Sitting of 25 November 1994

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

Road Safety
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Lightbown.]
9.35 am
The Minister for Transport in London (Mr. Steve Norris): I am delighted to be opening this morning's debate on road safety. By common consent, it is a matter of vital importance to us and to all our constituents, and one to which the Government devote a great deal of effort—and they will continue to do so.
On a personal note, it is now about four months since road safety was added to my other responsibilities in the Department of Transport. I was delighted that the challenge was offered to me. It is a particular pleasure to be the first Minister to have the words "road safety" as part of his official title. I am sure that we all want a specific commitment to the concept of road safety in everything that the Department does.
Modern road safety history began in 1987, when the then Secretary of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for Southend, West (Mr. Channon), announced what has become known as the casualty reduction target to reduce all road casualties by one third by the year 2000, compared with the average numbers for the years 1981–85.
Setting that target was a historic decision, and in some ways rather a gamble. I dare say the officials who advised my right hon. Friend might have called it a courageous or brave decision—as followers of "Yes Minister" will appreciate. He made it against the background that target setting has never been a popular practice in this country. Delivering the target depends on not just the actions of Government or official bodies but the behaviour of millions of individuals.
My right hon. Friend's decision proved entirely right and, paradoxically, that is precisely because so many other people are involved in delivering road safety. Nothing is gained from setting a target when achieving it is entirely in the Government's hands—that is simply a hostage to fortune. But in a case such as this, where so many other players are involved, setting a target can act as a focus for attention and activity, and a beacon to remind people that they are not working alone, but that we are all striving for a common objective. In many ways, we set a trend. Since the road safety target was set, there have been others. I cite in particular "The Health of the Nation" targets, which included the reduction of accidental death as one of its prime objectives.
Road accidents are the most common single cause of accidental death, especially for the young. In 1992, they comprised 38 per cent. of all accidental deaths in the whole population. Among 16 to 19-year-olds, 79 per cent. of accidental deaths and 35 per cent. of deaths from all
836
causes occurred on the road. "The Health of the Nation" target is to reduce the death rate from accidents among children under 15 by at least one third, and among young people aged 15 to 24 by at least a quarter by the year 2005.
We cannot build for the future unless we do all that we can to ensure the survival of young people. In that context, reducing road casualties is an important plank in the Government's overall strategy to improve the nation's health and well-being.
It is worth looking for a moment at our assumptions in 1987 when we set the casualty reduction target. It was not a panic measure simply prompted by ever-rising casualty figures. As hon. Members here, all of whom have considerable experience of these matters, will be aware, casualty figures at all severities had fallen steadily throughout the 1970s, but were levelling off in the early 1980s. At the same time, there seemed to be no end to the steady growth of traffic volume. Our research at that time had shown that we could maintain casualty figures at effectively the same level against an annual 4 per cent. growth in traffic, but if traffic volumes grew any faster, casualties would also rise. So to maintain and, preferably, accelerate the downward trend in casualties, we needed to push a bit harder.
Mr. Michael Fabricant: Has my hon. Friend read the recent article in The Times, which said that although we should not be complacent about the number of road accidents, the number per road mile in the United Kingdom is lower than in any other country in the European Union?
Mr. Norris: I shall say a little more about the context of accident rates in this country. My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the link between the absolute number of accidents and the growth in traffic, which is the point that I was just making. It is appropriate to put that on the record at an early stage in the debate, and my hon. Friend is noted for always getting his point on the record at a very early stage. Indeed, taking the Minister's best ballpoint is another practice at which my hon. Friend is a master. I yield to no one in my admiration for him in that respect.
Hon. Members on both sides of the House will be delighted to acknowledge the fact that Britain's record on road safety generally is literally second to none in ihe developed world. It is from that basis that we start looking to do even more. It is an extraordinary commentary on accident rates that fewer people were killed on our roads in 1993 than in 1926, when we started to collect accident statistics. That is an extraordinary statistic. I forget the precise rate of increase in traffic growth between then and now.
Mr. Richard Ottaway: Fourteen times more.
Mr. Norris: My hon. Friend prompts me to say that the figure is about 14 times more traffic. Yet traffic deaths are fewer. The other side of that tragic coin is that nearly 4,000 people lost their lives as a result of road accidents of some kind. That is the important context of the debate that we shall have today and why the House should devote time to this vital subject.
The target that we set was simple. It did not distinguish between different levels of severity or types of road user. With hindsight, it is easy to question whether it would

837
have been better to set different targets for different levels of severity. Arguably, there is a considerable distinction between causation of minor accidents and that of accidents in which people are killed or seriously injured. But the important proposition, which Ministers rightly accepted at the time, was that that, would have meant sacrificing the clarity and simplicity that have proved so valuable in galvanising into activity the various agencies involved in road safety. We were well aware that some measures would reduce accidents altogether while others would simply reduce severity. But it was important at the time and remains important today simply to get the overall numbers down.
In the event, the best results have been in reducing really bad accidents. Fatal and serious casualties have fallen far more rapidly than even the most optimistic might have hoped. In the 12 months up to June 1994, there were 33 per cent. fewer road deaths than the average for 1981–85 and 39 per cent. fewer serious casualties. That means that, when we take fatal and serious accidents together, we have hit the target that we set for the year 2000 seven years early. That is an extraordinary performance and a tribute to a range of organisations and individuals, including excellent officials in the Department of Transport and countless thousands of volunteers, individuals and local authority road safety.officers, who have all played a part in that staggering achievement. [Interruption.] If my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, South (Mr. Ottaway) would like to intervene, I should be delighted to give way to him.
Mr. Ottaway: I apologise for intervening from a sedentary position. I simply said that the Minister, too, should take much of the credit for that achievement.
Mr. Norris: I owe my hon. Friend one. I am merely the rapporteur in this matter. I am not a protagonist. But several of our hon. Friends, especially the hon. Member for Eltham (Mr. Bottomley), who was a distinguished roads and traffic Minister, deserve credit, as does my hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key), who, during his time in that post—he was there far longer than I have been—devoted a great deal of attention to the matter. Ultimately, Ministers simply indicate the importance with which a subject is to be treated in a Department's range of priorities. I am happy to reassure my hon. Friend on that score. My antennae must have picked up the fact that my hon. Friend was going to say something nice, which is why I fear that I embarrassed him by asking him to say it formally. But it is an important point.
Mr. Andrew Miller: Before the Minister forgets the point of the debate, with the plaudits coming from behind him, may I make a serious point? The publication, "Statistical Report on Road Accidents in 1991", produced by the European Conference of Transport Ministers, rightly says that, apart from Norway, Britain has fewer road casualties per road mile than the rest of Europe, the United States, Japan and Canada. That is a remarkable statistic. But throughout Europe, the rate of road accidents is falling consistently. It would be interesting if the Minister identified areas of research that have shown where the real successes have come from. Some countries have adopted a legislative
838
approach, some have looked at vehicle design and others have considered the question of speed. Which research has been useful in that matter?
Mr. Norris: The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. The reduction has in some respects been mirrored elsewhere in the world and is attributable to three main causes, all of which have many complex subheads. First, it is, of course, attributable to vehicle design, a matter on which I intend to expand later but which I mention briefly now in response to his intervention. Secondly, it is related very much to the work carried out by the Department of Transport and local authorities to make the road system itself inherently safer. Thirdly—this is the absolute key—it is attributable to driver behaviour.
As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Transport Research Laboratory, many independent institutions, the manufacturers of safety products and others have all carried out extensive research. Manufacturers alone have spent literally billions of pounds, but not one single reason can be isolated as either the single or most common cause of the reduction.
Lady Olga Maitland: Does my hon. Friend agree that it is ironic that car manufacturers are designing ever-more powerful car engines which can go from zero to 60 mph in X seconds? When I ask car manufacturers why they make such powerful cars, bearing in mind the fact that there is a 70 mph speed limit, they say that drivers like them. Surely powerful cars need to be curbed—[Interruption.]
Mr. Norris: I might have to protect my hon. Friend from the blandishments of my substantial colleague, the notionally silent Whip on duty—my hon. Friend the Member for Staffordshire, South-East (Mr. Lightbown)— who, to judge from his sedentary intervention, appears mildly to disagree with what she said and whose disagreement was audible at least at the top of Whitehall if not as far as Staffordshire. At the risk—and it is a substantial risk—of incurring the wrath of my hon. Friend the Member for Staffordshire, South-East, I believe that my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland) makes a valid point.
Generally speaking, the more powerful engines are safer in the hands of experienced, capable and responsible drivers because such engines give drivers the opportunity to escape from potentially dangerous situations provided that they act properly. However, my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam was also referring to advertising that stresses the transfer of libido that occurs when one buys a nice red sports car such as that owned by my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant), whom I remember seeing exit from here in a rather natty Lotus, something that he no doubt enjoys hugely.
I shall refer later to the encouraging trend in the design and manufacture of motor vehicles. That trend has been identified not by selfless, charitable manufacturers but by hard-headed and sensible ones. Largely because the climate is changing, they are beginning to accept that customers are finding safety and security elements in the design of cars increasingly attractive.
Sir Anthony Grant: Has my hon. Friend noted that insurance companies now take a very serious view of the issue and that their line on insurance premiums means that many young,

839
irresponsible idiots with over-powered cars are deterred whereas responsible drivers, such as my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant), are not?
Mr. Norris: I was able to agree with all that my hon. Friend said—until his final remark. My hon. Friend makes an observation which I am sure that many other hon. Members will develop if they are lucky enough to catch your eye, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Ninety-five per cent. of all accidents are caused by human error. My hon. Friend is a stalwart of the Guild of Experienced Motorists and is the first to acknowledge that it is experience and responsibility behind the wheel, rather than the technical specification of the vehicle alone, that prevents accidents.
I was talking about the accident reduction target. We allowed 17 years to make the one-third reduction, but achieved it in 10. The peak of road deaths in the mid-1960s was about 8,000 a year and, as I said, the number last year was well below 4,000, although traffic has increased 14-fold. Those people who believe that nostalgia is not what it used to be and who look back on a golden age when it was apparently safe to walk, cycle and play in the streets should think again. One is often tempted to look back on a mythical bygone age that may have felt safer, but, in fact, a great many more people lost their lives.
We are doing remarkably well in reducing the number of fatal and serious road accidents, but we have not finished our work. One should not rest on one's laurels. We must ensure that the trend is not halted or reversed. All our projections have assumed that at least the present level of road safety effort will be maintained and we still have a long way to go to reduce the number of slight casualties to the target level. In addition, we must remember that the target is not a destination but merely a milestone. Every accident is, of course, one accident too many and it is extraordinarily intolerable that, in an average week, 75 people die on our roads.
If we consider separately the different classes of road user, we find that the best progress in reducing accidents is made among what are commonly called the "vulnerable" groups. That is not a patronising term; it is simply a matter of physics that people are more likely to.be injured in a crash if they are not surrounded by a metal.box. Pedestrian deaths have been reduced by 36 per cent., pedal cycle deaths are down by 44 per cent. and motor cycle deaths by 56 per cent. However, in my opinion, the most gratifying news is the reduction in the number of child casualties which, by the end of 1993, was 40 per cent. below the average for 1981–85.
Those figures reflect the priority that we have all given to safety measures directed at the vulnerable road user. Of course, some, but by no means all, of the reduction reflects a drop in distance travelled by those modes. For example, the average distance walked fell by only 4 per cent. between the national travel surveys of 1976 and 1991.
More than half all road accidents involve car drivers and passengers. In this sphere, too, we have reduced fatal casualties by 19 per cent. and serious casualties by 24 per cent., but, unfortunately, there has been a steady rise in slight casualties involving car users. They are now 49 per cent. higher than in the early 1980s which, sadly, is almost enough to offset all the gains that we have made among other groups of road users. Of course, as I said to the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Mr. Miller),
840
some of that shift from the "serious" to the "slight" category is due to safer vehicle design, the use of rear seat belts and compliance with seat belt legislation and, of course, increased car use in general. However, it is still a matter of some concern that we have not done better in this regard. There is still a substantial amount of time until the target date in which we can continue to act.
Lady Olga Maitland: Can my hon. Friend give any figures about the accident rate among cyclists, bearing in mind the fact that there are more cyclists on the roads than ever before? They are extremely vulnerable to the risk of traffic knocking them off their bicycles, which can cause quite severe injuries.
Mr. Norris: The point made by my hon. Friend is immensely important. One of my concerns when I first came to the Department of Transport two and a half years ago was that we appeared to stress that cycling was dangerous, as my hon. Friend says, because the cyclist was very vulnerable in modern traffic conditions. The Department did not feel that it could encourage an activity that involved such danger. It has been of tremendous benefit to us all to have changed that psychology to an approach that represents best practice in pretty much every other country in Europe. The centrepiece of cycling policy there has been that cycling is healthy and environmentally friendly, that it eases congestion and that it should be encouraged in many ways.
If one wants to treat cyclists sensibly, one must protect them from their vulnerability to much larger and heavier pieces of metal travelling at speed. The separate cycle way is far more a feature of the continental landscape than it has been in the United Kingdom. I am delighted that we are now looking much more positively at the role of the bicycle.
If one asks people in a city, such as London, why they do not bicycle more, they say first, ironically, that they do not want to run the risk of getting wet. Our weather is hardly likely to alter hugely despite the direst predictions of the ecological lobby. Secondly, they say that cycling is dangerous: they do not want to have to navigate roundabouts where one seems to takes one's life in one's hands. I believe that we can make real progress in that.area.
I draw the attention of my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam to some figures that I found very telling. The other day, I looked at a graph that showed two statistics which were overlaid and contrasted with each other. The first concerned the proportion of all trips made by bicycle, and the United Kingdom was compared with Germany and Holland. In this country the proportion is, as I suspect the House knows, about 2.5 per cent. to 3 per cent. In Germany, the average was 15 per cent. Other research shows that in individual towns and cities, the figure can be as high as 30 per cent. The figures cannot be dismissed, as people who should know better have done in the past, on the basis that Holland is flat. I am afraid that it is not good enough to suggest that there is a topographical difference which explains the figures. In many European capitals, there is a lattice-work of cycle ways, which are an embarrassing comparison with the British experience.
The figures for accident rates to cyclists in the three countries were very telling. There are several times more accidents to cyclists per cycle mile in this country than there are in countries where cycling is practised so much more. In other words, as part of their culture, those

