73

  73

  30

  60

  1982–83

  55

  51

  17

  41

  1981–82

  56

  56

  19

  46

  1980–81

  71

  71

  30

  57

  1979–80

  82

  81

  25

  71

  1 Number of Bills passed by Commons.

  2 Number of Bills which received the Royal Assent.

  77
  3 Number of Bills which received Royal Assent which originated in the lords.

  4 Number of Bills which received the Royal Assent which were Government Bills.

  Paintings and Photographs
  Mr. Boyes
  To ask the Lord President of the Council how many(a) paintings and (b) photographs there are on the walls of his rooms.

  Mr. Newton
  There are four paintings in my room in the House of Commons and seven paintings and 12 prints in my room at 68 Whitehall. There are no photographs on the walls in either room.

  Mr. Boyes
  To ask the Lord President of the Council what plans he has to buy or borrow photographs; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Newton
  I have no plans to do so.

  Early-day Motions
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Lord President of the Council how many early-day motions have been tabled in each year since 1964.

  Mr. Newton
  This information is available in House of Commons Factsheet No. 30, entitled "Early Day Motions".

ENVIRONMENT

  Urban Regeneration (Regional Directors)
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for the environment if the appointment of, or powers given to, the new senior regional directors for urban regeneration, or the new procedures he proposes for determining the structure and distribution of related expenditure, are subject to any decision of Parliament.

  Mr. Baldry
  The integrated regional offices, headed by senior regional directors, will bring together the responsibilities of the existing regional offices of the Department of the Environment, Department of Transport, Department of Employment and Department of Trade and Industry. Their appointment does not require specific parliamentary approval. Voted expenditure on the new single regeneration budget, details of which were announced to the House by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment on 4 November 1993,Official Report, column 515, will be subject to the approval of Parliament in the normal way.

  Council Tenants
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many council tenants received compensation in 1992–93 upon leaving their home for improvements made to it; and what was the total sum paid to them.

  Sir George Young
  Information on expenditure by local authorities under the existing discretionary power to make such payments, in section 100 of the Housing Act 1985, is not collected centrally. The Department proposes 78
  to monitor expenditure under the new right to compensation for tenants' improvements scheme being introduced on 1 April 1994, under section 122 of the Leasehold Reform, Housing and Urban Development Act 1993.

  Executive Agencies
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the subjects on which his Department or its predecessors formerly answered parliamentary questions but which are now referred by hi m to an executive agency.

  Mr. Baldry
  Next steps agency chief executives are usually asked to reply to parliamentary questions on the day-to-day operational matters of their agencies and on subjects for which they have delegated responsibility, as set out in their agencies' framework documents. Copies of replies provided by chief executives are published in the Official Report.

  Planning Applications
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what proportion of planning applications to local authorities were decided within eight weeks lin 1992–93.

  Mr. Baldry
  An average of 63 per cent.

  Food Superstores
  Mr. Ward
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many planning applications for food superstores have been granted on appeal, for the last two years for which figures are available.

  Mr. Baldry
  The provision of information on planning appeals is the responsibility of the Planning Inspectorate. I have asked the inspectorate 's chief executive, Mr. Stephen Crow, to write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from H. S. Crow to Mr. John Ward, dated 3 February 1994:
  The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question about the number of food superstores for which planning permission has been granted on appeal.
  The information is taken from the Inspectorate's records. The latest figures available for England are for the financial years that ended on 31 March 1992 and 1993 and are set out below:

  Planning appeals allowed involving food superstores

  Number

  1991–92

  9

  1992–93

  13

  Docklands Light Railway
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the: Environment what additional public funding over the provision envisaged, is necessary to meet the full construction costs, including stations at Island Gardens and Cutty Sark, of the proposed docklands light railway extension to Greenwich and Lewisham.

  Sir George Young
  The full construction costs of the proposed extension, including Cutty Sark and Island
  79
  Gardens stations, were estimated at £139 million in November 1992. The Government have stated unequivocally from the outset that this project must be taken forward with the private sector in the lead without any Government grant or subsidy. That remains our position. A review of the commercial viability of the project undertaken last autumn indicated that the original estimated cost could not be funded from the level of revenues forecast for the extension. Third parties locally have assigned £7 million to the project but this will not be sufficient to close the funding gap. To ensure the project's financial viability, either major reductions in the scope of the project will need to be made or further third party finance will need to be contributed.

  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to charge a toll for cross-river journeys on the docklands light railway when it is extended to Greenwich and Lewisham.

  Sir George Young
  When London Transport promoted the Bill seeking powers to build the extension of the docklands light railway to Lewisham, it was envisaged that a premium fare, in the form of a cross-river toll, would need to be charged to recover the costs of construction. Current advice confirms that a premium fare will be necessary to make the project financially viable.

  Leeds Development Corporation
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the total value of the land and buildings held by the Leeds development corporation.

  Mr. Baldry
  The total value of the land and buildings held by the Leeds development corporation at 31 March 1993 was £7,507,000. The valuation figure, which is at the lower of cost and net realisable value, corresponds to the entry for development assets in the financial statements published in the corporation's annual report.

  Westminster and Wandsworth Councils
  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what concerns were expressed by his officials to himself or his predecessors in the operation by Westminster or Wandsworth council of(a) the cash incentive scheme and (b) the right to buy in general.

  Sir George Young
  By convention, advice given by officials to Ministers is not disclosed.

  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what reference was made to the cash incentive schemes and right-to-buy policies of Westminster and Wandsworth councils in their housing investment programme submissions, monitoring statements and meetings since 1985; what concerns were expressed by his officials as a result of these; and what changes were made to the scheme.

  Sir George Young
  Local authorities' HIP submissions are public documents and copies have been placed in the Library of the House. The Department collects detailed information at the end of each financial year from all local authorities operating cash incentive schemes under section 129 of the Housing Act 1988, and monitors the right-to-buy performance of all London boroughs. We were satisfied that Wandsworth's proposals met the criteria 80
  but, in the case of Westminster, following discussions with the Department when the borough first planned to run a cash incentive scheme in 1989–90, the council confirmed that when properties vacated were to be sold they would be offered to existing council tenants only, thus creating a vacancy for reletting to a homeless household.

  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what reviews were carried out by his Department of the cash incentive schemes operated by Westminster and Wandsworth councils; what the results of these were; and what changes were made to the schemes as a result;

  (2) what measures were taken by his Department to ensure that where the payment of a cash incentive in Wandsworth and Westminster council did not under their scheme result in the vacated houses being allocated for rent to someone in housing need the purchaser of those vacant properties themselves vacated a property which was let to someone in housing need.

  Sir George Young
  Since the introduction of the cash incentive scheme in 1989, the Department has collected detailed information at the end of each financial year. This includes the number of grants paid and dwellings released for each local authority running a CIS. It enables the Department to monitor schemes to ensure that they meet the objective of releasing vacancies to house—directly or indirectly—homeless households.

  No changes were made to the schemes run by Westminster council or Wandsworth council as a result of this monitoring process.

  The results of the first two years of this monitoring process were published by HMSO in a repoert "Cash Incentives Review" in 1992; a copy is in the Library.

  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment for what reasons Westminster council was judged to be performing well in its housing policies which led to the award of higher housing investment programme allocations in recent years; and by how much the allocation was increased as a result.

  Sir George Young
  Westminster city council's performance as a housing authority was assessed against the criteria published by my Department at the beginning of each HIP round.

  In recent years, Westminster has been assessed as performing strongly across the board, with particular strengths in the management of its stock, the promotion of tenant involvement and self-management, and the support of housing associations. These assessment's of Westminster's efficiency and effectiveness, along with assessments in respect of other published criteria, have been reflected in the discretionary elements of its HIP allocations.

  For the past three years, discretion has been used to allocate 60 per cent. of the HIP annual capital guidelines, the remainder being allocated on the basis of a calculation of the general housing needs of local authorities. Westminster has in recognition of its efficiency and effectiveness been allocated ACGs significantly greater than it would have been using the needs calculation alone.

  The criteria used in assessing housing authorities are available from the Library of the House, as are the details of the HIP allocations of individual authorities, and the calculations of their general housing needs.
  81
  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when approval was given to the cash incentive scheme operated by(a) Westminster and (b) Wandsworth councils; and what special conditions were added to the schemes as proposed by these councils.

  Sir George Young
  Any local authority which applies under section 129 of the Housing Act 1988 to run a cash incentive scheme is required to ensure that the number of grants paid equals the number of people rehoused in rented accommodation; that grants are paid only to tenants who could not afford to buy without this assistance; and that the amount of individual grants is kept within the prescribed limit.

  Both Westminster council and Wandsworth council met these criteria. Formal approval to run a cash incentive scheme in 1989–90 was granted to them on 14 August 1989 and 22 May 1989 respectively.

  No changes were made by Westminster and Wandsworth councils when they sought and obtained annually approval to run a cash incentive scheme in subsequent years.

  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what amount of subsidy was paid under the cash incentive scheme to Westminster and Wandsworth councils in each year since the scheme was introduced.

  Sir George Young
  The table shows the total Government resources made available in the form of supplementary credit approvals to Westminster and Wandsworth councils for cash incentive schemes each year since the scheme was introduced. No Government resources were made available in 1989–90 or in 1993–94.

  Year

  Wandsworth £

  Westminster £

  11990–91

  1,933,464

  1,409,000

  11991–92

  2,446,000

  2,611,000

  21992–93

  480,995

  658,000

  1 Made available under the homelessness initiative.

  2 Made available under the housing market package.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in his private office and (b) in his Department.

  Mr. Baldry
  The answer is as follows:

  (a) 1

  (b) 62 (including (a))

  Thermal Oxide Reprocessing Plant
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Pursuant to his answer of 20 January,Official Report, columns 827–28, whether British Nuclear Fuels was charged by his Department for the work put into preparation on the Euratom treaty article 37 submission on THORP.

  Mr. Atkins
  BNFL was not charged for work done by the Department specifically to meet the requirements of article 37 of the Euratom treaty.
  82

  Paper Processing
  Mr. Straw
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he is taking to monitor the progress of environmental health authorities in meeting the timetable requirements of part 1 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in respect of licences to control emission levels from paper coating processors.

  Mr. Atkins
  My Department monitors in various ways the operation of the local authority air pollution control system established under part I of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. This monitoring includes regular meetings of Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution—local authority liaison committee, the establishment of an industry forum, local authority statistical returns, and a review of the performance of 25 authorities undertaken by my officials last year.

  Guidance notes on air pollution standards have been issued for the categories of processes coming under the control system. Each guidance note includes a timetable for completing process improvements. One such note was published on paper coating processes in February 1992 and a copy was placed in the Library of the House at the time. Each note is issued in consultation with the relevant industry organisation and it is our intention that they are reviewed every four years, or sooner if particular issues arise.

  Surplus School Places
  Sir Thomas Arnold
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how he defines surplus places; what is the legal authority for his definition; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Forth
  I have been asked to reply.

  There is no statute governing the way in which surplus school capacity should be assessed. For current purposes the Department calculates the number of surplus places at a school as the difference between the number of places available, measured using a standard formula and based on the physical capacity of the accommodation at the school, and the number of pupils on the school's roll.

EDUCATION

  Ministers (Travel)
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what was the(a) budgeted and (b) actual expenditure by his Department on (1) internal and (2) overseas travel by the Secretary of State in 1992–93 after 11 April 1992 and so far in 1993–94.

  Mr. Patten
  The figures requested are as follows:

  Financial Year

  Domestic Travel £

  Overseas Travel £

  1992–93—planned

  6,000

  see note1

  —actual

  3,330

  2,0502

  1993–94—planned

  6,250

  see note1

  —actual (to date)

  3,080

  4002

  1 The annual budget for foreign travel by all the Department's Ministers (including officials in attendance). This was £54,000 in 1992–93; the corresponding figure for 1993–94 is £50,000. These plans are not

  83
  disaggregated between Ministers.

  2 Expenditure incurred on the Secretary of State's travel (including officials in attendance).

  Non-motorised Transport
  Dr. Twinn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what initiatives he plans to introduce to make educational establishments equally accessible to users of non-motorised as to users of motorised transport, including provision for adequate secure cycle parking.

  Mr. Forth
  The Education (School Premises) Regulations 1981, require that the land provided for a maintained school shall be adequate to permit provision of appropriate ancillary facilities, including vehicle parks. The Department's publication "The Outdoor Classroom", Building Bulletin 71, includes guidance on car parking and cycle storage facilities for schools. Parking and access arrangements at other educational establishments are a matter for the authorities responsible for those establishments.

  Under-fives Education
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will publish a table showing(a) the component of standard spending assessment which is notionally attributed to the education of under-fives, (b) the actual expenditure on education of under-fives for each of the London boroughs for the most recent year that figures are available, (c) the number of children under five in maintained schools and (d) the percentage of under-fives in (i) nursery classes and nursery schools and (ii) infant classes, as a percentage of the under-five-years population.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The information requested which is available is set out in the table. Reliable data on expenditure for under-fives are not available at the level of individual local authorities.

  £ million

  (a) Under-fives component of education SSAs

  935·2

  (c) Number of under-fives in maintained schools

  656,193

  (di) Percentage of under-fives population in nursery classes and nursery schools

  26

  (dii) Percentage of under-fives population in infant classes

  24

  Notes:

  1. The information on pupil numbers is derived from the January 1993 schools census carried out by the Department. The figure is based on a head count of the number of part-time (329,944) and full-time (326,249) pupils aged three and four on 31 August 1992.

  The figures exclude pupils aged four on 31 August 1992 but whose fifth birthday fell between 1 September and 31 December as well as pupils aged under-five in maintained special schools.

  3. The percentage rates have been calculated using information on the under-fives population supplied by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (OCPS).

  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will publish a table showing the component of standard spending assessment which is notionally attributed to the education of under-fives, expressed as a per capita figure for each child under five years, and the actual expenditure on education for under-fives expressed as a per capita figure for(a) each child under five years in maintained schools and (b) each child under five years in the population.
  84
  Mr. Robin Squire
  We do not have precise figures for expenditure by local education authorities on under-fives in maintained schools, but we can estimate the costs at a national level. The latest year for which spending data is available is 1991–92. The table gives the figures all in relation to the 1991–92 financial year.

  £

  Standard assessment (SSA) per population under five1

  260

  Estimated expenditure on under fives in maintained schools per under five pupil2

  1,650

  Estimated expenditure on under fives in maintained schools per population under five1

  340

  1 The divisor for this is the population 0–4 on 30 June 1989. This is the basis on which the 1991–92 under-fives SSA was distributed to LEAs.

  2 Both the expenditure and the pupil numbers relate to pupils who were aged four or less on 31 August. The pupil number divisor is a financial year average.

  Dearing Review
  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the impact of Sir Ron Dearing's national curriculum review on the swimming and water safety requirement of key stage 2.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The School Curriculum and Assessment Authority is currently considering what changes are needed in the statutory requirements for all the subjects of the national curriculum, including physical education. My right hon. Friend cannot anticipate the outcome of that consideration.

  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make a statement setting out the arrangements for the membership and timetable for action for the working groups recommended by the national curriculum review undertaken by Sir Ron Dearing.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  Membership of the groups advising the School Curriculum and Assessment Authority on the revision of the national curriculum was announced by the authority on 12 January: a copy of its press notice is in the Library. The groups' work will be completed by the end of March and the authority will then advise my right hon. Friend on a revised national curriculum to go out to consultation between May and July. The aim is that new orders for each national curriculum subject should be distributed to schools in January 1995.

  Local Education Authorities
  Mr. Hardy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will make it his policy that local education authorities should be represented on bodies which are relevant to their responsibilities as employers on such bodies as the Teacher Training Agency; and if he will invite those authorities to nominate representatives.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  My right hon. Friend will continue to make it his policy to appoint to bodies for which he is responsible members who will make an effective personal contribution, drawing on their knowledge and experience. While relevant experience may be specified in statute, and outside bodies may always suggest names for consideration, members are not normally appointed in a representative capacity.
  85

  Technology Schools Initiative
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what monitoring is being undertaken by his Department of spending by schools allocated funding from the technology schools initiative.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  TSI projects include a tender stage when project details are finalised and competitive tenders are sought to ensure value for money is obtained. For grant-maintained school projects, approval from the Department must then be obtained before work on the project can begin. Grant is paid only for expenditure which has been approved, and invoices must be submitted to support claims.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will place in the Library a copy of Stratford grant-maintained school's successful bid for £300,000 under the technology schools initiative.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  No. Bids for awards under the technology schools initiative—TSI—were prepared by individual schools, with the involvement of the local education authority where applicable, for submission to the Department. Schools did not necessarily prepare their bids with any expectation that they would become public documents.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education by what date he expects Stratford school to have completed the project for which grants were awarded under the technology schools initiative.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The project is expected to be completed before the end of the 1993–94 financial year.

  Information (Circulation)
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what facilities his Department provides for other Government Departments to circulate information to schools.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The DFE publishes a termly newsletter,Schools Update, which is sent to all schools. It has a section which offers information about the availability of leaflets and resource material from other Government Departments.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education which Departments of Government in the last year have offered for circulation or circulated to schools printed or film/video material directly or indirectly; and if he will name the publications provided in schools.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The Department for Education does not keep a record of material distributed to schools by other Government Departments. In the last 12 months, the DFE has itself distributed sample copies of the following publicity material to schools:

  Education Act 1993 Publicity Flyer

  Grant-Maintained Schools—Experiences in The First Year

  Grant-Maintained Schools—How to Become a GM School

  Grant-Maintained Schools—Questions Parents Ask

  Grant-Maintained Schools—Questions Staff Ask

  How is Your Child Doing at School?

  It's Your Choice

  National School Tests in 1994

  National Unauthorised Absence Tables

  School and College Performance Tables (16–18 Age Group) 1993

  86

  School Teachers' Pay and Conditions Document

  School Teachers' Pay and Conditions Leaflet

  Schools Update—termly newsletter to all schools

  Secondary Schools Performance Tables 1993

  Student Grants and Loans—A brief guide for higher education students 1993–94

  Student Grants and Loans—A brief guide for higher education students 1994–95

  The Charter for Further Education

  The Charter for Higher Education

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in his private office and (b) in his Department.

  Mr. Boswell
  My right hon. Friend does not have a shredding machine in his private office. There are a total of three machines in the Department.

  Grant-maintained Schools Centre
  Mrs. Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what inquiries he has undertaken or commissioned into the application of grants by the Grant-Maintained Schools Centre Ltd.; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The Department's accountancy adviser was asked to review the financial systems of the GMSC as regards the application of grant. Subsequently, a firm of accountants was engaged to review these in more detail. In addition the centre is required to provide the Department with audited accounts every year, which must include a statement as to whether the auditors are satisfied that grant income has been applied correctly.

  The auditors have certified that in 1992–93 grant was used for the purposes approved by my right hon. Friend.

  Mrs. Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education which grants to the Grant-Maintained Schools Centre Ltd. were incorrectly applied; if he will give the amounts, dates and purposes of such grants; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  None. The company's accounts for 1992–93 include an auditors' certificate that grant was applied for the purposes approved by my right hon. Friend.

  Mrs. Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what was the name of the consultants who conducted further work into the finances of the Grant-Maintained Schools Centre Ltd. after his own Department's internal review of the company was concluded in February 1993; and if he will place a copy of its report in the Library.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The consultancy was undertaken by the firm Coopers and Lybrand. Their report covers the full range of activities of the Grant-Maintained Schools Centre Ltd., more than half of which are not grant aided. It must therefore be treated as commercial in confidence.

  Mrs. Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will place a copy of the accounts of the Grant-Maintained Schools Centre Ltd. for 1992–93 in the Library.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  My right hon. Friend placed a copy of the accounts of the Grant-Maintained Schools Centre Ltd. in the Library last week.
  87
  Mrs. Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what inquiries he has undertaken or commissioned into the financial systems operated by the Grant-Maintained Schools Centre Ltd.; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The Grant-Maintained Schools Centre Ltd. was visited by the Department's chief accountancy adviser in February 1993, and subsequently by consultants, who examined and advised on the centre's financial systems. The company improved its systems in the light of that advice, and the external auditor's report on the company's accounts for 1992–93 includes a statement that the centre is now maintaining an adequate system of internal control.