841
countries have built a far larger safety margin into cycling. There is a real lesson for us. There is an environmental gain there, as the royal commission has pointed out, in terms of the nation's health and people's individual health. There is also a gain in terms of traffic safety. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam for raising the issue of cycling.
Mr. Miller: The Minister is quite right in his analysis of the European picture. It is interesting to see the tables on page 35 of the European report to which I referred earlier. The Netherlands is down close to the UK level of accidents. I know that the Minister is right to suggest that increased use of cycle ways and planning cycling into road traffic design schemes would have saved some of the 189 lives that were lost in 1993. How much of the road budget has been allocated for that purpose? Will the Minister ensure that in all road schemes, moneys are ring-fenced for that purpose?
Mr. Norris: The hon. Gentleman is precisely right to point to the need to ensure that when we spend money on our road system, cycling is taken into account. I heard a depressing story the other day from Graham Webb, who is a member of the council of the Confederation of British Industry and a very successful business man. He is also a keen cyclist who lives near Tonbridge in Kent. Although I do not know the scheme personally and, therefore, would not draw too many conclusions from what Mr. Webb says, I trust his judgment. He tells me that a local authority scheme in the area involved the spending of about a quarter of a million pounds, as a result of which cycling in the area is now more difficult than it was before.
That story stresses one point that I want to make clearly on the subject. The answer is often not huge additional resources. As the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston suggested, it is important to ensure that when schemes are designed, they are designed with cycling in place. I can go further to give the hon. Gentleman the assurance he seeks, although I cannot, of course, speculate on the shape of the public expenditure settlement because that is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor. The hon. Gentleman will know, however, that we have made it clear to local authorities that we believe that the package approach to transport solutions is the right way in which to proceed. That package, in essence, stresses the multi-modal approach to congestion and pollution issues, and to the movement of people in town centres.
There have been some excellent examples, such as the scheme in York. The local authority has built cycling provision very well into what is still a healthy and vibrant town centre. It has lost none of its economic force as a result of fewer private cars travelling there. I have made it clear in all my discussions with local authorities that I want them to build cycling much more centrally into a budget which, in any year in recent times, has generally been about £1 billion a year, to give the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston a broad idea. The transport supplementary grant settlement from which local
842
authorities generally benefit is a substantial sum. I hope that the hon. Gentleman can take some comfort from that reassurance.
Ms Joan Walley: I am pleased to hear about this refreshing change of attitude towards cycling, which is long overdue. The Minister has just spoken.about the importance of integrating cycling into what happens at local authority level. Will he issue written guidance so that all the schemes devised by local highways authorities, within the package approach, will have to address the whole issue of cycling? What will he do within his Department to ensure that what was British Rail and is now a collection of business operators has a policy of encouraging cyclists on to trains? If we do not have a multi-modal approach, we shall not have an increase in cycling at local level, given that we have to fit the whole country together like a jigsaw puzzle.
Mr. Norris: I believe that it will be a beneficial exercise to build in some specific guidance from the Department on how cycling should be fitted into schemes, especially the town centre solution. The other day I and, I believe, the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) attended the launch by Sustrans of its national cycle way scheme. It is an ambitious and attractive scheme, much of which concentrates on recreational cycling. I was especially interested in the way in which the project lattices into town centres. There is a double benefit. Such an approach would facilitate safer cycling and would attract people out of the car and on to the cycle to make a straightforward business journey.
There needs to be a substantial culture change if we are to integrate cycling much more into the fabric of urban transport. That is about employers providing employees, especially in larger buildings, with facilities that enable those who come to work on a cycle to change their clothes or at least to present themselves slightly more attractively than might otherwise be the case. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire needs no assistance in that respect, but others are not so fortunate. There should also be places where cycles can be left safely. There must be a separation of cycles and motor cars.
At the same time, it should not be assumed that cycles should be put at the top of a list of priorities within modes. We have made a great mistake in the past in thinking in terms of a priority list of modes, save that the most important priority in terms of traffic and road safety must always be the individual, starting with the pedestrian. That is essential to the debate.
I return to the statistical analysis. The total casualty figure, taking account of the increase in slight accidents, has fallen by 3 per cent. since the early 1980s. That has to be set against the increase in traffic, which was 40 per cent. during the survey period. If we consider the overall casualty rate per 100 million vehicle km we find that it has decreased dramatically from 108 during 1981–85 to 74 in 1993.
In recent years, as I have said to my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam, customers have been getting more concerned about the safety of their cars. That has encouraged manufacturers to install features such as airbags, seat belt pretensioners and webbing grabbers, for example. Indeed, they have gone further. They have been working to improve the overall crashworthiness of cars. We see that every day when watching car advertising on

843
television. The days when marketing people argued that "safety does not sell" are, mercifully, long past. I was talking recently to a representative of one of the major car manufacturers, who told me that safety and security are now at the top of the customer wish list. That, of course, is the basis on which manufacturers will make their production decisions. Increased customer concern about safety has come about for a complex variety of reasons to which, I am sure, my hon. Friends will wish to refer.
There is still a long way to go. For all the improvements of recent years, the pace of legislative change in vehicle standards is slow. We must continue our efforts to negotiate higher vehicle construction standards in the European Community.
The public are more concerned about the safety of their children when travelling on coaches and minibuses. That is understandable, as there have been some tragic accidents involving school and voluntary transport. It is little comfort for those affected to know that, statistically, it is about twice as safe, mile for mile, to travel in a minibus or coach as in a private car.
There would obviously be great road safety benefits if seat belts were fitted to all seats on all minibuses and coaches. Many schools and voluntary organisations have already fitted seat belts to their vehicles and many others are planning to do so. Virtually all new minibuses coming off production lines have seat belts fitted. But a legal requirement for all new vehicles can be arrived at only through the European Union. We are pressing it extremely hard, and meanwhile we are doing what we can to progress faster within the United Kingdom.
In the summer, we announced that we would seek agreement to make seat belt fitment compulsory on all minibuses and coaches used specifically for the transport of children. We have been having urgent discussions with the European Commission on this. Where seat belts are fitted, we shall be ending the concession allowing three children to be carried on two seats.
The voluntary sector plays a vital role in providing transport in minibuses to many people whose mobility would otherwise be restricted—especially children, the elderly and disabled people. Those people rely heavily on volunteer drivers. Our legislation has long enabled those volunteers to drive minibuses on the strength of their ordinary car driving licence. When we were negotiating the second EC driving licence directive, we fought, successfully, to preserve that important concession through a derogation.
We had to consider especially carefully in the light of some recent extremely tragic minibus accidents whether to continue the concession after the directive comes into force in 1996. We took account of all the views of those responding to our consultation on the issue. It must be said that opinions were strongly divided, some opposing the adoption of the derogation and others favouring it. I announced earlier this month that we came down on the side of adopting the derogation. It was not an easy decision. Shortly thereafter I received a letter from Bert Massie, whom many of us know as the director of RADAR, the Royal Association for Disability and Rehabilitation. In that letter he says
844
"how delighted I am at your decision to use the right of derogation from some of the requirements of the directive. This will ensure the mobility of many tens of thousands of disabled people. It is, of course, right to consider these issues from time to time, but I am convinced that you have made the right decision."
Mr. Jacques Arnold: Is my hon. Friend aware that there are many youth organisations—notably the Scout Association and parent-teacher associations throughout the land—that rely on voluntary drivers to enable them to carry out their many pursuits, and that they are extremely grateful to him for the close attention that he has paid to their concerns?
Mr. Norris: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I had much in mind precisely the sort of groups to which he has referred. The drivers whom we are talking about are all volunteers. The volunteering element is, of course, the whole spirit of voluntary and community work. It is one of the country's great strengths, and has been across generations. It is not only a matter of cost. It would have been sad to have lost that element. It is an important feature of our social and community life and it is immensely important that we protect it. I am glad to have the confidence and backing of disabled people and of others, as my hon. Friend has said.
Voluntary organisations have always taken, and continue to take, a responsible attitude to road safety. Both the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents and the Community Transport Association have produced guidelines on voluntary minibus driving. The CTA has only this month published a code of practice covering all aspects of voluntary minibus operation. The Government are therefore confident that adopting the derogation will not endanger road safety.
I have mentioned examples of greater safety awareness among the consumers of road transport. It seems to be part of a wider change in attitudes, and one which was not foreseen when we launched the casualty reduction target. As I said earlier, much of the credit for this belongs to my hon. Friend the Member for Eltham, who was, and still is, one of the most persuasive advocates of road safety. He certainly started a national debate, especially on drink-driving, which has continued to this day.
It is with drink-driving that the change in attitude and behaviour has been most striking. We have had the same drink-drive limit since 1967. When it was introduced, the fall in accidents was quite dramatic. That effect lasted for only about a year before drink-driving crept up again. That shows that changing the law does not of itself produce real changes in driver behaviour. Too many people were still unconvinced that the law was necessary, that it was their drinking and driving that needed to be curbed and that they should do something about it. In any event, the law was so full of procedural loopholes that enforcement and prosecution became something of a lottery. That was the position which we inherited in 1979. During that year there were 1,650 road deaths where at least one driver was over the legal limit. Since then, we have tightened the law and we have introduced evidential breath testing so that taking blood samples is rarely necessary. We have increased penalties, especially where a death is caused, and we have started to carry out medical checks on high-risk offenders. We have also begun experiments with rehabilitation. In short, we have used a wide range of measures and it seems that their effect in combination has persuaded large numbers of drivers to

845
change their drinking habits. In 1993, there were about 550 deaths from drink-driving, but that is one third of the level in 1979.
The role of the police in the campaign has been extremely constructive. Last year in England and Wales, they conducted just short of 600,000 roadside breath tests. That is about two and a half times the number in 1983, the first full year of evidential testing under the Transport Act 1981. Back in 1983, no fewer than 41 per cent. of drivers tested either gave an alcohol-positive reading or refused to give a sample, which is also an offence. In 1993, that percentage was down to 15—the lowest yet.
Mr. James Clappison: Does my hon. Friend agree that, in addition to the good progress that has been made in reducing drinking and driving, in seeking to persuade potential drink-drivers not to drink and drive it is very important that publicity and propaganda should not shy away from bringing home to those drivers the tragic consequences which can arise from their drinking and driving—for themselves and for others?
Mr. Norris: I hope that my hon. Friend will develop his thoughts on that later because he has hit the point absolutely squarely. The great change occurred the day we recognised that the message, "If you drink and drive, you are breaking the law and you might lose your.licence," powerful and perfectly accurate though it was,.was never going to work.
We had to bear that point in mind in relation to the results that were obtained—and my hon. Friend the Member for Hertsmere (Mr. Clappison) will agree that the advertising material we have used in this respect has been particularly powerful—when we said to people, "You are a perfectly respectable individual. You are not the kind of person who would ever knowingly commit violence on another individual, but you could in a moment do something which would result in a perfectly innocent person losing his life. Not only will that mean that you will carry a serious criminal record with you for the rest of your life, but you will never forget what you have done. You will be haunted by it until your dying day."
God forbid that that should happen to anyone. However, that is, of course, the tragic consequence of just a little excessive drink on an occasion when a perfectly normal person believes that he or she can handle what he or she is drinking. While the law is well intentioned, and these are law-abiding people, they do not believe that it need apply to them.
That is a crucial change. I have taken an interest in practice elsewhere in the world over the past few years. It is clear that our campaign has been a real achievement for this country. There are far more breath tests in other countries. France carries out many more breath tests than we do, but because it has not understood the psychology of drinkers and drivers—I am referring not to people with a substantial medical problem, but to the occasional drink-driver who is the real difficulty—the French have not made anything like the progress that we have been able to make.
Mr. Miller: Before the Minister leaves his point about breath testing, a Victim Support report published in 1994 contains a survey of breath testing by police authorities after road accidents. The pattern is not consistent and that
846
is worrying. Only half of police authorities will test the blood alcohol level after an accident as a matter of course. Will the Minister talk to his colleagues in the Home Office and try to increase that ratio? Such tests should happen as a matter of course.
Mr. Norris: I hope that the hon. Gentleman will develop that point. I will certainly draw it to the attention of my right hon. Friends, as I quite understand his point.
Before we leave this important area of road safety, I must point out that there has been quite a radical change in the attitude of the drinks industry, among the brewers, distillers, licensed victuallers and so on. The Portman group, which represents many of those interests, has played a very positive role in promoting the separation of drinking from driving in several ways. Two months ago, the group collaborated with the Department of Transport to organise a joint seminar on drinking and driving which was opened by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. That seminar brought together experts from research, medicine, police, advertising and the media to look at ways to bring new life into the drink-drive campaign.
There had been a perception in the media and among some road safety professionals that the campaign might be running out of steam. There was no sign of that in the statistics as drink-related deaths are still falling at much the same rate. However, in that area, as in many others, people's perceptions are almost as important as the reality. The seminar produced several interesting suggestions on how we might reduce the number of drink-driving cases.even further.
People in the road safety world have often said, "If only we could do as well in reducing speeding as we have done in reducing drink-driving, we would be able to take a great step forward." Excessive speed is a factor in between 22 per cent. and 32 per cent. of all road accidents. International experience suggests that a reduction of average speed of only 1 mph could save 5 per cent. of all injury accidents and 7 per cent. of fatal accidents.
Other things being equal, the faster one drives, the more likely one is to hit something and the greater the damage will be. That can make the difference between passengers surviving unscathed, especially if they are wearing seat belts, and being killed. That does not mean that the fastest roads are the most dangerous. Motorways have been designed for high-speed traffic and are by far the safest roads because many of the features that cause collisions have been eliminated. In fact, over half the fatal and serious road injuries occur on roads with a 30 mph speed limit.
The problem is not absolute speed; the problem is relative and inappropriate speed. That is the important distinction between speeding and going too fast. No one would call driving at 25 mph speeding, but if one happens to be travelling at that speed outside a school when children are setting off home, one would almost certainly be travelling too fast.
Sir Anthony Grant: Especially if the road is wet.
Mr. Norris: As my hon. Friend says, the condition of the road surface is relevant in such circumstances.
My hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, South-West and the House will be aware of the new campaign on the "kill your speed" theme in which we have focused on urban and mainly residential roads where