  Teacher Training Initiatives
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) how many schools have agreed to take part in the proposed school-based teacher training initiatives; and how many students will be trained as a result;

  (2) if he will make a statement on the representations he has received for and against participation in the school-based teacher training initiative.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  Consultations in 1992 and 1993 revealed widespread support for the principle of school-based teacher training, in which students spend considerable time in schools and schools are involved in the design and delivery of training. My right hon. Friend's criteria for new ITT courses now include these requirements, which should be fully in place by September 1994 for secondary ITT and by September 1996 for primary ITT.

  A new scheme of school-centred initial teacher training—SCITT—was launched in March 1993, in which funds are paid direct to consortia of schools to organise and provide ITT for postgraduates. In 1993–94, 214 students began courses offered by nine consortia involving a total of

  £000s

  Regional development grant1

  Regional enterprise grant

  Regional selective assistance

  Exchange risk guarantee scheme

  Total

  1979–80

  50,663

  —

  4,774

  (20)

  55,417

  1980–81

  103,475

  —

  8,025

  0

  111,500

  1981–82

  122,171

  —

  7,716

  4,311

  134,198

  1982–83

  121,527

  —

  9,613

  636

  131,776

  1983–84

  72,126

  —

  11,141

  2,092

  85,359

  1984–85

  31,268

  —

  13,765

  4,906

  49,939

  1985–86

  81,933

  —

  19,387

  3,770

  105,090

  1986–87

  85,192

  —

  26,009

  5,927

  117,128

  1987–88

  47,528

  —

  23,211

  5,987

  76,726

  1988–89

  55,105

  218

  35,148

  2,816

  93,287

  1989–90

  27,459

  944

  34,865

  5,274

  68,542

  1990–91

  21,700

  1,504

  30,461

  4,141

  57,806

  1991–92

  14,161

  1,430

  55,021

  3,535

  74,147

  1992–93

  5,532

  1,096

  58,819

  5,480

  70,927

  1Figures for RDG up to 1983–84 are gross of receipts. Net figures are not available for those years. All other figures are net.

  Education Expenditure
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how much central Government money was spent per head of the population on education in Wales in each year since 1979.
  88
  49 schools. Proposals from consortia of primary and secondary schools for courses to start in 1994–95 are currently being considered.

WALES

  Development Board for Rural Wales
  Mr. Llwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what Welsh Office scrutiny there is of the working of the Development Board for Rural Wales; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  The Development Board for Rural Wales, like other non-departmental public bodies, is subject to a range of controls, direction and monitoring as required by the Development of Rural Wales Act 1976 and as set out in the board's financial memorandum and other guidelines. In addition, the board is set a number of targets, objectives and performance measures and in the context of its corporate planning cycle. I shall be chairing a meeting with the board in the summer to discuss its corporate plan targets for 1995–96. The board's finances are monitored on a monthly basis and its accounts are audited by the National Audit Office.

  Business and Industry (Government Support)
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how much central Government money was spent on developing and supporting(a) manufacturing industries and (b) business in general in Wales for each year since 1979.

  Mr. Redwood
  Expenditure through the Welsh Office's main schemes for business support is shown in the table. Separate figures for manufacturing industry are not available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. The figures do not include grant in aid for development agencies in Wales, nor expenditure by DTI on UK-wide schemes.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  Based on the appropriation accounts of the Welsh Office, the information is estimated to be as follows:
  89

  £ per head of population (in cash terms)

  Per cent.

  1979–80

  1·17

  1980–81

  1·26

  1981–82

  1·77

  1982–83

  1·89

  1983–84

  2·55

  1984–85

  3·16

  1985–86

  3·94

  1986–87

  4·84

  1987–88

  7·38

  1988–89

  8·52

  1989–90

  10·37

  1990–91

  11·79

  1991–92

  14·76

  1992–93

  32·68

  These figures are not wholly comparable in every case because of changes in classification. However, figures for total identifiable Government expenditure on education in Wales are available on a consistent basis and the information is as follows:

  £ per head of population (in cash terms)

  £

  1979–80

  192

  1980–81

  234

  1981–82

  256

  1982–83

  277

  1983–84

  291

  1984–85

  299

  1985–86

  298

  1986–87

  330

  1987–88

  358

  1988–89

  391

  1989–90

  423

  1990–91

  458

  1991–92

  521

  1992–93

  568

  Unemployment Schemes
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how much central Government money was spent on schemes to help unemployed people in Wales in each year since 1979 in total and per person unemployed; and if he will list which schemes are included in these totals for each year.

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

  National Curriculum
  Mr. Llwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what additional resources have been allocated to the Welsh Office for the expanding of the national curriculum in key stage 4 during 1994–95.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  The curriculum for 14 to 16-year-olds in Wales is being slimmed down to provide flexibility and choice and is not being expanded.

  Tourism
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how much central Government money was spent per head of the population on encouraging tourism in Wales for each year since 1979.
  90
  Sir Wyn Roberts
  The information in the table represents central Government support to the Wales tourist board per head of the population in cash terms:

  Central Government support to Wales Tourist Board 1978–79 to 1993–94

  Year

  £ per head of population in Wales1

  1978–79

  1·2

  1979–80

  1·3

  1980–81

  1·5

  1981–82

  1·8

  1982–83

  2·0

  1983–84

  1·8

  1984–85

  2·3

  1985–86

  2·7

  1986–87

  2·8

  1987–88

  3·1

  1988–89

  3·3

  1989–90

  3·5

  1990–91

  3·7

  1991–92

  3·9

  1992–93

  4·6

  21993–94

  4·8

  Source: Wales tourist board and OPCS

  1Population estimates are Registrar General's mid-year estimates of resident population.

  2 Projected population from the Government Actuary's Department.

  Welsh Development Agency
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he received a copy of the curriculum vitae of the chair of the Welsh Development Agency before making the appointment; and if he will place a copy in the Library.

  Mr. Redwood
  I did not read the chairman's curriculum vitae. Such documents are confidential and not suitable for placing in the Library of the House. I read a letter and memorandum about Mr. Rowe-Beddoe's career and suitability for the job before asking to see him. I did not discuss politics when I met him, with officials present. The CV was received in the Welsh Office, did include on it on page 2 a reference to the Conservative party, but this was not repeated in the materials I read before confirming the appointment.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he first considered the curriculum vitae submitted by Mr. David Rowe-Beddoe in support of his application for the post of chairman of the Welsh Development Agency.

  Mr. Redwood
  My Department provided details about Mr. Rowe-Beddoe's career. I had no need to consider the curriculum vitae.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many applicants for the post of chairman of the Welsh Development Agency were personally interviewed by(a) himself and (b) his immediate predecessor as Secretary of State.

  Mr. Redwood
  I met the selected candidate; officials sifted CVs of over 80; my predecessor interviewed six.

  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he first became aware that Mr. David
  91
  Rowe-Beddoe, the person he appointed as chair of the Welsh Development Agency had been, immediately prior to that appointment, the chairman of the Monte Carlo branch of Conservatives Abroad.

  Mr. Redwood
  Recently. Mr. Rowe-Beddoe was appointed because of his business skills. His political associations were not a consideration.

  Transport Expenditure
  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans his Department has to produce annual statistics of all Government spending, capital and revenue across all modes of transport in Wales, including data on tonnages, passenger numbers, investment and subsidy.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  Comprehensive information on transport in Wales including data on tonnages, passenger numbers, Government expenditure, investment and subsidy, is published annually in "Welsh Transport Statistics", copies of which are available in the Library of the House. The next edition—No. 10—is due for publication on 6 July 1994.

  Cereal Support Payments
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether he will make it his policy to ensure that Wales and England are treated as one region for the purpose of cereal support payments.

  Mr. Redwood
  This is a matter for my right hon. Friends the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Secretary of State for Scotland and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and me to decide jointly.

  Milk Marque
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the progress of discussions with the Milk Marketing Board on the setting up of Milk Marque; and what representations he has received from Welsh farming unions on this matter.

  Mr. Redwood
  I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr. Davies), on 3 February 1994,Official Report, column 866.

  I have received four letters from hon. Members on behalf of the farming unions. In addition my right hon. Friend the Minister of State has met the National Farmers Union and the Farmers Union of Wales on 16 and 23 December 1993 respectively to discuss this matter.

  Sheep and Beef Premiums
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has received on late payment of sheep annual premium and special beef premium to farmers in Wales in 1993; and what steps he intends to take to ensure that payments are made on time in 1994.

  Mr. Redwood
  I have received representations from several sources.

  Processing work on these schemes was delayed initially by the need to establish a new computer system to enable payments to be issued from the Welsh Office, and not from MAFF as previously. The system has now been established and good progress is being made.
  92
  Payments have been sent to 84 per cent. of sheep premium claimants. Payments have been authorised for 46 per cent. of holdings which submitted beef special premium claims and will be sent to them shortly.

  Priority is being given to the remaining claims.

  A5
  Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether he will make a statement on the commencement dates for each section in respect of the dualling of the A5 across Anglesey.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  I refer the hon. Member to the 1993 supplement to "Roads in Wales: Progress and Plans for the 1990s".

  Denbigh Graig Quarry
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make it his policy to take measures to halt the proposed extension of the Denbigh Graig quarry by Tarmac/Roadstone; what account he has taken of the objections of residents and organisations in Denbigh; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  This is a matter for Clwyd county council as the mineral planning authority for the area.

  Crossrail
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement regarding the potential benefits to Wales of the crossrail project in central London.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  Crossrail will afford travellers from south Wales speedier and more convenient access to the west end, the City and to destinations in east London and beyond.

  M4
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many representations he received during the consultation period on the proposals to extend the M4 relief road through the Gwent levels; how many of these representations approved of the Welsh Office's proposals; and if he will make a statement.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  I refer the hon. and learned Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Newport, West (Mr. Flynn) on 31 January 1994,Official Report, column 526.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in his private office and (b) in his Department.