847
most of such accidents happen. We will have to continue to plug away at that theme. We want to make speeding take on in people's minds the same status as drink-driving. However, other things are going on.
Engineering measures are being taken to control speed. Traffic calming has moved in from the fringes of road safety and is now playing an increasingly important role. My hon. Friend the Member for Wyre (Mr. Mans), as a private Member, brought in the Traffic Calming Act 1992. That legislation has placed beyond doubt the legality of the way in which techniques such a chicanes and road narrowings are applied in local areas. The variety of measures made possible by that Act are explained in an excellent booklet entitled "Safer by Design", which was launched by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State in August.
Lady Olga Maitland: With regard to traffic calming, does my hon. Friend agree that some traffic calming guidelines, particularly in relation to road humps, have been taken on board by local authorities with almost excessive zeal? There is, rightly, a great deal of objection in my constituency to humping down a mile-long road. Should we not encourage a greater variety of traffic calming facilities of which there is a considerable dictionary?
Mr. Norris: My hon. Friend may have to revisit the way in which she phrased that point.
Lady Olga Maitland: I am sorry.
Mr. Norris: There is no need for my hon. Friend to apologise. I am grateful to her for making a perfectly serious point. Funnily enough, we find that people in many parts of the country are concerned about the potential danger to their children, particularly on residential roads. They want measures to stop cars travelling too fast. They know that simply putting up a roundel with a number on it does not achieve the desired effect. Therefore, they have considered taking a variety of measures, of which road humps are one, to stop traffic travelling at excessive speed.
People realise that road humps will pose issues for emergency service vehicles, for example, and that they will constrain people who have been used to using the road perfectly normally and who will find it rather irritating that they must slow down substantially in order to make progress. That demonstrates the importance of always taking such decisions as openly as possible and considering all options before one assumes that one technical solution is necessarily the only one that can deliver the desired effect.
We have also been considering the design of road cushions, which can have the same effect. There are several around Westminster, which hon. Members might have encountered, and they can facilitate emergency service vehicle access and bus access. Low-floor buses are again on the agenda for a very important social reason, which all hon. Members .welcome. From time to time, certain low-floor design features might be incompatible with some types of traffic calming measures. It is important to have a variety or a menu available—that is
848
what our "Safer by Design" booklet says—and to make sure that people understand the full implications of what they are seeking to achieve.
Sir Anthony Grant: In my constituency, the problem is not road humps but the narrowing of roads to such an extent that poor old farm vehicles cannot get through. That is a great problem for farmers.
Mr. Norris: That underlines the crucial importance of never reacting too quickly. It is said that hard cases make bad law. There is the problem in this country—I suspect that it occurs in every country—that, as I know from my postbag, the minute an accident occurs, the natural reaction is to want to change the law in some respect or take an instant measure as a result. From time to time, that might be necessary, but, in general, common sense has to prevail. As my hon. Friend suggests, serious thought must be given to all the implications of introducing measures such as chicanes, road narrowing, speed humps, tables, cushions and so on. Those measures are all useful in their way, but they must be introduced with care.
Mr. Nigel Waterson: On road desiign, does my hon. Friend agree that some people in the anti-roads lobby lose sight of the fact that, broadly speaking, motorways are safer to drive on than dual carriageways, which in turn are safer to drive on than single-track roads?
Mr. Norris: Yes. That is broadly the point that I was making. The motorway system has generally designed out a number of the hazards which cause accidents. As I have said, more than half the fatal and serious accidents occur on roads with a 30 mph limit. It is important to remember that.
In that context, we have been considering a 20 mph zone, which is a fairly new phenomenon. I opened the 100th scheme in my constituency in August. We introduced the scheme in a rather unusual way, because we had a considerable accident problem in Epping forest, which had been used by a few motorists as a race track. By definition, Epping forest is a rather rural environment in which the roads were never built for modern vehicle.numbers or speeds and in which street lighting would be.absolutely impossible. Indeed, there would be no public support for street lighting there. Such schemes can work in context, but that does not mean that the answer to every serious injury accident is the introduction of a variety of measures or 20 mph schemes. It is a matter, as I.am sure the House will expect, of putting such matters into proportion.
Much road safety engineering is paid for through the local roads capital settlement. We have made more than £170 million available over the past four years, thereby saving more than 250 deaths and 15,000 casualties every year. On the basis of local authorities' returns and some recent research by the Transport Research Laboratory, we have calculated that the money invested in that way produces a first-year rate of return of more than 250 per cent.
We have also been attacking speeding in another way—that is, by more effective enforcement. Since the Road Traffic Act 1991, automatic speed cameras have been installed, especially in London. As Minister for Transport in London, I have been associated with the west London pilot scheme from its start. It was introduced in October

849
1992. I remember introducing it on Twickenham bridge. Our monitoring and evaluation shows an average speed reduction of 10 per cent., and that accidents are down 21 per cent. and deaths and serious injuries are down 37 per cent. In the first year of operation there were seven deaths, which is tragic, compared with an annual average of 23 over the previous three years.
If we could replicate that improvement nationally, we would really make an impact on casualty statistics. It is a matter of resources, of course, and of enormous fixed penalties and many court hearings. We continue to encourage well-targeted camera enforcement, concentrated on the roads most subject to accidents at speed. The more traditional types of speed enforcement still have their place.
Mr. Fabricant rose—
Mr. Norris: We have had a very interesting hour, but it is about time I allowed other hon. Members to make more than just interventions. [HoN. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] I am disappointed that that is the only remark that I have made this morning which has been universally applauded. However, I inform my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire that, when we introduced traffic speed cameras, I made it clear that the objective was not to prosecute motorists. The objective was to show motorists that they would be monitored and to give them the opportunity not to be an accident statistic. Large signs warn motorists when they approach every camera. That has been a requirement from the beginning of the scheme and it will continue to be so. That is why I regard it as successful not when we prosecute but when we see large reductions in deaths and serious injury accidents.
A large number of casualty reduction measures are being introduced in various areas. We cannot monitor them all individually, but we have a fairly good idea of their impact. The effect could be even more dramatic if one town used the whole range of existing measures, and perhaps some new ideas as well, as a safe town demonstration project. My hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, South-West will remember the Slough experiment in the 1950s, which pioneered several road safety ideas that later came into general use. We are talking now to local authority associations about the possibility of a demonstration project in a suitably sized town. That project is at an early planning stage, but it will be very exciting.
Engineering measures can be effective, but, as I have said, human error is a feature of about 95 per cent. of road accidents. New and inexperienced drivers in particular are likely to be involved in accidents. There are some obvious reasons for that. Some have been taught to perform well in the driving test and they pass it first time, but they lack the subtle skills that they need to be good drivers. Some, particularly young males, are over-confident or naturally inclined to show off and take risks. Others are just plainly irresponsible—they deliberately break the law and they know that they are putting lives at risk.
Last year, we put forward several proposals to try to improve such matters. We must influence the attitudes of young people even before they start to drive. Some of them think that road safety is just kids' stuff—for example, the green cross code and cycling proficiency—and that, once they are old enough to drive, they can
850
forget all about it. We need to put the message across that, as drivers, they will have to take on some adult responsibilities for the safety of themselves, their passengers and all other road users. However, it is no use preaching or talking down to that age group. A much more direct, hard-hitting, street-wise approach is better. Alexei Sayle hit the right note in the BBC's "Drive" series early this year. We are reworking that series into a video, with a full supporting pack of teachers' notes for use in sixth forms and colleges.
Changes will also be made to enhance the theory element of the driving test, which should have an impact on the way in which people are taught to drive. Early in the new year we will launch a scheme for those who have passed their driving test but who want further training. The scheme is being promoted in conjunction with a large number of major insurance companies which will offer insurance discounts sufficient to meet the entire cost of the training.
However, I believe that we also need more appropriate sanctions for new drivers who pass their tests but who then go on to drive badly and commit offences. Research shows that new drivers who commit offences are twice as likely to be involved in accidents as those who do not. I will be frank: I am talking about young men who think that they are great drivers, that they can drive on water, and that somehow the law does not apply to them. Sadly, they are wrong.
The House has to hit those young men where it hurts.most—in their egos. They might lose their licences and.find themselves back with their fathers sitting beside them and L-plates on the front and back of the car. It might bring home to them how seriously irresponsible driving is viewed. That proposal will involve the introduction of primary legislation which we hope to put on the statute book at the earliest opportunity. I am confident that this package of measures will reduce the unacceptably high number of road casualties involving inexperienced drivers.
Mr. Ottaway: I apologise for intervening again when I know that the Minister is trying to conclude his speech. Might not amendments to the daylight saving regulations have some impact on saving lives? It is believed that a change to the regulations could save hundreds of lives.
Mr. Norris: My hon. Friend is perfectly right to draw attention to this important subject in which, as he knows, a number of Departments of state are interested. The daylight hours issue involves consideration of a variety of important aspects, ranging from business interests, to transport operators needing to harmonise timetables, and the needs of travellers, the rural community and so on.
I do not suggest that what I am saying represents the definitive Government position precisely because all those interests need to be synthesised. I also appreciate that views about the matter vary greatly in Scotland and between the north and south of the United Kingdom, because geographical differences impose different daylight regimes on communities.
There is no doubt that the proposed legislative changes will reduce significantly the number of road accidents. It is true that there may be more accidents in the morning, but the saving in the number of accidents that occur in the evening will more than compensate for that. I have no emotional, business or other interest in the subject, but I have to say that, merely from looking at the analysis of