  Mr. Redwood
  The answer is:(a)(b)

  Health Promotion Authority
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) what consultations he has had with the chairman of the Health Promotion Authority for Wales concerning the enhancement of value for money to be achieved from overseas travel by its staff;
  93
  (2) what consultations he has had with the chairman of the Health Promotion Authority for Wales concerning the strengthening of financial controls, and improvement of assessment and monitoring of overseas travel claims;

  (3) what consultations he has had with the chairman of the Health Promotion Authority for Wales concerning the resignation of its executive director with effect from 2 February 1994.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  These are matters for which the chairman and the board of the Health Promotion Authority for Wales have already given consideration. Overseas travel claims are currently being investigated by the district audit service at the request of the chairman and the board, following an internal inquiry, and the police have been informed by the chairman of the results of the investigation so far. The chairman and the board may wish to take into consideration any comments, the district audit service may offer following its investigation and I expect that they will continue to keep the Welsh Office fully informed.

  Sustainable Development
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make it his policy to establish a special advisory body for sustainable development policies in Wales on the lines of that proposed for Scotland.

  Mr. Redwood
  The Government panel on sustainable development will provide independent and authoritative advice to all Ministers, including me. The Welsh Office is also giving priority to ensuring that Welsh interests are properly reflected in the round table and citizen's environment initiatives. I see no need for another quango in Wales to deal with this.

  Teacher Training
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many schools have agreed to take part in the proposed school-based teacher training initiative; and how many students will be trained as a result.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  Schools in Wales have not yet been invited to participate in school-centred courses of initial teacher training. Subject to the passage of the Education Bill currently before Parliament, it would be for the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales to decide on the allocation of training places in higher education institutions and schools.

  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the representations he has received for and against participation in the school-based teacher training initiative.

  Sir Wyn Roberts
  I have received a number of representations from schools, higher education institutions and other interested parties about schools-centred teacher training. Some were opposed to schools taking full control of the training of student teachers; others supported the initiative provided that proper guidance and funding were made available.

  Agriculture Support Schemes
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what steps he plans to take to introduce more clarity and efficiency into the system of forms for the support schemes for agriculture in Wales; and if he will make a statement.
  94
  Mr. Redwood
  [holding answer 4 February]: I wish to see forms and explanatory literature kept as simple and straightforward as possible, although they inevitably have to be comprehensive enough to inform farmers of the full range of scheme rules. I have established a working group which will report to me in the near future on the streamlining of agri-environmental and other schemes in Wales.

  Consumer Protection
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will make it his policy to ensure the provision of full consumer protection and trading standards service in all parts of Wales; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Redwood
  [holding answer 4 February]: It is a matter for local authorities to ensure that they perform their statutory duties satisfactorily.

TRANSPORT

  Carriage of Goods
  Mr. Clifton-Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what specific restrictions in respect of the carriage of goods apply to vehicles in taxation class restricted showman's heavy goods vehicle.

  Mr. Key
  This is an extremely complex area and I will write to the hon. Member in detail.

  Bowbelle
  Ms Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will investigate and place in the Library details of the certificates of service held by the crew of Bowbelle; and whether they satisfied medical fitness certification requirements.

  Mr. Norris
  The manning of Bowbelle was fully in accord with the statutory requirements for the vessel, and all the crew were properly qualified. Some of the crew held certificates of competency or service. These certificates can be issued only to persons possessing a valid medical fitness certificate.

  Tax Concessions (Germany)
  Mr. Luff
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what representations he has made to the German Government about the extension of tax concessions available to German shipping companies.

  Mr. Norris
  None, but the EC Commission, which has responsibility for the initial consideration of these matters, is currently considering whether the extension of tax concessions available to German shipping companies is an illegal state aid within the terms of the treaty of Rome.

  Public Bodies
  Dr. Wright
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which non-departmental public bodies for which he is responsible have been(a) abolished or (b) created since 1979.

  Mr. MacGregor
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 1 February 1994,Official Report, column 611.
  95

  Contracts
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his answer of 31 January,Official Report, column 509, if he will publish the terms of reference for each contract awarded over the past five years.

  Mr. Norris
  The contracts awarded over the past five years contain a wide variety of types of work. They will not normally have been let against simple terms of reference, but if the hon. Member has a particular interest in any one of the specific cases listed in my answer of 31 January, I will be happy to respond.

  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his answers of 31 January,Official Report, columns 506–9, regarding contracts for which bids are currently being considered by his Department, if he will publish the terms of reference for each contract.

  Mr. Norris
  The contracts currently being considered contain a wide variety of types of work. They will not normally be let against simple terms of reference, but if the hon. Member has a particular interest in any one of the cases listed in my answer of 31 January, I will be happy to respond.

  Operator Licensing
  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the method used to calculate the annual savings to the transport industry of his proposals for simplifying the operator licensing system for buses and lorries quoted in his press statement No. 24 of 19 January.

  Mr. Key
  The press statement figure was based on the saving to the haulage industry as a result of the introduction of continuous licensing. It was calculated on a fee charged at five-yearly intervals which would be less than the current grant charge because no processing of an application would be involved and the elimination of advertisement costs for operators already in the industry.

  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps his Department has taken to ensure that local residents are aware of their rights to object to the issue of goods vehicle operator licences.

  Mr. Key
  Applicants for a goods vehicle operator's licence must advertise their application for a licence in a local newspaper which is circulated in the area of the applicant's operating centre, i.e. where the vehicles are to be kept. The advertisement must appear within 21 days before, or 21 days after, the application is made.

  The advertisement makes local residents aware of their right, if they are owners or occupiers of land in the vicinity of an operating centre, to submit written representations to the licensing authority within 21 days after the date when the advertisement appeared in the local newspaper.

  Further advice is given to representors in a booklet entitled "A Guide to making Representations". Copies of this booklet are available free of charge from traffic area offices.

  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is his estimate of the savings to his Department of the introduction of continuous licensing for operators of buses and lorries.
  96
  Mr. Key
  It is estimated that the effect on departmental expenditure will be neutral.

  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list all the meetings held by his officials with representatives of local authorities to discuss the deregulation of operator licensing.

  Mr. Norris
  Prior to the 1989 review of passenger and goods vehicle operator licensing, meetings took place between officials and the associations of district councils, county councils and metropolitan authorities. These associations received and responded to the 1993 consultation document but no further meetings were requested.

  Litter
  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what action he intends to take to ensure that motorways are regularly cleared of litter.

  Mr. Key
  We take a positive approach to our obligation under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to keep motorways in England clear, so far as is practicable, of litter and refuse. Our maintenance agents carry out regular safety inspections and patrols during which they report litter accumulations; if debris is observed which could present a hazard to traffic, it is removed as soon as possible. Other offending material is then removed in accordance with the demanding standards specified in the code of practice on litter and refuse, issued under the Act. We spend over £5 million a year on sweeping and cleaning motorways and scavenging the verges.

  Traffic Area Offices
  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what amount was spent by traffic area co-ordinating division on promotion of the work of the traffic area offices in the last year for which figures are available.

  Mr. Key
  It is estimated that promotional work by the traffic area co-ordination division in publishing annual reports and customer service guides on behalf of the traffic area offices will amount to £4,500 in the present financial year 1993–94.

  Buses
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) if he will publish a table showing for each year since 1985, how many(a) double-decker buses, (b) single-decker buses, (c) minibuses and (d) midibuses, owned by London Buses Ltd., were (i) under four years old, (ii) between four and seven years old, (iii) between eight and 11 years old, (iv) between 12- and 15-years-olds and (v) more than 15-years-old;

  (2) if he will publish a table, showing for each year since 1985, the number of (a) double-decker buses, (b) single-decker buses, (c) minibuses and (d) midibuses operated by private bus companies on behalf of London Transport were (i) under four years of age, (ii) between four and seven years of age, (iii) between eight and 11 years of age, (iv) between 12 and 15 years of age and (v) more than 15 years of age;

  (3) if he will publish a table, showing for each year since 1985, the number of (a) double-decker buses, (b)

  97
  single-decker buses, (c) minibuses and (d) midibuses operated by or on behalf of London Transport which were (i) under four years of age, (ii) between four and seven years of age, (iii) between eight and 11 years of age, (iv) between 12 and 15 years of age and (v) more than 15 years of age;

  LBL fleet age profile 1985–94 Age range in years

  Year and Type

  3 or less

  4 to 7

  8 to11

  12 to 15

  over 15

  Total Fleet

  1985–86

  DD

  1,323

  1,197

  346

  —

  1,640

  4,506

  SD

  —

  69

  381

  —

  —

  450

  Midi

  22

  —

  —

  —

  —

  22

  Mini

  5

  —

  —

  —

  —

  5

  1,350

  1,266

  727

  —

  1,640

  4,983

  1986–87

  DD

  1,121

  1,680

  385

  —

  1,227

  4,413

  SD

  —

  69

  414

  —

  —

  483

  Midi

  53

  2

  —

  —

  —

  55

  Mini

  3

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3

  1,177

  1,751

  799

  —

  1,227

  4,954

  1987–88

  DD

  755

  1,539

  1,055

  50

  918

  4,317

  SD

  —

  69

  416

  —

  —

  485

  Midi

  165

  2

  —

  —

  —

  167

  Mini

  3

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3

  923

  1,610

  1,471

  50

  918

  4,972

  1988–89

  DD

  461

  1,551

  1,337

  50

  813

  4,212

  SD

  7

  —

  362

  80

  —

  449

  Midi

  367

  2

  —

  —

  —

  369

  Mini

  3

  —

  —

  —

  —

  3

  838

  1,553

  1,699

  130

  813

  5,033

  1989–90

  DD

  270

  1,323

  1,399

  394

  784

  4,170

  SD

  12

  —

  250

  54

  —

  316

  Midi

  486

  20

  —

  —

  —

  506

  768

  1,343

  1,649

  448

  784

  4,992

  1990–91

  DD

  127

  1,064

  1,715

  273

  776

  3,955

  SD

  20

  —

  102

  67

  —

  189

  Midi

  738

  100

  —

  —

  —

  838

  885

  1,164

  1,817

  340

  776

  4,982

  1991–92

  DD

  70

  698

  1,796

  391

  718

  3,673

  SD

  9

  —

  69

  55

  —

  133

  Midi

  866

  182

  —

  —

  —

  1,048

  945

  880

  1,865

  446

  718

  4,854

  1992–93

  DD

  135

  528

  1,510

  710

  686

  3,569

  SD

  95

  5

  69

  12

  —

  181

  Midi

  1,000

  230

  —

  —

  —

  1,230

  1,230

  763

  1,579

  722

  686

  4,980

  1993–94

  DD

  138

  295

  1,679

  507

  601

  3,220

  (est)

  SD

  122

  11

  —

  72

  —

  205

  Midi

  911

  367

  —

  —

  —

  1,278

  1,171

  673

  1,679

  579

  601

  4,703

  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many(a) double-decker buses, (b) single-decker buses, (c) minibuses and (d) midibuses have been bought by London Buses Ltd. in each year since 1985; and what was the cost of each category.