851
road statistics and at the time profile of when accidents occur, that conclusion is clear. We cannot escape from debating this important issue; it should be central in our minds. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making his point.
We have achieved a great deal since we embarked on the casualty reduction programme. We are also doing very well by international standards. Great Britain had 7.5 road deaths per 100,000 people in 1992—a figure lower than any other OECD country. Norway had 7.6 road deaths per 100,000 people, as the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston will no doubt confirm. The Netherlands had 8.5 road deaths; Germany, 13.2; the USA, 15.4; France, 17.3; and Spain, 20. So there is no need for Brussels or anywhere else to lecture us about improving road safety.
But we still have plenty to do. We must keep up the activity that has enabled us to make those achievements. We must now begin to look to the longer horizon beyond the year 2000 and set a new target for 2005 or 2010. It is easy to pluck a figure out of the air, but there is no point in doing that. We must set a target which is both challenging and realistic.
We set the 1987 target on the basis of a careful assessment of what could be achieved given the possibilities open to us. We now need another assessment of what we can reasonably aim for in the first decade of the new millennium. We must decide whether to set another global target—reducing all casualties by a specific percentage—to concentrate on fatal and serious casualties, or to set targets relative to distance travelled. We intend to consult widely with the various road safety authorities and organisations to develop a shared target that will maintain the momentum and make our roads even safer.
I know, from the many interventions that we have heard this morning and from the number of letters in my postbag, that many hon. Members are interested in the subject and are prepared to make significant contributions to the debate.
I do not believe that I, any of my predecessors, or the Department is the fount of all knowledge in these matters. We have a great deal to learn. I hope that this debate will introduce some new thinking that will enable us to achieve our aim of making road transport, and transport generally, in this country as safe as is humanly possible.
10.45 am
Ms Joan Walley: A debate on road safety is long overdue, but it is very welcome. Unless we have the opportunity for proper and regular debate about road safety issues, we cannot discuss the details of long-term decisions that must be made.
The hon. Member for Croydon, South (Mr. Ottaway) intervened to talk about summer time and how we deal with it. It is right that that subject should be debated in the House. All kinds of considerations are involved in the debate, but clearly those who care about road safety want a full and informed public debate so that the decisions of the House reflect the needs of the country across the board.
This debate is also welcome because it gives us an opportunity to tackle the Government about their road safety record so far. We have heard a great deal about the progress which the Minister says that the Government
852
have made. However, he said that he is not the fount of all knowledge on this important issue, and I agree with him on that.
In the brave new privatised and deregulated world which the Government are busy setting up, it is difficult to see how issues of public safety and road safety can be integrated.
Mr. Jacques Arnold: If the hon. Lady thinks that this debate is long overdue, can she tell us why, when the House spent 24 or more days debating subjects raised by the Opposition, those opposite did not raise road safety once? Today we are debating it in Government time.
Ms Walley: The hon. Gentleman knows as well as I do that the Government have the initiative in determining the business agenda of the House, although a number of days are allocated to the Labour party—and also the other party, whose members are not in their places this morning. We currently have proposals before the House to debate only private Members' Bills and such on Fridays. If the Government were as interested in road safety as the hon. Gentleman suggests, they would have ensured not only that we had this debate in Government time, but that we had this debate when all members of the House were present. However, I am in danger of going down a route that is not in the best interests of road safety, so I shall make some progress with my speech.
We need to ask whether the Government are treating their transport policy any differently from other areas of policy making. We can see from the announcements that have been made this week about the privatisation of Railtrack that the Government are desperate to find money to pay for the tax cuts which they feel that they will need to win votes at the next general election. When there is such an agenda, it is essential that within that framework, which applies just as much to road transport as to rail, the Government should pinpoint the importance of issues such as public safety and road safety, which we are discussing today.
Throughout the country, the public are crying out for safer roads. The Minister was right to recognise that that is what they want. They are right to demand that, nationally and locally, the Government and local councils do what is required to ensure road safety. The Opposition are right to challenge the Government on their failure to provide a framework within which we can adequately—I stress "adequately"—identify, plan, enact, enforce and monitor the effectiveness of the safety measures that people are entitled to demand and expect.
The Minister made a comprehensive speech and we heard a great deal about the progress that he and his Department have made. I am always ready to give credit where credit is due and I was pleased to note the change of attitude—the Minister used the word "psychology"—in respect of cycling. It is long overdue. I acknowledge that the Government have set targets and that considerable progress has been made towards meeting them.
I wholeheartedly welcome the fact that the total number of child road accidents in 1993 was 15 per cent. lower than the 1981–85 average. I note that there has also been progress towards meeting the casualty reduction target for fatalities and serious injuries. We must continue to make progress at each and every opportunity.

853
However, we must not be complacent. Neither can we ignore the fact that the number of slight injuries has increased, meaning that progress towards the target for all casualties is slower than hoped for. We must recognise that fact and do something about it. The figures for 1993 show 3,814 fatalities, 45,000 serious casualties and 257,199 slight casualties—which is 306,013 too many. Whatever progress we have made, each accident is one too many.
We can cite statistics, but that does not show the human misery, the agony and the remorse behind them. The almost universal response of all involved in a tragedy is that lessons must be learnt in a way that will prevent further such accidents. Other factors include, not least, the victims and their families. That is something that my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Mr. Miller) wants to raise in his speech.
It is the Minister's job to plan for safer roads. Who else can? He should have given us some information on the Government's policy to hand so much responsibility to the Department of Trade and Industry's Deregulation Committee, which was set up last night. The new deregulation procedures will not receive full parliamentary scrutiny, so the hon. Gentleman should have given us some sign of what the changes will mean. For example, is it the case, as has been rumoured, that a.large number of road traffic Acts or sections of them will be deregulated in January? What are the implications of that? Will there be an extension in the number of domestic working hours of drivers of heavy goods and public service vehicles? Is that part of the Government's agenda? What are the implications for the underpinning of safety measures?
At the same time, the Minister will be busy deregulating buses. We should not forget that only yesterday London bus drivers presented a petition to the House expressing concern about the safety of the engines in Routemaster buses. He will also be busy dismantling the, in our view, effective system for overseeing the London lorry ban and operating licences for heavy goods vehicles and buses.
Mr. Fabricant: I am grateful to the hon. Lady, my near neighbour, for giving way. Does she not think that there is room for deregulation in the road traffic Acts? Is she aware that under current regulations hackney carriages—black cabs—have to carry a bale of hay in the back? Does that not need deregulating?
Ms Walley: Every time I get into a black cab in London I am made aware of the great concern among drivers about what the Government's deregulation proposals will mean for them. If they were simply about bales of hay, that would not be a problem. However, if the proposals undermine the safety of taxi operations and private hire vehicles, that is a different matter. Much wider considerations have to be taken into account.
The Minister is going to be busy privatising the Transport Research Laboratory. He made much reference in his speech to the importance of research and I believed him when he said that he valued research. But does he not value independent research? Does he not value the independent body of knowledge that has been built up at the laboratory at Crowthorne in Berkshire? What effects
854
will privatisation have on the long-term future of transport research? Of course, the Department of Transport has cut the budget for research, against the express wishes of many distinguished Conservative Members—some of whom are usually in the Chamber for transport debates, but regrettably are not here this morning.
The Minister will be busy making arm's-length agencies such as the Highways Agency responsible, with the private sector, for the construction of motorways and for repair work to motorway service areas. He will also be busy, at a local level, considering even more contracting out of services, which will include the design and building work done by highways engineers. He will be busy cost-cutting by 20 per cent., thereby undermining the effectiveness of civil service departments responsible for vehicle testing, driving standards and vehicle inspections. It is no wonder that people feel a deep sense of unease and anxiety about the effects of all that on road safety. No amount of statistics can gloss over that.
I want to give a few examples of areas in which we could have expected real progress. The prime one is seat belts. I listened carefully to what the Minister said on that issue. Last week was the first anniversary of the tragic accident on the M40 involving a school minibus. A year ago there was a public outcry and widespread demands for seat belts to be fitted to new vehicles. What have the Government done other than to promise on 19 July action ahead of the European Union to seek agreement on the introduction of compulsory fitting of seat belts to all.minibuses and coaches used specifically for the transport.of children? I listened carefully to what the hon. Gentleman had to say. He promised us action in advance of what could be done through Europe. I have not seen the introduction of any new regulations to implement that promise.
Mr. Norris: This is very important—I want the hon. Lady to say now, on the record, what measure she believes should have been taken in this respect that has not been taken. I want her to say what measure. She knows well that she simply cannot do so.
Ms Walley: It is clear that the issue is complicated and technical. Since it became an issue, the Government have had 12 months to find a way of fitting seat belts in advance of Europe and through the construction and use regulations. That is what people, and especially parents, want. They want to know that there is a seat and a seat belt for every child.
The Minister made many references to ending the three-to-two seats rule. I looked into the matter very carefully and I understand that that has been done and that considerable progress has been made in Scotland where, if I understand the position correctly, there is a difference. Where two children to a two-seater seat is now a requirement, local education authorities have a disregard. When the Scottish Office give grant settlements to local councils, any extra cost that the change has entailed is disregarded. Why has the same provision not been made available in England, as it would do so much to ensure that we have two children to two seats, rather than having mere rhetoric on the subject?
On fitting seat belts in minibuses, the Government have all the expertise of the civil service available to them. We want seat belts fitted and we want an agreement that that will be done in advance of any European directive on the matter. If there is a will to do it, a way will be found.

855
The public want action. I understand that the issue is technical and complex, but we want action more quickly than Europe can achieve it. That is what the organisation to belt up school kids wants and that is what we want from the Minister.
Mr. Norris: I do not want to embarrass the hon. Lady any more, but that is not good enough. She is simply trading on people's natural concerns about improving safety standards in the most appalling and cynical way. It does not do her or her party any credit. She knows very well that unless changes in United Kingdom law are agreed by the Community and reflected in directives, they are in every 'practical way of no effect. I ask her again to state, among all the words that she trots out so easily, what measure she would have introduced during the past 12 months to remedy the problem that she described so graphically.
Ms Walley: I will answer. The Minister's reply sounds fine, but why did the Department of Transport issue a statement on 19 July—if my memory serves me correctly—to say that it would introduce some sort of regulations in advance of European legislation and that the Government were seeking a procedure for achieving seat belt regulations in advance of a decision by Europe? They did so after suggesting research, which I have no doubt has been carried out.
It is now up to the Minister, who is responsible for road transport, to find a way to introduce those regulations. He said that he had carried out the research and he promised that the regulations would be introduced in advance of European legislation. It is now November and we have not yet seen the regulations. We await them in advance of a European commitment.
Mr. Norris: The hon. Lady must know that the Community must agree before we can introduce legislation in advance of a Community directive. The delay has not been on the Government side. The hon. Lady is also wrong to say that the M40 tragedy triggered the desire for regulation, as the M2 coach accident was the spur. Since that accident, the Government have worked quickly and hard in Brussels to persuade the Community to grant us the right to go faster than it is going—the Community that the Opposition so wholly, enthusiastically and uncritically endorse. The reality is that the hon. Lady cannot produce one shred of evidence to show that we have not acted with all expedition in the matter. By treating it in such a cynical manner, she has done her party no service.
Ms Walley: I am pointing out that parents do not understand the delay. I await with interest a detailed letter from the Minister setting out each and every move that he has made since the matter first became an issuea letter setting out what he has done to ensure that regulations are put on the statute book in advance of European directives. The Government promised us those regulations, but have not delivered them. If there are reasons for the delays, the Minister should tell us what they are.
We will return to that issue time and again because people clearly want the regulations. Although people in some parts of the country might be willing to insist that commercial operators provide seat belts, that is no substitute for regulations so that minibus and coach operators know exactly what should be fitted, in what
856
circumstances, how the belts should be maintained and what should apply retrospectively. We need clear guidance on all those matters.
Mr. Nirj Joseph Deva: Will the hon. Lady put me out of a predicament? I listened carefully to what she and my hon. Friend the Minister said. Is she saying that she wants the Government to act unilaterally, without a collective decision with our European partners? Does she want us to do as we want and to tell the rest of Europe to go to wherever?
Ms Walley: People outside this place who take an interest in such debates will see how the issue is being turned into a different issue about Europe. We need to know exactly what the Government have done in advance of European legislation. They said that they would find a way.
How councils' stretched budgets can shoulder the price of safety is another issue. More than anything else, the Government's empty rhetoric on seat belts sums up the difference between what they say and what they mean. That is true of road safety education and road safety officers, who should have the resources to do the work—working in partnership with voluntary agencies such as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, motoring organisations such as the Automobile Association and the Royal Automobile Club, and other council departments, especially schools, the police and the local authorities that employ them—of co-ordinating road safety at a local level.
I am sure that the Minister will agree that road safety education is essential. Indeed, he said so in his speech. Education has a major part to play in making the changes necessary for improved road safety relevant to people of all ages, especially to the young. One change must be in the attitude to excessive speed and use of the roads.
The debate has various aspects and strands. It is clear that motor manufacturers' advertising campaigns have stressed speed—often at the expense of road safety, and we must study that.
Mr. Fabricant: Does the hon. Lady accept that there is a distinction between acceleration and speed? I take her point. She is right in saying that some advertisements pander to the boy racer. Does she accept, however, that acceleration can get people out of, rather than into, difficulty and that there is a difference between acceleration and top speed?
Ms Walley: Yes. I am talking about excessive speed, responsible driving and the ways in which advertising often undermines that. I acknowledge the hon. Gentleman's argument.
As good as they are, unless the Department of Transport's campaigns on speed, drink-driving, pedestrian safety and the use of seat belts in cars are backed up by properly resourced, local road safety officers, their success cannot be maintained. I cannot stress too strongly how important it is that, having made progress, we maintain it. Just because there has been some success with the drink-driving campaign, that does not mean that we can ease off; we must keep up the pressure and maintain the results. Road safety officers can play an important role in achieving that.