  Mr. Norris
  The typical cost of vehicles to London Buses Ltd.—in 1993–94 prices—is as follows:

  £

  Double-deckers

  110,000

  Single-deckers

  95,000

  Midibuses

  55,000

  Minibuses

  35,000

  98
  Mr. Norris
  The information requested on the age profile of the buses owned by London Buses Ltd. is given. The same information for vehicles operated by private bus companies on behalf of London Transport is available only at disproportionate cost.

  The number of vehicles of each type that LBL have bought in each year since 1985 is shown in the table.

  New buses delivered

  Year

  DD

  SD

  Midi

  Mini

  Total

  1985–86

  135

  —

  —

  3

  138

  1986–87

  229

  —

  12

  —

  241

  1987–88

  —

  —

  65

  —

  65

  1988–89

  —

  —

  174

  —

  174

  1989–90

  59

  1

  150

  —

  210

  1990–91

  11

  7

  352

  —

  370

  1991–92

  23

  2

  316

  —

  341

  1992–93

  105

  73

  224

  —

  402

  1993–94 (est)

  —

  53

  98

  —

  151

  Total

  562

  136

  1,391

  3

  2,092

  99
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to introduce measures to privatise London Buses Ltd.

  Mr. Norris
  London Transport currently expect to offer the 10 London Buses Ltd. operating companies for sale in the spring.

  Motorway Usage
  Mr. Pawsey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what was the level of motorway usage(a) nationally and (b) by individual motorway by (i) all vehicles, (ii) trucks and (iii) motor cars, in (1) 1970, (2) 1980 and (3) 1990; and what the figures are currently.

  Mr. Key
  The table gives traffic on motorways in Great Britain. The data are available only from 1973. The corresponding information for individual motorways is not available.

  Traffic on motorways in Great Britain

  billion vehicle kilometres

  Year

  All motor vehicles1

  Cars

  Goods vehicles

  1973

  18·6

  13·2

  4·0

  1980

  29·4

  21·8

  5·2

  1990

  61·6

  46·9

  9·0

  1992

  61·0

  46·9

  8·4

  1 Includes light vans, buses and coaches and motorcycles in addition to cars and goods vehicles.

  Road Construction
  Mr. Raynsford
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is the planned expenditure on road construction in the years 1994–95 to 1996–97.

  Mr. Key
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Mullin) on 24 January,Official Report, column 77.

  Motor Traffic Growth
  Mr. Robathan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what proportion of his projections of future traffic growth is expected to be heavy goods traffic; and what proportion is expected to be private cars.

  Mr. Key
  Car traffic forecasts do not differentiate between private and commercial use. The growth in car traffic forecast in the national road traffic forecast between 1994 and 2025 is between 57 per cent. and 87 per cent. The growth in heavy goods vehicle traffic over the same period is forecast to be between 54 per cent. and 110 per cent.

  Mr. Robathan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is the projected growth of motor vehicle traffic by the year 2025.

  Mr. Key
  It is projected in the NRTF that all motor vehicle traffic will grow by between 58 per cent. and 94 per cent. between 1994 and 2025. The forecast range results from differing assumptions about economic growth and fuel prices.

  Mr. Robathan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is the source of information that is provided to the Government on future motor vehicle traffic growth.
  100
  Mr. Key
  The growth in motor vehicle traffic is forecast within the Department of Transport. The information used is detailed in the booklet "National Road Traffic Forecast (Great Britain) 1989".

  Road Lighting
  Dr. Twinn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will light more roads in order to help achieve his target of reducing road deaths and serious injuries by a third by the year 2000.

  Mr. Key
  In deciding which road safety measures to introduce we apply the general principle that resources should be used in a way which is most likely to be effective in reducing casualties. There may be cases where lighting should be installed, but there are also many other ways of improving roads to reduce deaths and serious injuries. Lighting will not always be the most effective solution.

  Public Transport
  Mr. Robert Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will specify the measures his Department is taking to encourage freight traffic to use rail and passengers to use public transport.

  Mr. Key
  Government policies are designed to encourage passengers and freight to transfer from road to public transport where that makes economic and environmental sense. Some 90 per cent. of passenger and inland freight traffic goes by road, but next year about 40 per cent. of total transport expenditure will be used to improve public transport. The existing freight facilities grant scheme is also to be extended by the Railways Act 1993 and our new track access grant for freight services will start in April.

  Road Maintenance
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what percentage of roadworks begun on or since 1 April 1993 are accompanied by a sign displaying the name of the organisation for which the work is being carried out and an emergency telephone number.

  Mr. Key
  Under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991, the information described by the hon. Member is required to be displayed at works carried out by public utilities and others with apparatus in the road. The requirement does not apply to roadworks carried out by the highway authority. Compliance appears to be generally good but precise figures are not available.

  The Department is the highway authority for the trunk roads and motorways in England. On these roads, all new construction works, and maintenance works other than short duration works, are accompanied by a sign naming the Department and giving other information about the work.

  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what percentage of(a) major and (b) all road maintenance contracts let between July 1992 and July 1993 were covered by lane rental agreements;

  (2) what percentage of (a) major and (b) all road maintenance contracts let between July 1992 and July 1993 have contained direct financial incentives to minimise the amount of road coned off and to finish the work quickly.
  101
  Mr. Key
  Three quarters of all major maintenance contracts let between July 1992 and July 1993 were lane rental. These contracts provide direct financial incentive to finish work quickly. Figures for non-major maintenance works are not available. It is a requirement in all trunk road maintenance contracts that traffic lanes should not be coned off unnecessarily.

  Diabetics
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make it his policy not to debar insulin-dependent patients from holding heavy goods vehicle and public service vehicle licences.

  Mr. Key
  The advice of the honorary advisory board on driving and diabetes is that to allow insulin-treated diabetics to drive these large vehicles would constitute an unnecessarily high risk to road safety.

  Pollution
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what estimates he has made of the effect of Her Majesty's Government's plans for increasing the number of cars on the road and Her Majesty's Government's efforts to reduce pollution with technology such as filters and catalysts.

  Mr. Key
  Road traffic growth is largely a function of economic growth; current projections suggest that road traffic will increase by 58 to 94 per cent. by 2025. The forecasts of traffic demand do not represent targets which the Government are seeking to meet.

  The Government have agreed tight emission standards for both cars and lorries within the European Union. As a result, most new cars have needed catalytic converters since the beginning of 1993. These reduce harmful emissions by about 70 per cent.

  Unanimous agreement of a common position on vehicle emissions has been reached at the recent EC Council which will significantly tighten emission standards for new cars registered after 1 January 1997. Standards will be tightened further by the year 2000.

  As a result of these standards, we expect ambient levels of most vehicle related pollutants to decline until well into the next century.

  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what study he has made of reports from the Centre for Exploitation of Science and Technology in relation to toxic effects of pollutants; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Key
  The Centre for Exploitation of Science and Technology produced a report on road transport and the environment as part of the United Kingdom environmental foresight project. The report contains a wide ranging review of environmental policies and aims to indentify future trends. In reaching views on these matters the Government take advice from a number of expert groups including the expert panel on air quality standards, established by the Department of the Environment, the Advisory Group on the Medical Aspects of Air Pollution Episodes and the Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants, which report to the Department of Health.
  102

  Seamen (Employment Agencies)
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many employment agencies for seamen have(a) been licensed, (b) had applications for licensing as an employment agency for seamen refused and (c) had their licences revoked in each year since 1973.

  Mr. Norris
  Ninety-three licences in total have been granted to employment agencies for seamen since 1973. Prior to 1988 the Department of Transport refused licences to commercial agencies, and there were only nine licence holders. These consisted of seven Merchant Navy establishment administration offices, which all closed by 1990, and two unions. Information is not available as to when these nine licences were first issued. Since then, one licence was issued in 1988, 29 in 1990, 19 in 1991, 21 in 1992, 13 in 1993 and one in 1994. No licences have been refused since 1990 but two were revoked in 1993.

  Crossrail
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make it his policy to take into account in considerations on the crossrail project for central London the benefits that scheme might have for Wales; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Norris
  We remain committed to achieving the benefits of the crossrail project, which is a scheme of wide-ranging significance. Benefits to passengers travelling to and from points beyond the London area are taken into account in evaluations of the scheme. This includes benefits to people travelling to and from Wales.

  Traffic Congestion
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what proposals he has for the reduction of traffic congestion; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Key
  The focus of the current trunk road programme is on relieving congestion on the existing network through widening schemes and the provision of bypasses on inter-urban routes.

  In urban areas, there will be cases where on economic or environmental grounds it is neither practicable nor desirable to meet demand by road construction. In these cases, the answer may lie in a mix of traffic management measures—including priority routes in London, parking controls, encouraging public transport, car sharing and park-and-ride schemes. A wide-ranging study of urban traffic congestion is being carried out. It includes the possible role of city congestion charging. The introduction of the "package approach" will encourage local authorities to develop a coherent strategy for dealing with urban transport problems, and provide more flexibility for funding between modes.

  Ports (Policing)
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what proposals he is considering to bring responsibility for policing the ports of the United Kingdom under the direction and control of the British Transport police; and if he will make a statement.
  103
  Mr. Norris
  A member of the Port of Liverpool police made such a proposal in a letter copied widely to Members of the House. I do not support the proposal. Rather, it is for each port to decide about its policing arrangements.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in his private office and (b) in his Department.

  Mr. Norris
  The Department has 186 paper shredding machines. Three are in the Secretary of State's private office.

  Traffic Monitoring
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what monitoring is undertaken by his Department of road works in London and their impact on traffic movement.

  Mr. Norris
  The Secretary of State is responsible for works co-ordination on motorways and trunk roads. Our own planned highway works are discussed with other London highway authorities with Metropolitan police and statutory undertakers to help to minimise inconvenience to the public. In addition, our consultant and borough agents receive advance details of certain types of street works proposed by statutory undertakers on trunk roads on our behalf; to enable co-ordination of all these activities to take place.

  London Roadworks
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will name all those London roads for which his Department is responsible and which are currently undergoing roadworks; and if he will name in each case the body responsible for the works.

  Mr. Norris
  The following is a list of major roadworks currently being carried out on the trunk road network in London on behalf of the Secretary of State:

  National Improvement Schemes

  A 406/M 1 Junction

  A406 Silver Street to Hall Lane

  A406 Hanger Lane to Harrow Road

  A406 East of Falloden Way to East of High Road Finchley

  A40 Long Lane

  A40 Widening, Long Lane to West End Road

  Al2 Hackney Wick to M 11 Link Road

  A13 West India Dock Road Junction

  Maintenance and Small Improvement Schemes

  M1 Junction 4–5—carriageway patching work

  M1 Junction 1–5—communication cable laying

  M4 Heston Road to Elevated section—overlay and partial reconstruction

  M4 Heathrow Spur—overlay and partial reconstruction A3 Hook Underpass—maintenance work

  A3 Coombe Lane Flyover—replacement of expansion joints

  A3 Malden Way—replacement of expansion joints on Hogsmill River Bridge

  A4 Great West Road/Sutton Lane and Heston Road junction—improved right turn facilities

  A4 West Cromwell Road Bridge and viaduct—replacement of expansion joints

  A10 Church Street—junction improvements

  A10 Bullsmore Lane to Carterhatch Lane—installation of cycle facilities

  104

  A 13 New Road to Lambs Lane and Sandy Lane—resurfacing works

  A13 Old Roding Bridge—bridgeworks

  A13 Butcher Row/Branch Road—junction improvements

  A23 Hermitage Bridge—maintenance work

  A23 Foxley Lane Railway Bridge—maintenance work

  A41 South of Brent Cross Flyover—drainage works

  A406/A5 Staples Corner Flyover—bridge repairs

  The upkeep of the trunk road network is an ongoing daily task requiring maintenance and improvement works.

  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which London bridges are currently closed or affected by roadworks; and which bridges are due for closure or roadworks during 1994.

  Mr. Norris
  None of the Secretary of State's bridges across the River Thames is currently closed or affected by road works. Roadworks are in progress on Blackfriars bridge and Lambeth bridge. I am advised by the local highway authorities that Westminster bridge, Albert bridge, Putney bridge and possibly London bridge are likely to be affected by works during the remainder of 1994.

  Public Transport Liverpool
  Mr. Loyden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many(a) inspections and (b) prosecutions were carried out by the Traffic Commission in respect of public transport in the Liverpool area (i) in the two years preceding and (ii) since deregulation.

  Mr. Key
  [holding answer 3 February 1994]: Data are not maintained for the Liverpool area alone. The north-western traffic area is the smallest area for which data may be available. Inspections are carried out by traffic examiners, responsible for such matters as drivers hours, tachographs and operator licensing, which may result in prosecution. Vehicle inspections are also carried out by vehicle examiners who are responsible for checking roadworthiness of vehicles. Offences may result in prohibitions. The police and local authority trading standards staff may also bring prosecutions in certain circumstances. Because changes have occurred in the way the figures are recorded, as well as in traffic area office boundaries, it is not possible to provide a consistent series of figures.

  In the two years since the boundary change, PSV inspections and prosecutions by traffic examiners in the north-western traffic area were as follows:

  1991

  1992

  Vehicles examined

  4,703

  5,421

  Prosecutions

  53

  77

AGRICULTURE FISHERIES AND FOOD

  Public Bodies
  Dr. Wright
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food which non-departmental public bodies for which she is responsible have been(a) abolished or (b) created since 1979.

  Mr. Jack
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to him by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 1 February 1994 at column 611.
  105

  Fish Stocks
  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how much money has been made available by the European Union to improve monitoring of fish stocks; and how it will be spent.

  Mr. Jack
  European Union funding is available for research and development under programmes such as FAR and AIR and the Fisheries Departments participate in relevant projects. However such funds are not available for regular monitoring of fish stocks which is funded by member states.

  Live Cattle (Exports)
  Mrs. Ray Michie
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) what discussions she has had with the European Commission and the Standing Veterinary Committee concerning lifting the ban on the export of live cattle; and if she will make a statement regarding the ban on the export of live cattle;

  (2) what plans her Department has to exempt highland cattle from the current ban on the export of live cattle;

  (3) what representations she has received regarding the ban on the export of cattle; what analysis her Department has carried out as to the effects of the ban on the industry in the United Kingdom; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Soames
  The export of live cattle over six months of age from the United Kingdom to other member states is prohibited under European Commission decision 89/469/ EEC. This is because of the position on bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). The EC Scientific Veterinary Committee in conducting a scientific evaluation of BSE in September 1993 endorsed the Community control measures on BSE. There has been no change in this position.

  Officials attend the monthly meetings of the animal health standing veterinary committee in Brussels at which regular updates on the BSE situation in the United Kingdom are given. There has been no discussion recently about the lifting of the ban on the export of live cattle for breeding from the United Kingdom and the exemption of certain breeds from the restrictions. This would be a matter for consideration initially by the European Commission who are keeping the position under review and are aware of the improving disease situation in the United Kingdom. Several representations have been received on this subject and are being considered in the light of the present situation on BSE in the European Union.

  Decommissioning Grant
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many fishing boat owners have had their application for decommissioning grant accepted; how much was paid out in each case; and how many owners have withdrawn from the scheme after their applications were accepted; how much money for the first round of the decommissioning scheme is likely to be underspent; what plans she has to re-allocate that money; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Jack
  On 21 September I announced that we were to pay decommissioning grant to the owners of 142 vessels. Since that time the owners of some of those vessels have withdrawn their applications. We currently expect to 106
  pay decommissioning grant in respect of 137 vessels. As I said on 21 September, payments will average £340 per vessel capacity unit (VCU).

  On the question of withdrawals and the reallocation of funds, I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Great Grimsby (Mr. Mitchell) on 3 February at column 818.

  Goosanders
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many licences have been issued by her Department for the slaughter of goosanders on the Duke of Devonshire's estates in the Yorkshire dales.

  Mr. Soames
  Two licences have been issued for the Duke of Devonshire's estates in the Yorkshire dales to shoot a restricted number of goosanders as an aid to scaring.

  Licences are not issued to cull bird populations. They are granted only where the Ministry is completely satisfied that the applicant has provided sufficient evidence of the serious damage being caused to the fishery and where other methods of non-lethal scaring have been shown to be ineffectual or impractical, not just difficult to implement.

  Milk Quotas
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if she will carry out a review of the financial situation of dairy farmers with milking herds of fewer than 40 cows, with particular reference to the problems faced when production exceeds quota; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Jack
  There are no plans to carry out such a review. However, among the amendments which the Ministry will be making to the dairy produce quotas regulations from 1 April are provisions which may be of assistance to smaller producers. In particular, we are planning to relax some of the current restrictions on the lease and sale of quota; and we will be making some technical ajustments which will provide for a more quitable redistribution of unused quota to over-quota groups of producers at the end of the quota year.

  Paper Shredders
  Mr. Rooney
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many paper shredding machines there are(a) in her private office and (b) in her Department.

  Mr. Jack
  There are no paper shredding machines in the Minister's private office.

  The purchase of paper shredding machines is a decentralised function within this Department and central stock recordse are not kept. To answer the second part of the question would require a survey covering the Department's offices throughout England, Scotland and Wales, which could be done only at a disproportionate cost.

  Bovine Somatotropin
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is Her Majesty's Government's policy towards the use of bovine somatotropin in milk production.
  107
  Mr. Soames
  I refer to my reply to the hon. Member for Liverpool, Garston (Mr. Loyden) on 3 February 1994 at column 817.

  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimates have been made of the increased cost of subsidies for milk production were bovine somatotropin to become freely available in a non-quota system; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Jack
  We have made no such estimate as currently the Community has no policy to dismantle current milk quota arrangements and replace it with an alternative regime. It remains the Government's objective to get rid of

  1990

  1991

  1992

  No. of licences issued

  No. of birds killed

  No. of licences issued

  No. of birds killed

  No. of licences issued

  No. of birds killed

  Feral pigeon and house sparrow

  435

  12,756

  382

  4,899

  333

  6,583

  Canada goose1

  73

  3,708

  86

  4,833

  94

  2,737

  Bullfinch

  2

  1,346

  1

  402

  1

  587

  Herring gull2

  1

  1,005

  1

  781

  1

  1,546

  Brent goose

  87

  831

  108

  1,244

  214

  2,797

  Greylag goose1

  2

  23

  5

  91

  14

  37

  Cormorant

  3

  11

  4

  18

  4

  10

  Greenfinch

  1

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Robin

  1

  1

  0

  0

  5

  2

  Blackbird

  2

  4

  0

  0

  2

  1

  Wigeon

  1

  0

  1

  13

  1

  0

  Moorhen and coot

  0

  0

  1

  40

  2

  36

  Heron

  0

  0

  1

  5

  2

  1

  Mallard

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  2

  Thrush

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  1

  Blue Tit

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  1

  Pink-footed goose

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  0

  Pied Wagtail

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  0

  Wren

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  0

  Notes:

  1Includes the pricking of eggs.

  2Includes the taking of eggs and nests.

  Set-aside
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what changes have taken place since set-aside was introduced in(a) the acreage of land cultivated, (b) the acreage of set-aside fallow land, (c) the totals of pesticides used and (d) the totals of agro-chemicals used.

  Mr. Jack
  [holding answer 3 February 1994]: The set-aside arrangements under the arable area payments scheme first came into operation at the end of 1992 in respect of the 1992–93 crop year. The total area of relevant arable crops (cereals, oilseeds, linseed and proteins) in England and Wales for 1992 and 1993 respectively was:

  hectares

  1992

  3,738,800

  1993

  13,349,900

  1Source: June census.