857
We must pay more attention to the proper enforcement of regulations that already exist. Clearly, following the first road traffic legislation, it was natural for the police to be handed powers of enforcement. We could not have anticipated today's world of performance-related pay for chief police officers. How can the Transport Minister guarantee adequate levels of enforcement for traffic officers for motorway incidents and routine patrol work when the interim report of the Home Office review of core functions fails to define traffic police work as the major objective that we would like it to be?
Who is responsible for guaranteeing that police resources are available for enforcement of road traffic offences and how is that to be done in future? There has been a great change in the way that local police forces operate. They will have a set of objectives and targets—it is crucial that road safety should feature among them. When the Minister winds up, will he tell us what relationship he has with the Home Secretary on that issue and how he wants to set objectives in respect of the work of the police?
What priority has been given to ensuring that there are enough police to carry out lorry checks and speed checks? I am sure that those who followed the Sowerby bridge incident and other such accidents will be aware of the dangers ahead on our roads. There are fewer and fewer police carrying out spot checks, and fewer controls on maintenance standards and on the limit on hours worked by heavy goods vehicle drivers and bus drivers. Such factors increase the likelihood of serious accidents—we must take account of that.
I was glad that the Minister said a great deal about speed cameras. From what I have read—I do not have his first-hand knowledge of the west London experiment—I believe that the cameras have led to a decrease of more than one third in the number of accidents, which must be welcomed. That shows that we need far more speed cameras, as well as the resources to buy them and to place them where they are most needed and can make the biggest contribution to reducing the number of accidents. We also need the money to ensure that the evidence from those speed cameras is properly processed. We hear a lot about profit generation and the ways in which, within the police service, different offences can lead to income generation. I am glad that the Minister said that he would ensure that those cameras are placed where they are most needed in the interests of road safety.
There are many new laws and regulations, including construction and use regulations, which will be beneficial. I shall mention one that the Minister did not: bull bars on on-road vehicles. The research carried out shows that the Minister could easily act to outlaw bull bars to ensure that they are not used on cars as they are at present. I should like the Minister to have said something about how that could be done and what he proposed to do in future. It is a cause for worry, particularly as the impact of bull bars is so great that, rather than causing less severe accidents, the chances are that accidents will be severe, if not fatal.
Evidence recently produced by the Department of Transport shows that drivers under the age of 21 are involved in 1,000 fatal accidents a year. We must acknowledge that and act accordingly. I welcome the Government's four-pronged attack, particularly pre-driver training in schools. When can we expect the introduction
858
of the legislation mentioned by the Minister? It is now about a week since the Gracious Speech. I wonder why it did not include such legislation—it is not as though we face a taxing time with a heavy legislative programme. Why did not the Gracious Speech include legislation to enable the Government to respond to the problems mentioned by the Minister in his speech? What is the Government's response, particularly to the proposal advanced by the AA for a graduated points threshold for new drivers?
Developments in Europe provide an opportunity for enhanced safety, but there are more opportunities that the Government could grasp. The Minister said that theory tests would be introduced on 1 July 1996. There is much uncertainty about who will manage the tests, how they will be introduced and to what extent they will be hived off to the private and commercial sector.
I am glad that the Minister mentioned the second European Community directive on driver licensing, which would require voluntary minibus drivers to take a separate official driving test to drive vehicles with a carrying capacity of more than eight passengers. I think that there is some common ground between us over that issue. We are aware that the United Kingdom is different from most other European countries in that voluntary organisations depend far more on their own minibuses than is the case elsewhere in mainland Europe. There are many good reasons for that. One reason is the lack of investment in public transport, which is not on a par with that of other European countries.
The Opposition are also aware of important financial considerations. But, having derogated in that way, is there some way for the Government to introduce national guidance so that volunteers driving minibuses on behalf of organisations do not drive them simply according to a set of guidelines issued by a county council, but drive them to a standard that complies with national guidelines issued by the Government? It is a skilled operation and it is crucial that minibus drivers are competent to handle vehicles. We also need tighter regulations for those employed in the minibus industry.
Fears a out road safety apply as much to rural areas as to urban—some policies impact equally on both. We have heard a lot about drink-driving, and the campaign to kill speed, which must be maintained. We must understand the way in which the creeping privatisation of the arm's-length agencies for inspections and training results in lower standards.
There are worries about the future viability of school crossing patrols. I am concerned that they are being reviewed in many parts of the country. In urban districts, local safety schemes are effective in reducing the number of road accidents. However, the money available for traffic calming and traffic management, which benefits all road users, including cyclists and pedestrians, is not enough to cope with the demand.
Our exchange on cycling was useful. No one is more pleased than me at the change in psychology on cycling, which is now recognised as a healthy pursuit that can drastically reduce road traffic. Stoke-on-Trent is twinned with a city in Germany, Erlangen, which has a wonderful system for cyclists. It is second nature for people to cycle whenever possible and there are facilities for people to leave their cycles so that they can travel to and from work. I am pleased that a school in my constituency has recently received some grants to enable it to build cycling

859
facilities. I hope that that will open up other opportunities. The city engineer will have to integrate those facilities into wider traffic systems.
We must consider ways to change the attitude of engineers responsible for highway policy. Where cycling has been overlooked for many years, we need to ensure that engineers are properly trained and receive national guidance from the Department of Transport to show clearly how cycling can be encouraged. I look forward to seeing a copy of the guidance notes to which the Minister referred.
I am glad that the traditional casual approach to road safety is being challenged. Leeds council, for example, has responded to that challenge by
"moving out of the ghetto of bright armbands, and poster competitions, and into the realms of sustainable transport, public health and quality of life issues."
It has set up a road danger reduction forum. I hope that the Minister will encourage similar forums in other parts of the country. I hope that the Minister will endorse the new approach to road safety, which is based on reducing danger at source while promoting equity and accessibility for non-motorised users.
The accident statistics for rural areas are grim. In 1992, an AA foundation study revealed that rural roads in Cambridgeshire accounted for 89 per cent. of fatal accidents and that 44 per cent. of all traffic accidents occur on rural roads. Those roads were found to be more dangerous and to cause higher casualties than urban ones. Will the Minister tell us what action he proposes to take in rural areas to reduce single-vehicle accidents; accidents at T-junctions and staggered junctions; accidents on private drives and slip roads and those involving heavy goods vehicles and slow-moving traffic?
Many issues deserve to be properly considered in this debate, which is all too brief. I do not think that Fridays are the best time for such a debate. Just as there has been a change in the psychology governing cycling policy, so there is a great wind of change that wants to alter our sitting days and the way in which the business of the House is managed. A debate on a Friday does not guarantee that the subject in question gains the maximum amount of attention. Road safety needs to be properly debated.
To make our roads safer is an enormous task and it can be undertaken only in a consistent, comprehensive and coordinated manner. The Government have fragmented and dismantled many of the agencies that used to underpin road safety and it is clear that their approach to it is piecemeal. We have heard some encouraging policy suggestions from the Minister, but we will look closely to see how he follows them up in the long term.
11.21 am
Sir Anthony Grant: This is an important debate. At the risk of being ungallant, I regret to say that the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) has not made a good fist of it. I agreed with some of the points she made, but the impact of her speech suffered because of the dismal turnout on the Opposition Benches. I am not fussed about the Liberal Democrats—the only surprise in their case is when they turn up. We all know that hon. Members have constituency engagements on a Friday and I would excuse the absence of Opposition Members if it were not for the fact that they are always rabbiting on about integrated
860
transport, as though they knew all about it. Today would give those Opposition Members a wonderful opportunity to explain their case and I am sorry that the hon. Lady does not have the support that perhaps she deserves from her colleagues.
I must declare an interest, because I am not merely a stalwart, but I have the honour to be president, of the Guild of Experienced Motorists, which has about 60,000 members. We consider ourselves to be one of the premier road safety organisations in the land. Our theme, if it can be called such, is care, courtesy and concentration at all times. The guild takes a close interest in road safety.
I entirely agree with the Minister that our accident reduction record is extremely good. We compare extremely favourably with Europe, but we should not be too smug about that. We must keep relentlessly on the job of reducing road accidents. It is sobering to reflect that a Lockerbie-type accident happens every month on our roads. To put it another way, if 4,200 people were killed by shotguns each year, the outcry would be deafening. We would go berserk and demand legislation. That number of people are killed on our roads each year, to say nothing of the 50,000 people who are seriously injured and possibly permanently maimed. For that reason, we must take the subject of road safety seriously.
I was interested to note what my hon. Friend said about drink-driving, because the guild has been active in stopping that practice. It has been a particular success story because young people now consider it normal for the driver not to drink. If there is still a problem, I am afraid that it is still evident in my generation, which is largely at fault.
The great statistic has always been that one accident in five is caused by drink. According to lateral thinking, however, that means that four out of five accidents are not caused by drinking. We must try to reduce those accidents.
In the past, Governments have faced great difficulty—
Mr. Miller: I am not trying to trick the hon. Gentleman into a silly position, because I am sure that he is not suggesting that the 510 deaths that occurred in 1993 as a result of alcohol-related accidents are not serious and do not need to be addressed. Surely he is not saying that his generation, members of which are perhaps not as astute as some younger people, does not need the rod as well as the carrot.
Sir Anthony Grant: Certainly not. I praised young people, but I readily acknowledged that much of the trouble lies with older generations. We must recognise, however, that four out of five accidents are nothing to do with drink. We must aim to reduce that accident rate in the future.
I am glad that the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North mentioned Cambridgeshire. Everything in Cambridgeshire and throughout East Anglia is excellent. It is the healthiest region and it has the lowest unemployment rate. You name it, everything is wonderful there, with one exception: the region has the worst record of road accidents. That is a disgrace and I am glad that the hon. Lady referred to it.
In my constituency, the A45 and the A505 are nightmares to drive on. They are straight, narrow roads with sudden bends. People come off the motorway at high speed and then endeavour to overtake. Those roads are a

861
deathtrap. I agree with the hon. Lady about the importance of attempting to reduce road accidents in rural areas. That is one reason why the debate is so important.
Until recently, successive Governments had not caught up with the motor car phenomenon. They recognised that increased prosperity and more vehicles were a good thing—I accept that up to a point. When I started motoring it was a joy, but now all too often it is a nightmare. We know that motorways are an important feature of the transport infrastructure. They are far and away the safest roads to drive on—statistically that is incontrovertible. On the M25, however, one often drives in a 70 mph traffic jam.
My hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland) spoke about the dangers of excessively powerful vehicles and I have found that the more powerful the vehicle I drive, the faster and faster I drive from one traffic jam to the next. Apart from the Netherlands, which is smaller than this country anyway, Britain is more overcrowded with vehicles than any other European country. We must address that serious problem. The answer for the future is rather draconian: we must ensure that there are fewer bad drivers and fewer bad cars on the roads.
I was delighted when the Minister spoke of clamping down on vehicle licensing evasion. He pointed out that £145 million per annum was lost because people did not pay their road licence. Let me praise the fact that Cambridgeshire and Northamptonshire were used as pilot regions in that clampdown. One million vehicles on the road are uninsured. One might ask how their owners can purchase vehicle excise discs. They simply obtain a temporary cover note and get a tax disc for a year, if necessary. They subsequently continue to drive while uninsured and cause the most appalling accidents, annoyance and injury. One's insurers can help in that respect, but that does not help to get one's vehicle repaired. I hope that the Government will carefully review the scandal of uninsured vehicles.
Mr. Fabricant: Just as one has to display a vehicle excise licence on the windscreen, would it not be a good idea to adopt the practice of many European countries and of the United States, and require drivers to display a certificate of insurance on the windscreen? I mean not the certificate in its traditional format, but a smaller document that could easily be checked by police officers.
Sir Anthony Grant: That is an excellent idea, and I am sure that my hon. Friend the Minister will give it thought. It is one thing not to pay one's road tax and to cost the Government money. It is quite another thing to drive while uninsured. I hope that my hon. Friend's suggestion will meet with favour.
I know that the Government are giving serious thought also to improving driving standards. I have always been critical of the fact that one can get in a little Mini, tootle around a suburban road at 30 mph and pass a driving test—then get straight into a Ferrari or Jaguar and belt round the M25. Entirely different driving techniques are required. Everyone assumes that the roads are always as in spring or summer—clear and free of ice. European drivers appreciate that driving conditions can differ.
862
Good eyesight is a matter of particular interest to the Guild of Experienced Motorists, which makes sight-testing machines available to local authorities and other organisations. The results are staggering. Those tests reveal how many people should not be driving. I shall let the House into a secret. I took the test as the president of the guild and was told, "You ought to get another pair of spectacles."
Lady Olga Maitland rose—
Sir Anthony Grant: I was about to tell a funny story, but I will allow my hon. Friend to intervene.
Lady Olga Maitland: I am sorry to interrupt, and I hope that my hon. Friend's funny story will follow my intervention. Is he aware that it is possible to take a sight test for night driving? That test, devised by Professor Paul Cook, confirms that different perceptions are involved, which may require rectifying by the use of different spectacles.
Sir Anthony Grant: Anything that draws the public's attention to the need for good eyesight and appropriate spectacles is important.
One member of the guild's council is a retired senior police officer. He told the story of a motorist who was stopped for driving erratically, but who was perfectly sober. The officers noticed that he was not wearing spectacles and asked him to read the number plate of the police car parked some yards ahead. The motorist asked, "What police car?"
I am confident that the Department, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and my hon. Friend the Minister are applying a good deal of new thinking. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Eltham (Mr. Bottomley), who is a zealot in this respect, and my hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key), who brought huge enthusiasm to his task. I was interested to hear my hon. Friend the Minister talk of the progress made in achieving the target set for reducing road accidents. I shall suggest one or two more targets.
It is important to get unroadworthy vehicles off the road. The report of the Royal Commission on pollution should be studied carefully. In due course, no car that is environmentally unclean should be allowed on the road. In future, I hope that all vehicles will have catalytic converters and use unleaded petrol. I look askance when I am in a traffic jam and ahead of me is a disgusting old banger belching forth the most filthy fumes, which has in its back window the sign "Nuclear? No thanks". There is a lot of hypocrisy.
Many road casualties involve stolen cars. The level of car theft in this country is among the worst in Europe. We need to address that scandalous and disgraceful situation. Drivers of stolen cars are most likely to cause mayhem and accidents. Another target for the future is that there should be no car on the road that is not fitted with a full security system, an immobiliser so that it cannot be driven away—there are many inexpensive immobilisers on the market—and a tracking device. A tracker allows the police to identify the changing location of a stolen vehicle almost immediately and to halt it at the next junction. Such equipment should be installed as a matter of course, as are seat belts and radios.