  The area of land set-aside in England and Wales under all the options of the voluntary five-year set-aside scheme, the one-year set-aside scheme and the arable area payments scheme was:
  108
  production quotas and to expose the dairy industry throughout the Community to the free market forces of supply and demand.

  Birds (Killing)
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if she will give details of all licences issued by her Department for the killing of birds protected under the Countryside and Wildlife Act 1981 during the last three years, specifying the number and species killed.

  Mr. Soames
  Figures for 1993 are not yet available. The number of licences issued for birds protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 for the years 1990 to 1992 and the number of birds killed are as follows.

  1992 hectares

  1993 hectares

  Five-year scheme

  128,779

  114,778

  One-year scheme (applied in 1992 only)

  12,192

  —

  Arable area payments scheme (applied in 1993 only)

  —

  501,120

  Total area set aside

  140,971

  615,898

  Just over 25,000 tonnes of pesticides and herbicides were used in England and Wales in 1992, but this figure includes quantities used for protected crops as well as for outdoor arable crops. The 1992 British survey of fertilizer practice indicates that the average application rate of organic fertilizers was 257 kg/ha. Comparable figures for 1993 are not yet available.

  Intervention Stocks
  Dr. Strang
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, pursuant to her answer of 25 January,Official Report, columns 131–32, when she expects to receive figures for actual expenditure in respect of each member state under the EC surplus food scheme in 1993.
  109
  Mrs. Gilliam Shephard
  [holding answer 4 February 1994]: Final figures will be available after 31 March, which is the closing date for the notification of member states' expenditure under the 1993 scheme.

DEFENCE

  Defence Planning
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the purpose and outcome of the recent trilateral meeting between France, Germany and the United Kingdom on co-operative defence planning.

  Mr. Hanley
  My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence hosted informal discussions with his French and German counterparts in London on 26 January 1994 to share views on European security issues following the NATO summit. The discussions, which were wide-ranging and constructive, did not cover defence planning.

  Scott Inquiry
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what cost has been incurred in providing documents to the Scott inquiry additional to that given in his reply of 8 July 1993,Official Report, column 80.

  Mr. Aitken
  The direct cost of the provision of documents to the Scott inquiry between 1 July 1993 and 31 January 1994 is estimated to be approximately £58,000.

  Armaments (Shipping)
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what safety and environmental protection precautions are taken at each of the ports used by his Department for the shipping abroad of armaments and explosives.

  Mr. Aitken
  Protection is afforded through the licensing of commercial ports by the Health and Safety Executive as required by the Dangerous Substances in Harbour Areas Regulations 1987. Dockyard ports and the military berth at Marchwood are also licensed in accordance with HSE standards.

  Allivane International Ltd.
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when payment was made by his Department to Allivane International Ltd. for the storage of ammunition at the central ammunition depot at Longtown, from 7 to 16 June 1988 to which he referred in the reply on 7 June 1993,Official Report, column 125.

  Mr. Aitken
  No payment was made by my Department to Allivane International Limited for the storage of ammunition at the central ammunition depot at Longtown from 7 to 16 June 1988.

  Overseas Trainees
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if any(a) Iraqi, (b) Iranian, (c) Indonesian and (d) Malaysian nationals are currently training at British military establishments in the United Kingdom or at overseas bases.
  110
  Mr. Hanley
  The information requested is as follows:

  (a) No

  (b) No

  (c) Yes

  (d) Yes

  It is not our practice to give details of training or numbers involved.

  Iraq
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the information he secured from the CIA on Iraqi military capabilities, as indicated in his reply of 10 June 1993,Official Report, column 192.

  Mr. Hanley
  In this instance the United States Government have not been able to produce a copy of the report in a form that is releaseable to foreign Governments. My Department, however, regularly exchanges information and assessments with the US authorities, and I believe that we have a good picture of Iraqi military capabilities.

  Tornado-Helicopter Accident
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what action he is taking following the report from the military accident investigation, pursuant to his answer of 26 November,Official Report, column 239; and when he will publish the report.

  Mr. Hanley
  The RAF board of inquiry report into the investigation of the accident involving a civil helicopter and an RAF Tornado on 23 June 1993 is not yet complete. A summary of the board's findings will be published as soon as they are available. The RAF's flying procedures are kept under constant review to ensure that flying is conducted with full regard to safety and a number of possible measures to reduce further the risk of collision are under consideration. A new system of notification by civil operators engaged in pipeline inspections has also been introduced by the CAA, and is currently under review after an initial six month period.

  Public Appointments
  Dr. Wright
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which of the public appointments for which he is responsible require advance notice to and consultation with the Chief Whip's office; and which appointments made since 1979 have been so notified and consulted upon.

  Mr. Hanley
  It is not the practice of Her Majesty's Government to answer parliamentary questions about discussions and consultations between Departments and offices of Government relating to public appointments.

  No-fly Zone (Bosnia)
  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when Sea Harriers first took part in monitoring and enforcing the no-fly zone over Bosnia; under what operational command; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  The Sea Harriers first participated in no-fly zone operations on 2 August 1993. The Sea Harriers remain under national command. Their tasking on no-fly zone operations is co-ordinated between the command of NATO's 5th allied tactical air force and the commander of the Royal Navy task group.
  111

  RFA Sir Geraint
  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much the United Nations is paying for the charter of RFA Sir Geraint to transport heavy equipment of the Nordic battalion from Trieste to Split; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  The UN has agreed to pay a daily hire charge of £3,500 for the use of the landing ship logistic, LSL, Sir Geraint and to meet any additional costs arising as a result of the charter.

  HMS Birmingham
  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the implications for the pattern of rotation of Royal Navy ships on Adriatic embargo operations of the recent alleged sabotage of HMS Birmingham.

  Mr. Hanley
  HMS Birmingham sailed recently for pre-deployment work in United Kingdom waters after a two-week delay and will shortly deploy for the Adriatic. HMS Coventry, the Op Grapple escort, has been made available for the NATO-WEU embargo operation until HMS Birmingham arrives in theatre.

  UNPROFOR
  Mr. Home Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many reservists on S type engagement in the regular forces are currently deployed with the British contingent in UNPROFOR; and if he will give a summary of the categories of reservists concerned.

  Mr. Hanley
  Members of the Territorial Army and the Royal Marines Reserve may volunteer to undertake short regular engagements or commissions on special terms. No one serving on that basis is currently deployed as part of the British contingent of UNPROFOR.

  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make it his policy to seek information on the monthly additional allowances paid by countries contributing troops to the UNPROFOR mission since 28 January; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  Having now received some information from other countries participating in the UNPROFOR mission, I am satisfied that the current arrangements for paying United Kingdom service personnel in the former Yugoslavia are both fair and justifiable and compare well with other nations. All personnel serving under United Nations auspices in Bosnia, including United Kingdom personnel, receive a United Nations allowance of $1·28 per day and a lump sum of $73·50 to cover rest and recreation: this is passed on in full by the British Government.

  There are, however, inevitable differences in the pay and allowance regimes of the various participating nations. United Kingdom service personnel, for example are not paid "danger money". But their basic salary is in general significantly higher than the other nations' troops. For example the basic pay of British junior NCOs is some 70 per cent. higher than their French counterparts, some 55 per cent. higher than their Belgian counterparts and
  112
  some 35 per cent. higher than their Norwegian counterparts. In addition, all United Kingdom personnel receive, throughout their career and irrespective of where they are stationed, an X-factor representing an 11·5 per cent. enhancement of basic salary which contains an element which recognises the need for them to serve on occasions under difficult and dangerous circumstances.

  Troop reimbursement costs paid to nations providing personnel for United Nations deployments are intended to allow participating Governments to recover certain costs from the United Nations, including an element for the salary costs of personnel on a per capita basis. United Kingdom personnel continue to receive their full pay and allowances from the British Government, including for those deployed from Germany and proportion of their local overseas allowance at a rate of 70 per cent. for married personnel and 40 per cent. for singles, in recognition of their continuing financial commitments at home.

  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) purusant to his answer of 28 January,Official Report, column 425, if he will give a breakdown of the annual receipts and costs areas they cover received by his Department from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office for the British contribution to UNPROFOR;

  (2) what has been the cost to his Department of the British contribution to UNPROFOR in each of the last three financial years; and if he will give a breakdown;

  (3) what costs have been reclaimed by his Department from the Foreign and Commonwealth office for each year since Britain contributed troops, equipment and expertise to UNPROFOR.

  Mr. Hanley
  UNPROFOR was established in financial year 1992–93 when the additional cost of the British contribution amounted to some £63,000,000. This amount was reimbursed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to the Ministry of Defence in full in financial year 1992–93 and comprised £1 million for personnel costs; £8 million for set-up costs; £12 million for deployment; £38 million for sustainment; and £4 million for miscellaneous support and equipment. For the current financial year, it is anticipated that the additional cost will amount to some £75 million which will be reimbursed in full by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

  Employment Legislation
  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what employment legislation is applicable to his Ministry; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  The Crown is bound by legislation which contains a specific provision to this effect, or where this is the necessary implication of the legislation.

  Service Women (Numbers)
  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many women were in each of the armed forces as(a) female officers and (b) non-commissioned females in each year since 1979–80.

  Mr. Hanley
  The information requested is as follows:
  113

  Year as at 1 April

  Royal Naval services

  Army

  Royal Air Force

  Female officers

  Service women

  Female officers

  Service women

  Female officers

  Service women

  1979

  434

  3,402

  884

  4,933

  608

  5,036

  1980

  440

  3,395

  877

  5,373

  706

  5,402

  1981

  481

  3,590

  945

  5,644

  755

  5,518

  1982

  465

  3,495

  959

  5,014

  752

  5,016

  1983

  436

  3,465

  933

  5,211

  740

  4,634

  1984

  387

  3,542

  984

  5,589

  767

  4,977

  1985

  374

  3,332

  1,009

  5,762

  801

  5,149

  1986

  380

  3,062

  979

  5,582

  850

  5,186

  1987

  403

  2,980

  1,115

  5,491

  971

  5,443

  1988

  399

  2,945

  1,137

  5,285

  1,053

  5,350

  1989

  407

  3,064

  1,186

  5,465

  1,099

  5,277

  1990

  430

  3,231

  1,23

  5,816

  1,136

  5,625

  1991

  456

  3,716

  1,253

  6,096

  1,181

  6,116

  1992

  473

  4,100

  1,197

  6,585

  1,194

  6,099

  1993

  495

  3,991

  1,170

  6,424

  1,139

  5,698

  Note: Figures prior to 1 April 1986 exclude female officers in the medical, dental, veterinary and legal specialisations as they were included in the male officer numbers.

  Pregnant Women
  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when his Ministry first received a legal challenge from a woman serving in the armed forces or formerly serving in the armed forces with regard to dismissal from the armed forces on the ground of pregnancy; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  The first legal challenge to the policy of compulsorily discharging service women on pregnancy was received from two former service women in June 1990. With the assistance of the Equal Opportunities Commission, the women applied to the High Court for judicial review of the decision to discharge them.

  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the average amount paid in compensation to women who had to leave the armed forces because they became pregnant in each year since compensation payments were first made; and if he will make a statment.

  Mr. Hanley
  Compensation payments to women discharged from the armed forces on the ground of pregnancy commenced in 1992–93, when the average amount paid was £3,462. The figure for the current financial year to date is £3,823. My answer of 21 January to the hon. Member,Official Report, col 939, should have given a total of £5,822,943 as the figure paid in compensation to women compulsorily discharged from the armed forces on grounds of pregnancy between August 1978 and August 1990. The current figure for compensation claims paid is 1,720 at a total cost of £6,234,779.

  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many women who left the forces because they became pregnant in each year since 1980 subsequently rejoined the forces at a lower rank; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  The Royal Navy and Army do not hold this information centrally and it could not be provided without disproportionate cost. Fourteen airwomen discharged on pregnancy after 1980 rejoined the Royal Air Force at a lower rank: nine in 1991, four in 1992 and one in 1993. All these women rejoined the RAF under the local service airwoman scheme. Three of those who re-enlisted in 1991 have since transferred to regular service.
  114
  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence under which vote and subhead his Ministry made compensation payments to women who left the armed forces because they became pregnant; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  As with all compensation paid by my Department in common law and industrial tribunal cases, payments made to pregnant ex-service women are made centrally on behalf of the three services from the second Under Secretary of State's top level budget—vote 1L2.

  Creches
  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 21 January,Official Report, column 940, what estimates he has of the costs involved in providing creche facilities at military bases; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  I have nothing further to add to my answer of 21 January,Official Report, column 940.

  Equal Opportunities Employment
  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what policy statement his Ministry has with regard to equal opportunities employment; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  It is the Department's policy to promote equal opportunity in the field of employment for disabled civilian personnel, for personnel of all racial groups and between men and women. The level of fitness required of service personnel precludes the recruitment of disabled persons. For operational and practical reasons, female service personnel are excluded from certain areas of employment, but the positon is kept under continuous review.

  Dual-use Technology
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of Slate for Defence what is his policy towards the development of dual-use technology.

  Mr. Aitken
  We favour the development of dual-use technology wherever practicable. The Defence Research Agency is currently pursuing a number of initiatives in this field including the pathfinder scheme and the development of dual-use technology centres.
  115

  Lightweight Fighter
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the objectives of the common affordable lightweight fighter programme.

  Mr. Aitken
  The common affordable lightweight fighter programme is sponsored by the United States Department of Defense. Its overall objective is to demonstrate, through flight testing, technologies to enable the development of a lightweight fighter aircraft of modular design. It is intended that the developed aircraft will have an advanced short takeoff and landing variant and a conventional takeoff and landing variant, sharing common designs of modules of engine, airframe and avionics. Cost reduction of design and manufacturing processes, is a major objective of the programme.

  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects the United Kingdom to join the common affordable lightweight fighter programme; and on what terms.

  Mr. Aitken
  We hope to join the risk reduction phase of the United States common affordable lightweight fighter programme this summer, subject to mutual agreement of terms that are still under consideration by both countries.

  NATO Soldier Modernisation Plan
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement about the NATO soldier modernisation plan so far as it affects United Kingdom companies and forces.

  Mr. Aitken
  The NATO soldier modernisation plan is a long-term concept for an integrated system of personal equipment for soldiers which is currently the subject of a study by the NATO industrial advisory group, NIAG. A number of representatives from United Kingdom companies are involved in this work. It is too early to assess the effect of the NATO soldier modernisation plan on United Kingdom companies and forces.

  Long-term Costings
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make it his policy to release information relating to long-term costings; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  The 10-year costing of the defence programme, known as the long-term costing, is designed for internal planning purposes. Approval to commit expenditure is subject to separate procedures and endorsement by Ministers as appropriate. To avoid giving a misleading impression as to the firmness of our plans we would not normally provide details of the contents of the long-term costing.

  Desert Storm Syndrome
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what information he has relating to possible psychological aspects of Desert Storm syndrome; and if he will make a statement.
  116
  Mr. Hanley
  We have no evidence to support the existence of a medical condition peculiar to armed forces service in the Gulf conflict, so statements on its possible psychological aspects would be mere speculation.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what new information he has received in the last six months relating to Desert Storm syndrome; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  My Department has continued to receive information relating to the alleged Desert Storm syndrome over the past six months from various sources. The information and sources are too numerous to list in detail but include:

  (a) the results of medical assessments on those United Kingdom service and ex-service personnel concerned that their health might have been affected by their Gulf service, who came forward in response to my offer to such personnel of investigation by armed forces medical services' specialists.

  (b) information from the United States authorities about the investigations and research they are undertaking into the existence of the alleged Syndrome.

  (c) correspondence from various individuals and organisations concerning claims that service and ex-service personnel who served in the Gulf are suffering unexplained illnesses.

  (d) media reports of the alleged existence of Desert Storm syndrome.

  To date none of the information has provided scientific evidence to support claims of the existence of a medical condition peculiar to service in the Gulf conflict.

  Accommodation (Expenditure)
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his policy regarding expenditure on improvements and furnishings for the accommodation assigned to commanding officers; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Hanley
  The Ministry of Defence provides married quarters for all ranks of the armed forces. The scale of provision of quarters for commanding officers varies according to the rank and responsibilities of the appointment. Expenditure on improvements and furnishings of these and all quarters is limited to that which is necessary to maintain the property to an appropriate standard.

  Defence Industrialists
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will publish all the graphical information on defence expenditure that has been shown to defence industrialists in the last three years; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Aitken
  No central record is kept of the contacts with industry at all levels at which such information may have been passed. I will however make arrangements, as soon as possible, to place in the Library of the House appropriate unclassified graphical information from the chief of defence procurement's first two conferences for defence suppliers, in July 1992 and July 1993. These include illustrative indications of possible trends in certain categories of defence procurement expenditure.
  117

  Britannia Royal Naval College
  Mr. Jamieson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the cost of building dog kennels at Britannia Royal Naval college, Dartmouth.
  118
  Mr. Hanley
  The work undertaken to prepare the site and to house the Ministry of Defence police guard dogs at Britannia Royal Naval college, Dartmouth cost some £54,000.

  CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION: EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION
  CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION: EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION
  GAZA AND JERICHO: ISRAELI WITHDRAWAL
  GAZA AND JERICHO: ISRAELI WITHDRAWAL
  PALESTINIANS: FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT
  PALESTINIANS: FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT
  PALESTINIAN DETAINEES: RELEASES
  PALESTINIAN DETAINEES: RELEASES
  CROATIA: CONFIDENCE-BUILDING MEASURES
  CROATIA: CONFIDENCE-BUILDING MEASURES
  NATO: DEPARTMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
  NATO: DEPARTMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
  NATO AND RUSSIA
  NATO AND RUSSIA
  CHILE: MAR PRESENCIAL CLAIM
  CHILE: MAR PRESENCIAL CLAIM
  EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ACT 1972: DESIGNATION ORDERS
  EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ACT 1972: DESIGNATION ORDERS
  CYPRUS: PROGRESS OF NEGOTIATIONS
  CYPRUS: PROGRESS OF NEGOTIATIONS
  MR. MORDECHAI VANUNU
  MR. MORDECHAI VANUNU
  CYPRUS: CONFIDENCE-BUILDING MEASURES
  CYPRUS: CONFIDENCE-BUILDING MEASURES
  PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY AGREEMENTS
  PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY AGREEMENTS
  TECHNOLOGY FORESIGHT PROGRAMME
  TECHNOLOGY FORESIGHT PROGRAMME
  PASSIVE SMOKING
  PASSIVE SMOKING
  LYME DISEASE
  LYME DISEASE
  HUMAN EMBRYO BASED RESEARCH PROJECTS
  HUMAN EMBRYO BASED RESEARCH PROJECTS
  ABORTIONS: COST TO NHS
  ABORTIONS: COST TO NHS
  EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT MEMBERS: DEATHS
  EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT MEMBERS: DEATHS
  COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS
  COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS
  METROPOLITAN POLICE: PRIORITIES
  METROPOLITAN POLICE: PRIORITIES
  GENERAL SERVICE MEDAL AWARDS
  GENERAL SERVICE MEDAL AWARDS
  CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENCE ESTABLISHMENT: ETHICS COMMITTEE
  CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DEFENCE ESTABLISHMENT: ETHICS COMMITTEE
  SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER ATLANTIC
  SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER ATLANTIC
  DEFENCE COSTS: IMPLICATIONS OF CUTS
  DEFENCE COSTS: IMPLICATIONS OF CUTS
  CYPRUS SOVEREIGN BASE AREAS: MARKET TESTING OF SERVICES
  CYPRUS SOVEREIGN BASE AREAS: MARKET TESTING OF SERVICES
  DRINKING WATER QUALITY INSPECTIONS: EUROPEAN COMPARISONS
  DRINKING WATER QUALITY INSPECTIONS: EUROPEAN COMPARISONS
  DOE APPOINTMENTS HELD BY MPs' SPOUSES
  DOE APPOINTMENTS HELD BY MPs' SPOUSES
  HABITATS DIRECTIVE: MANAGEMENT ORDERS
  HABITATS DIRECTIVE: MANAGEMENT ORDERS
  COUNCIL TAX IN LONDON BOROUGHS
  COUNCIL TAX IN LONDON BOROUGHS