863
The greatest cause of accidents on motorways is vehicles driving too close to each other and failing to allow for their speed and the road conditions. When I drive up the M11, I am appalled to see heavy goods lorries travelling within inches of vehicles in front. That causes terror to some of my constituents. One can imagine poor old ladies driving along on the inside lane. My wife—who is not actually a poor old lady—drives up the M11 and keeps to 70 mph on the inside lane, but enormous juggernauts travel only 2 ft or 3 ft behind her. That practice could be defeated by the use of available technology that shows when a vehicle is too close. I am advised that it is also possible for such a device to govern the vehicle's speed.
I should like also to see vigorous testing of heavy goods vehicles. One police officer in my constituency told me that the police test HGVs whenever they can, and that it would make one's hair stand on end if one knew the condition of the brakes and other equipment on many of them. I will not get into a Euro debate but many such vehicles come from Europe, where standards may not be as high as those in this country.
The courts should make much greater use of the power of disqualification, which is the greatest deterrent that they have. I would add one other. If the courts could confiscate vehicles, that would get bad vehicles and bad drivers off the road and that would be a much more salutary punishment than a fine.
For years, the Ministry of Transport was the Cinderella of Government. Today, transport is assuming a much higher priority. I was afraid that it would change from being the Cinderella to being one of the ugly sisters, but I am satisfied that, under the stewardship of my hon. Friend the Minister and the new Secretary of State, it will become the Prince Charming.
11.39 am
Mr. Andrew Miller: I want to spend a little time sharing with colleagues ideas about death on the roads. It is easy to be complacent and argue that we have one of the best records in the world. On that basis, we could all pat ourselves on the back and go home. The figures in the document to which I referred earlier, the "Statistical Report on Road Accidents in 1991" by the European Conference of Transport Ministers, published last year, shows that Britain has 433 vehicles per 1,000 population. Many vehicles travel on this small island, yet we are almost at the bottom of the table on road risk. Therefore, the general advice to motorists and pedestrians is that it is safer to travel in Britain, Sweden, Norway and the Netherlands than elsewhere in Europe or in the United States, Canada or Japan.
I am pleased that the Minister acknowledged that we should not be complacent, because 4,000 people still die on the roads every year. Although the figures throughout Europe and the UK are falling, people are still needlessly dying. We can do much to improve road safety. The Minister mentioned road design, and we could educate drivers and improve vehicle design. The hon. Member for Cambridgeshire, South-West (Sir A. Grant) referred to some of those measures. When all of that has been dealt with, the fact remains that we need to legislate against drink-drivers and the lunatic fringe, who show little responsibility towards others.
864
How should society deal with a person who causes the death of another while at the wheel of a car? I contend that we should approach the offence just as we approach that of any other culpable death. I hope that hon Members will bear with me while I go through the statistics because it is important to see what is happening and put it in perspective.
In 1992, an estimated 510 fatal accidents involved illegal alcohol levels, with 610 casualties. The corresponding figures for 1990 are 650 and 760 respectively. That shows that the vast majority of road deaths—some 85 per cent.—are not caused by drunken drivers. The hon. Member for Cambridgeshire, South-West made that point. Although it is impossible to tell how many of the deaths were accidents and how many were caused by negligent driving or bad vehicle maintenance, the latter category may account for as many as those killed by drunk driving.
On the charges brought, in 1992, 402 people were tried at Crown court level for causing death by dangerous driving, compared with just two for causing death by careless driving while under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Committals for trials at magistrates courts ran at 307 and six respectively. The offence of causing death by dangerous driving is therefore numerically more important than the alcohol-related offence. For that reason, it should be straightforward for the police to charge somebody with that offence.
The Road Traffic Act 1991 replaced the offence of causing death by reckless driving with the offences of causing death by dangerous driving and of causing death by careless driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The change was intended to facilitate a greater number of such charges being brought against a driver who had killed, but it has not worked.
The most detailed figures available from the Home Office statistical bulletin, "Motor Offences, England and Wales, 1992", are for offences causing death or bodily harm. As well as the two aforementioned offences, that category includes causing death by aggravated vehicle taking, which is another point mentioned this morning, and causing bodily harm.
Since 1989, the number of people charged with those offences has remained static at about 600. The conviction rate has not improved, with some 400 people found guilty of those offences every year. Although the number of people charged with such offences is proportionately higher as the number of road deaths has declined, it is not a highly significant improvement. The difference between the number of accidents in 1991 and 1992 was just 1 per cent.
It is difficult to obtain a conviction in cases involving causing death by dangerous driving. In 1992, just 9.44 per cent. of cases of that nature coming before a magistrates court were discontinued. That may seem a small figure—less than 10 per cent—but it compares with just 4.35 per cent. of charges of careless driving. Of the cases heard, 82 of the 402 led to acquittals and two never came to trial. That compares with 24 of the 300 cases of driving without due care and attention heard at Crown courts and 12,606 of the 88,422 charges of driving without due care and attention offences, which is the most common careless driving offence. Proportionately, more cases are discontinued and more are dismissed or acquitted when

865
death by dangerous driving is the charge. That is important as it backs up speculation that it is difficult to gain a conviction for such a charge.
Organisations and individuals concerned with that matter suspect that the Crown Prosecution Service would rather not risk a charge of causing death by dangerous driving but prefers the relative certainty of a guilty plea to driving without due care and attention. That charge, however, is not suitable for such a serious offence. The death of a victim is not a factor in the careless driving charge, and inevitably victims' families are upset when it is not even mentioned in the court proceedings. The sentence is also thoroughly inadequate: fines result in most cases.
In the most serious careless driving cases-those tried in the Crown court-of the 278 findings of guilt, 189 were dealt with by fines; 21 by conditional discharge; 16 by probation or supervision orders; only three by community service; and 49 were otherwise dealt with. No one was gaoled. The average Crown court fine for cases of careless driving was £206 and only one fine was in excess of £800. At the magistrates court, the average fine is £99 when sentences for careless driving are passed by a magistrate.
There seems to be a problem with the concept of causing death by dangerous driving. The acquittal rate is much higher than for any other offence and no different from the old law against death by reckless driving, which was known to be flawed. The police seem to be reluctant to press charges as they charge only the same number of people as they did under the previous charge, which they were widely felt to be reluctant to invoke.
However, organisations such as Roadpeace and relatives of victims of road crashes are understandably upset about sentences. Their concerns seem to be split between the apparent inadequacies of the present system—gaps in the law—and dissatisfaction with the severity of sentence handed down. In 1992, of the 320 people found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving, 70 received a sentence completely unrelated to prison, 27 received a fully suspended sentence, five received a partially suspended sentence, 60 were sent to a young offenders institution, while 156 got an unsuspended sentence.
Mr. Ottaway: May I take the hon. Gentleman back to something he said a few moments ago? It has taken me a little while to reflect on it. He was complaining about the number of acquittals in cases of death by dangerous driving. He might correct me, but I was under the impression that such cases are jury cases. I understood that they are not matters for the prosecution or for the police but that 12 good men and true decide on acquittals.
Mr. Miller: I would not complain about the principle of jury trial. I am merely putting on record the statistics—which are giving rise to a great deal of concern—the greatest of which is that many people who cause a death in a road accident are prosecuted under the Road Traffic Act 1991 not for causing that death but perhaps for leaving the scene of an accident or for some seemingly trivial matter. That is the theme that I am attempting to
866
develop, but I am nevertheless pleased that the hon. Member for Croydon, South (Mr. Ottaway) is listening carefully.
Mr. Barry Porter: One of the reasons given for introducing the charge of death by dangerous driving was that, at that time, juries were very reluctant to convict on manslaughter so another charge had to be introduced. However, it followed that juries were equally reluctant to convict on the death by dangerous driving charge. If the hon. Gentleman is advocating some sort of fiercer punishment for death by careless driving, it will probably follow that there will be an equal reluctance to convict. The view might be that, if the death were due to, for example, momentary inattention, the jury would be thinking, "There, but for the grace of God, go I."
Mr. Miller: I am glad that the hon. Gentleman, who is my neighbour in constituency terms, is also listening attentively because I shall develop that very point. If he waits for my conclusion he will find that I shall propose an idea for consideration by the House which would accommodate his concerns but which would nevertheless deal with the very real needs of victims and victims' families. I hope that the House will bear with me for a few minutes while I complete my statistical analysis.
Sentence lengths are unsatisfactory and the much-lauded increase of maximum sentences from five to 10 years seems to have had little effect. Groups such as Roadpeace are understandably outraged at such sentences, which they regard as pitifully low. Even after Alison Burgess successfully brought a private prosecution and got her husband's killer, and killer he is, gaoled for three years, she was understandably unhappy about such a sentence for a killer in circumstances which, by any standards, do not fit what the hon. Member for Wirral, South (Mr. Porter) called the "There, but for the grace of God go I" cases. That case involved a serious criminal offence.
A reform of the law to ensure that the charge of causing death by dangerous driving can be brought more easily by the police is unlikely to satisfy such campaigners. Many people feel that justice is not done.
Mr. Waterson: I agree with a great deal of what the hon. Gentleman is saying about sentences, but is not one of the difficulties, not only in motoring offences but in other cases of unlawful killing, the so-called tariff of sentences? Life sentences do not mean "life" but, on average, 12 years. As, sadly, no death penalty is available, the whole tariff is depressed. Does he agree that, even if we do not restore the death penalty, we could at least ensure that life sentences for manslaughter and murder mean life, which would pull the whole tariff upwards?
Mr. Miller: That is one issue on which I agree with the Prime Minister. I am fundamentally opposed to the death penalty because mistakes are made, as happened recently in the Stefan Kiszko case and many others. Although the hon. Gentleman's logical argument about the suppression of sentences needs consideration, I do not believe that taking his uncivilised approach—I am sorry to have to use that word—in extreme cases is the solution. We must find another way.
In an attempt to find another way, I have examined the law as it stands and, in response to the point made by the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Waterson), some of the cases that I considered were in countries where the death

867
penalty is enforced. I examined all the states of the United States of America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand for some inspiration about how to deal with this horrific problem. My research involved reading thousands of pages of text, some of which is beside me in case colleagues want to question my conclusions or join me in trying to secure an improvement in the law.
There should be an automatic charge of culpable death by driving when an investigation reveals that an incident was not a pure accident. It should be akin to motor manslaughter, a charge that exists in some of the states in America. As hon. Members will know, the Law Commission, is examining that proposal. In fact, the closing date—31 October—for submissions on its consultation paper entitled "Involuntary Manslaughter" has just passed. I hope that the commission will listen carefully to the spirit of this debate.
I should like the House to consider paragraphs 5.22 to 5.29 and paragraphs 6.5 to 6.7 of the commission's consultative paper No.135. The commission states, among other things, that
"We do not think it can be sensible for the present law to remain untouched."
The two sets of paragraphs to which I referred appear under the heading "Motor Manslaughter".
I believe that the law requires fundamental reform, and that it should include the concept of motor manslaughter. There are arguments for and against calling the offence "manslaughter", "motor manslaughter" or any number of other titles but my assertion is that any title should link three points—culpability, the fact of death and the fact that the person was driving. The penalties should be in line with that for manslaughter; in other words, wide ranging, up to and including long prison sentences.
In an intervention on the Minister, I referred to breath testing which, I believe, should be automatic when a death occurs, as should testing for illegal substances if there are suspicions about the state of the driver. There is a further problem when the person who is alleged to have caused the crash is himself hospitalised. Forensic samples should be taken and analysed, but not released until the accused is in a fit state to give consent. Failure to give consent at that stage should either be interpreted by the courts or become an offence in itself.
Such a scheme should overcome the British Medical Association's ethical concerns, which were voiced by the Government when my hon. Friend the Member for Wallsend (Mr. Byers) raised the matter in the Committee that considered the Criminal Justice and Public Order Bill in the previous Session. In response to my hon. Friend, the Minister of State, Home Office said:
"The BMA would be very unhappy about samples being taken from someone who was unconscious and had not given his consent. Although I am sympathetic to the point that the hon. Gentleman made, we cannot move towards such a policy because our law fundamentally depends on the consent of the person." —[Official Report, Standing Committee B, 10 March 1994; c. 133536.]
I made inquiries at the House of Commons Library about the history of the BMA's position. The research officer of the ethics, science and information division of the BMA replied to the Library on 23 June this year. He wrote:
"If a blood sample has already been taken for clinical reasons, it is not acceptable for that sample to be released for police purposes unless specific consent is gained from the patient."
868
I have looked at that point in a number of countries. It is interesting to note that in Germany, a blood sample is taken automatically without any consent. If the investigating police officer believes that the person who is hospitalised was the cause of the accident, he has the right to require a blood sample to be taken. A more liberal interpretation—
Sir Anthony Grant: Where are the Liberals?
Mr. Miller: Indeed, where are they?
A more liberal interpretation of the need to provide vital information to determine the innocence or guilt of the driver in question is found in Australia. New Zealand, incidentally, has a system in which no consent is required, but there are some qualifying caveats. The general philosophy in Australia, as I understand it, enables a sample to be taken and analysed, but the information is not released to the police until such time as the person concerned is able to give consent. That seems a sensible way in which to overcome the understandable objections from the BMA's ethical committee. The question of consent to information being released to the police is not dealt with until the person is fit enough to consent. If the person does not consent, I believe that either the courts should be able to interpret that refusal or refusal should become an offence in itself.
We need to consider how the issue of culpability is dealt with in some cases. The hon. Member for Cambridgeshire, South-West made the point that four out of five road accidents involving deaths—"accidents" may be a misnomer—are not caused by drinking and driving. There are cases in which driver schedules, road design, local parking arrangements and the design of vehicles should, perhaps, require other persons to join the driver in the dock. Examples are the lorry company that requires a driver to go out when it knows that the vehicle is not fully safe or the coach company that provides a timetable that is not sensible in terms of getting from A to B. We must consider the possibility that culpability can extend far beyond the driver, The Law Commission is looking at the concept of corporate manslaughter in the broader sense.
One of the tragic cases brought to my attention—such cases are happening all over the country—occurred in the Wigan area. It took place in a narrow road; perhaps the local authority could have done better. The parking arrangements may have been relevant; perhaps, again, the local authority had not addressed needs as well as it could have done. I am not accusing the local authority, but simply speculating about a particular set of circumstances. The driver backed the van and he did not act very sensibly because he backed the van where visibility was poor. The Department of Transport and the Minister himself are responsible for the type approval for that van. That van had no audible means of signalling the fact that it was reversing and it had huge blind spots which meant that it had a questionable level of safety.
A whole series of circumstances need to be looked at carefully when the question of culpability comes up. In the particular case to which I have referred obliquely, a small child died unnecessarily. The van backed on to the pavement over the child and then drove forward over the body of the child. The Minister said in his opening speech that things were getting better. However, we must all remember those tragic cases.

869
I hope that the Minister will give his support today to encouraging the Law Commission to look at those matters in a positive manner. The consultation period is over and it is now down to the commission to respond.
I give my thanks to the people who have written to me from all over the country. Many of them are victims or the families of victims. They have contributed to my research despite the obvious grief that they are suffering. I extend my thanks to organisations such as Roadpeace, and to the many organisations throughout the world that have written to me. On a light-hearted note, I especially thank the National Commission Against Drunk Driving in the United States, which wrote, "Dear Minister Miller," which may be a little premature. Organisations in the United States, such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving, which has collated enormous amounts of information from all the states, European organisations and people in a good number of countries outside Europe who have also provided information deserve thanks. All the information helps us to examine the possibilities rationally.
I have today floated one possible way in which to eradicate the deaths that take place as a result of the drinkers and the lunatic fringe who still exist on the roads. I am not seeking to penalise the motorist. I have driven large mileages all my adult life in a number of different occupations. I understand the pressures that the Government would face from some of the motoring organisations if they were to take a draconian view. The point I emphasise time and again is that we must never lose sight of the interests of the victims and their families. We should accept that the point made by the Minister at the beginning of this debate was correct. We should not relax in our effort to reduce the number of deaths down towards zero. Our national record may be good, but one death is one death too many.
12.10 pm
Mr. Michael Fabricant: It should again be emphasised that the Government have a successful record in helping to reduce the number of tragic deaths on our roads. I have a few suggestions to make which, if implemented, would, I hope, help further to reduce such deaths. As I suspect that some of them might be considered controversial, I shall welcome responses from Opposition Members and from my hon. Friends if they feel that I am going beyond the mark.
My hon. Friend the Minister emphasised that deaths and serious injuries as a result of road accidents have been reduced considerably and are at their lowest level since 1926. It is worth emphasising, too, that there are 14 times as many cars on the roads now than there were in 1926. The reduction in serious accidents and deaths is something of which we can be proud. In the European Union table of accidents per road mile, we find that the United Kingdom is the lowest. Again, that is something of which we can be proud. Perhaps I can say in these troubled times that it is a statistic which might reflect on the British sang froid as opposed to the more excitable nature of some of our European neighbours.
My hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, SouthWest (Sir A. Grant) talked about drinking and driving. It was interesting to hear him say that people of his generation are possibly more lax about it than young people. In Lichfield, there is a fair amount of drunkenness
870
on the streets on Friday and Saturday nights. It has been suggested by members of the city council that the young people involved should go to Tamworth, where there are cinemas and discotheques. There is none in Lichfield. Young people do not go to Tamworth, interestingly enough, because they are not prepared to drive there, to drink and then drive back to Lichfield. That is laudable. As much as I condemn drinking, I condemn even more drinking and driving.
There are some important issues that the Government are examining in the long term. My right hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, South (Mr. MacGregor), the former Secretary of State for Transport, said on 9 February that drivers should be retested if they have been convicted of serious driving offences. That is an exciting and interesting initiative. It has been suggested that posttest driver training—"passplus"and better road safety education should be introduced and made available for the 16plus age group. Those are excellent initiatives.
We have heard about the second EC driver licensing directive. I shall be interested to know what the one Opposition Member who is in his place—the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Mr. Miller)—thinks about the proposal to place photographs on driving licences. I consider it an excellent idea. I suspect, however, that some of the bleeding hearts—perhaps I should say heart—on the Opposition Benches will feel that it would be an infringemelt of civil liberties.
Mr. Miller: The hon. Gentleman disappoints me by responding to the debate so frivolously. We are dealing with life and death. I do not think that photographs on driving licences will solve the problems that we are discussing. Identity becomes an issue only in the context of stolen vehicles. An eminently sensible proposal—the hon. Gentleman referred to it earlier—is identifying insurance on a vehicle. That is a better approach. The libertarian argument about whether photographs should be placed on driving licences is a red herring.
Mr. Fabricant: The hon. Gentleman accuses me of approaching the debate frivolously. The frivolity of the Labour party is reflected by the sparse number of Opposition Members in their places.
The hon. Gentleman misunderstands my argument about photographs on driving licences. As he said, the question of identity often arises when vehicles have been stolen. It has already been stated that drivers of stolen vehicles often cause fatal accidents. If we had photographs on driving licences and if there were fewer stolen vehicles, it follows that road traffic accidents would be reduced.
Lady Olga Maitland: I congratulate my hon. Friend on introducing such an important topic. Is he aware that Britain is one of the few countries in the European community that does not require photographs on driving licences?
Mr. Fabricant: Indeed, I am aware of that. My hon. Friend will know that I undertook most of my doctoral thesis in the United States. I was proud to hold a United States driving licence, and proud also to have a not very pleasant photograph imprinted on the licence. It was a

871
useful form of identification. All Members have identity cards, on which our faces are imprinted. There is nothing new about identity cards.
Mr. Miller: The hon. Gentleman is going down a blind alley. If his argument were sound, the United States would have better accident statistics than those of the United Kingdom. Instead, they are far worse. The Minister has said that there is a host of issues that are far more fundamental than photographs on driving licences—issues that have been shown to have an impact and that should have priority. Why does not the hon. Gentleman concentrate on some of those?
Mr. Fabricant: The hon. Gentleman is missing the point. I shall come to other proposals in due course.
As for the United States, I suspect that the hon. Gentleman has not read the statistics accurately. He will recall that I was talking about stolen vehicles. Is he aware that there are fewer cars stolen per car on the road in the United States than in the United Kingdom? That is the point.
I commend my hon. Friend the Minister on the publicity campaigns that have been introduced. In the coming year, £6.5 million will be spent on road safety publicity campaigns. The Government hope to continue the spend at about that level in 1995 and 1996. As my hon. Friend has said, the campaign themes are likely to be speed, child safety and drink-driving. We have heard from the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston about the importance of reducing the number of drink-driving incidents.
The United Kingdom is in the forefront of developing improved standards in Europe for front and side impact testing for new designs of vehicle. The initiatives of my hon. Friend the Minister are to be commended.
My hon. Friend the Minister and his predecessor, my hon. Friend the Member for Salisbury (Mr. Key), have been proactive, not reactive, in ensuring that seat belts are introduced in coaches and other forms of public transport.
We are hoping to introduce to all new vehicles anti-lock brakes by the end of the century. It is an interesting objective from my point of view. As I have already said, I drive a Lotus, which does not have that facility. It is most unfortunate that a British manufacturer such as Lotus does not provide ABS as standard or as an option.
The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) rightly referred to cycling. I strongly believe that cycle lanes should be introduced where practicable. When I did my masters degree at Sussex university, many people used to ride from Brighton to the university, which was in Falmer. There was a great campaign at the time, of which I was part, for the introduction of a cycle lane. I am pleased to say that such a lane now exists.
One of the Government's great successes over the past few years with regard to child safety in cycling has been the introduction of hard hats or crash helmets for cyclists. More often than not, children and adults now wear hard hats when they are cycling whereas, five or 10 years ago, that was not the norm. There has been an 80 per cent. reduction in the number of child pedestrian and cyclist casualties and that is partly due to the introduction of hard hats. The Government have introduced 20 mph limit zones and these have also helped to reduce casualties. Eighty such zones are now in operation.
872
I want to raise specific points about motor cycles. I used to be, and still am to a much lesser degree, a keen motor cyclist. As I pointed out to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North in the debate on European Union regulations last night, I used to ride a Yamaha FJ120D. I used to travel around Europe every year. One year I managed to obtain a three-week holiday from work and I travelled overland from Britain to eastern Turkey and Kurdistan and returned via the Greek islands. Trying to ride a motor cycle up a 4 in wide plank on to a boat is a difficult and dangerous task.
The Motor Cycle Industry Association has said that motor cyclists are the only road-user group to achieve or better the Government's targets. Motor cyclists should be applauded for that. Many people fail to realise that two thirds of motor cycle accidents are caused by other road users—those driving four-wheeled vehicles. It is important that the Government continue to heighten the awareness of car drivers to road users on two wheels—bicycles and motor cycles.
It is important to note that the Government introduced compulsory basic training for motor cycle users in 1990. That was a very important initiative. Before that, motor cyclists did not have any formal training although they had to be tested.
The hon. Member for StokeonTrent, North referred to "modality". I was not sure about the meaning of that word, but I understood it from her context when she said that, if we are to encourage cyclists, they must he able to use other forms of public transport, including the rail system. I fully agree with her and I would extend that to motor cycles. Many fairweather motor bike riders who use their motor bikes in and around urban areas would like to be able to take their motor bikes on trains to travel longer distances.
Mr. Miller: It is particularly important that all road users, including people with bicycles, small motor cycles and invalid vehicles, should have access to trains. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that British Rail should, as a matter of urgency, ensure that its current ludicrous restrictions, including the 63 cm width maximum which is obviously a door constraint, and the rule whereby three-wheeled invalid vehicles can be carried by train, but four-wheeled invalid vehicles cannot, are addressed? British Rail should also consider the transportation of other forms of vehicle on trains.
Mr. Fabricant: The hon. Gentleman has raised a good point. I believe that when the rail services are privatised, there will be very good commercial reasons for taking up the points raised by the hon. Gentleman. Huge sections of the community are not using the rail services for the very reasons that he gave. It will make commercial sense to allow invalid carriages, motor cycles and bicycles on to trains so that more people can use our train services.
I want now to consider several useful improvements. I commend the Minister on the use of cameras on our roads. I am pleased that he reassured the House, following my sedentary intervention, that where cameras are used for checking people who exceed the speed limit, drivers will be prewarned by signs stating that cameras are present. That is very important.
Cameras have another role and that is to catch red light dodgers at junctions and pedestrian crossings. I appreciate that a cost will be involved, but far too often people MSS red lights at zebra crossings. They may think that the light

873
is red and no pedestrians are trying to cross, so they drive through the red light. They might not see a pedestrian at night. It is important that all red lights should be obeyed by motorists. There may be an additional incentive for motorists to do that if they think a camera will catch them if they cross a red light at a zebra crossing as well as at important junctions.
The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North referred to bull bars. If a young child is hit by a Jeep with bull bars at speeds as low as 5 mph, that child may be killed. However, if the Jeep had normal bumpers, the child would have every chance of surviving. Bull bars serve little or no practical purpose and are fixed purely for cosmetic reasons. They should be banned. I always hesitate to suggest to a Minister that we impose extra restrictions, but I ask my hon. Friend the Minister for Transport in London at least to consider doing so.
My hon. Friend the Minister mentioned traffic-calming ramps. They have an important role. Several people on buses, particularly in London, have supposedly suffered neck injuries as buses have gone over particularly abrupt ramps. I hope that the Government, if they are not already doing so, will issue guidelines on the shape of ramps. I was reassured by my hon. Friend's statement that the Government are considering soft ramps and means by which emergency vehicles can quickly pass over them. It is in the public interest that their speed is not impeded.
I shall now make some possibly controversial points. I shall welcome interventions if hon. Members think that I am going a little too far. I have mentioned that I attained my masters degree at Sussex university. Most of my work for my doctorate was done at the university of Southern California. When I left university, after a very short career in broadcasting—I was also in broadcasting before I went to university—I became involved in business, which caused me to be abroad for eight months of the year. I have travelled a lot. Some of my proposals come about from my experience of driving abroad. I shall make three suggestions.
Some road accidents occur through driver frustration. Although, at first sight, it might seem that my three suggestions might increase road accidents, there is evidence abroad that they can reduce them. First, many motorists become frustrated when, at 2 am or 3 am, they are held up at red traffic lights for one minute, two minutes or three minutes, when nobody is coming the other way, and there is the greatest temptation to jump the lights. Other countries have solved the problem. I have seen the solution in operation in the United States, Australia, South Africa, and, I believe, certain parts of—
Mr. Waterson rose—
Mr. Fabricant: My hon. Friend wants to intervene. I have not even made the suggestion yet, but I am happy to give way to him.
Mr. Waterson: I am happy to slow my hon. Friend down a bit. I am most grateful to him for allowing me to intervene. My hon. Friend might be too young to remember that, during the three-day week in the 1970s, when at times there was not the power even to operate traffic lights in central London, if anything, the traffic
874
statistics improved, because people took elaborate care when approaching busy junctions because the traffic lights were not working.
Mr. Ottaway: The traffic ground to a halt.
Mr. Waterson: I wonder whether my hon. Friend had that point in mind when he evolved his threepoint plan.
Mr. Fabricant: I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. It is not the point that I was going to make, but it is an interesting observation. As my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, South (Mr. Ottaway) said from a sedentary position, the fact that there were fewer accidents may have resulted from the whole of London grinding to a halt because of the lack of traffic lights. However, I wonder whether there is over-enthusiasm for traffic lights.
I sold several radio station systems to Radio Uganda. In Kampala, not a single traffic light is now working. I am told that the traffic system there works a darned sight better now that the lights are not working. At times, roundabouts or other forms of traffic control might be more appropriate than traffic lights.
Let me now make my suggestion. In the early hours of the morning, or when there is little traffic on the road, we could have a system whereby traffic lights are altered so that, if cars enter a main road from a side road, the traffic lights flash red. The red flashing light would be equivalent to a stop sign. Hon. Members laugh as though that is an odd idea, but, throughout the United States of America, Australia, South Africa, where they strangely call traffic lights robots, and in what used to be Rhodesia—Zimbabwe—that system works.
The idea is that, at certain times of the night, or possibly during the day, a red traffic light flashing on-off would be equivalent to a stop sign. As at pedestrian crossings with traffic light control, drivers would stop at the flashing red traffic light and, if the road were clear, would approach the junction. On the other side of the road there could be a flashing amber light which would be equivalent to a giveway sign. We all know what that means: motorists slow up at the junction and, if the road is clear, they continue. This would alleviate much motorist frustration.
An obvious argument against the proposal is that motorists would become confused. Of course, there would have to be a lot of advance publicity before we introduced the system. However, I am not too young to remember when we introduced traffic lights on zebra crossings.
Mr. Deva: Can my hon. Friend explain how the flashing red light system would prevent accidents from occurring among frustrated motorists, who presumably take care to look left and right before they jump red lights? What additional benefits would the flashing red light system produce?
Mr. Fabricant: My hon. Friend makes an interesting point. The answer is that at 2 or 3 o'clock in the morning the number of cars may build up at traffic lights. An impatient driver, perhaps two or three cars back, may say, "Blow this, I will not wait for three or four minutes because I have already been waiting long enough—something may have gone wrong with the traffic lights." That driver may overtake the other cars and cause an accident. A flashing red light would prevent queuing at traffic lights.

875
As I have said, I am not suggesting anything new in the context of world traffic methods; it is something new only for the United Kingdom. The system has been in use in the United States, Australia and South Africa for years. At junctions where two important roads intersect, all sets of traffic lights would flash red in the early hours of the morning, creating the same effect as a red traffic light.
Mr. Miller: In his worldwide travels, did the hon. Gentleman bother to look at the statistics for road traffic accidents at junctions? He will find that while that practice alleviates driver frustration—which, in itself, is a cause of road accidents—it does not improve safety at junctions. I invite the hon. Gentleman to think about using available technology to adjust the switching mechanisms of traffic lights in the early hours of the morning, with the timing to be determined by traffic flows in the area. It would be very easy to time such changes using technology which is currently available from road traffic research laboratories.
Mr. Fabricant: The hon. Gentleman raises a reasonable point; that would be an alternative suggestion. However, if we were to study statistical queuing theory, the number of cars coming from different directions when there was not a constant traffic flow, would cause unnecessary delays and driver frustration.
In answer to the hon. Gentleman's first point: yes, I have looked at the statistics. They show that the number of accidents at junctions at night is lower in countries which use the flashing light system than in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Deva: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way. Certain countries I have visited—I will not go through a litany of them—have a system called the "green wave". This means that when one is travelling at a certain speed on a heavy traffic road one can go through all the traffic lights at a constant speed. This is not the case in Britain. Does my hon. Friend agree that the Minister for Transport in London could consider implementing that system here?
Mr. Fabricant: My hon. Friend has raised an excellent point. Returning from Staffordshire, the most beautiful county in the country, to the House of Commons last week, I was coming down Portland place past the headquarters of my former employers, the BBC, and I had to stop at every traffic light. There was no phasing of the system. There would be less frustration if there were.
Mr. Ottaway: My hon. Friends the Members for Brentwood and Isleworth (Mr. Deva) and for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant) have made interesting points about phased traffic lights. However, we must remember that under the phasing system they are all timed for traffic to pass through them at 30 mph, so that motorists should get a green light the whole way through. Of course, some smart Alec discovered that he could go through them at 60, 90 or 120 mph, which rather brought the system into disrepute.
Mr. Fabricant: Perhaps my hon. Friend the Minister wants to intervene on this point.
Mr. Norris: I am loth to interrupt my hon. Friend. His speech has been fascinating and he is only on point one. I cannot wait for points two and three.
876
I must tell a number of my hon. Friends—it may be the fault of the traffic authorities that they are not already aware of this—that although my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant) may have been stopped at a series of traffic lights, London has the most sophisticated system of traffic light management of any major city in the world. It allows free flow through a whole series of traffic lights on continuous routes it is called the SCOOT system. I am delighted to say that that technology, which was developed and is used in London, is sold all over the world as an example of how to develop systems to allow continual traffic flows.
I am not suggesting anything about my hon. Friend's driving habits as he cut down Portland place past the BBC. I merely take up the observation of my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, South (Mr. Ottaway) that to make the system work it is necessary to stick to the legal speed limit.
Mr. Fabricant: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his helpful intervention. Is not it another demonstration of how British technology leads the world? I just hope that the British system was not in use in Milan when "The Italian Job" was filmed. As I recall it, Benny Hill reprogrammed the Italian computers to cause a major traffic jam.
Lady Olga Maitland: I thank my hon. Friend for telling me about his night-time driving habits. He praised the system in the United States, Australia and South Africa. Does he have any statistical evidence to show that the accident rate has dropped since those countries changed to the flashing red light system? Have the numbers really gone down? I find that hard to believe.
Mr. Fabricant: I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention, although it was not totally helpful. Those countries have had that system for so long that I do not think it is now a question of producing figures to show that the accident rate has gone down. Indeed, the United States and other countries have had it for at least 25 years.
I come now to point two, as we have more or less covered point one. The United States—again—has a system that allows traffic to turn right on red. That was gradually introduced state by state, but it is now in use in all 50 states except at junctions that specifically state that traffic cannot turn right. We should have a similar system at certain road junctions in Britain, although, of course, it would be to turn left on red. A motorist wanting to turn left at a junction would treat the red light as a stop sign and would have to stop. However, provided that no traffic were coming the other way, the motorist could filter left. That would be a helpful system and it has been shown to have reduced traffic accidents in the United States. I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will consider introducing a similar system in this country. As no one has sought to intervene, I shall assume that that means that my suggestion meets with the approval of hon. Members.
Finally, my most controversial point—
Mr. Waterson: A man with a red flag.
Mr. Fabricant: I do not know whether they had red flags in 1926, but even if they did I must remind my hon. Friend that there are fewer road accidents now than there were then. Clearly, the red flag was a frustrating influence on drivers, which demonstrates my argument that when motorists are frustrated they can cause accidents.

877
My final suggestion would certainly reduce the number of people breaking the law. In the early hours of the morning, when there are few cars on the road, many motorists, including myself, often drive at more than 30 mph in a 30 mph zone if there is no traffic around. Everyone does it. I suggest that in zones where the speed limit is under 70 mph the limit should be increased automatically by 10 mph at certain times in the morning. Perhaps, between the hours of 2 am and 4 am—whatever the Minister decides—one might be allowed to drive legally at up 'to 40 mph in a 30 mph zone.
Mr. Waterson: I do not want to disturb the flow of my hon. Friend's radical ideas, but does he not think that if that were the case people would go 10 mph faster than those limits? People will always drive at speeds above the limit when they think that it is safe to do so and that no one is around—or, perhaps more importantly, that no members of the constabulary are around. If there is an informal increase in the limit at certain times, some people will go even faster.
Mr. Fabricant: That is a reasonable argument. Perhaps, in conjunction with the changes, we should increase the penalties for breaking the speed limit. Let us have practical and reasonable limits and a radical increase in penalties for those who break them—perhaps more or less along the lines that my hon. Friend the Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Waterson) suggested.
Mr. Deva: On speed limits and breaking them, does my hon. Friend have any views on the radar detection systems that one can buy and instal in a car? I have not done so, but I have seen them in shops. They warn the driver when a speed detection system is ahead. If one is driving a car and at the same time looking at the speedometer and the radar detection system, it would completely divert one's concentration from the road. I see no reason why people would buy them unless they intended to break the speed limit. Does my hon. Friend have any views on those systems in regard to his theory on increasing speed limits?
Mr. Fabricant: I would not condone any device that would assist people to break the law, although I must correct my hon. Friend. He said that people would be distracted by using such a device. I have not bought one and I do not have one in my car, but I know that they bleep, so it is not a question of looking down. If one enters an area in which the police are operating a radar detection system, the device bleeps. I condemn their use and it is wrong.
People should keep to speed limits, but those limits should be sensible. That is why my third point was that they should be increased by 10 mph at certain times of the morning, which would be sensible. After all, did not the Minister or the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North—perhaps it was both of them—mention the use of inappropriate speeds? People should not drive at inappropriate speeds, but it is appropriate and safe to drive at speeds above the speed limit in the early hours of the morning, if that limit is 30 mph and there are no other cars or children around.
878
I drive a fast car, but when I drive past schools and parked cars where children might be about to come out into the road and one cannot always see them, I drive at a darned sight less than 30 mph and I am always careful to do so.
The Minister will be relieved to know that I have come to the end of my three points. However, will he assure the House that he will not entertain any plans to standardise our legislation with that of the European Union, particularly when it comes to driving on the right?
Hon. Members may recall that many years ago drivers in Sweden drove on the left. The country undertook a costly programme to change the system to driving on the right. Recently, Transport Ministers in Sweden have said that if they were deciding whether to change the system now, they would not do so because of the cost involved, the increased number of cars on the road and the increased number of traffic accidents that occurred following the changeover.
I am reminded of the joke that, when Idi Amin had difficulty with the United Kingdom and called it a toothless bulldog, he said that he would change the system in Uganda so that drivers drove on the right, but to make things easier for the citizens of Kampala and Entebbe, the change would be phased in over a week so that people could get used to the new system. I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will assure me that that will not happen.
I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will assure the House that he will resist any moves to make people in this country drive on the right. If anyone here were foolish enough to say that that would help our motor industry, that would be nonsense. Indonesia, Thailand and Japan, as well as much of the Commonwealth, still drive on the left and continue to be major markets for the United Kingdom.
This country has gone a long way and has taken much innovative action to reduce the number of road deaths. That has been demonstrated by the fact that Britain has the lowest road accident rate in the European Union. Much of that progress is due to what the Government have done over the years. I ask my hon. Friend the Minister to consider some of my proposals which I hope might, in a small way, help to reduce the number of road deaths still further.
12.51 pm
Mr. Richard Ottaway: It is a pleasure to follow the imaginative, thoughtful and provocative speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant). Of his three points, the most interesting was the first, dealing with the technological approach. As my hon. Friend the Minister said, we have a highly sophisticated system in London and many computerised systems. As my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland) will know—her constituency is close to mine—we also have a number of computerised systems in the suburbs. An effective system has been introduced at Purley cross, where the A22 and the A23 merge. A highly sophisticated computerised scheme, introduced by the Department of Transport, has resolved one of London's big trouble spots. Like any system, when it becomes overloaded it grinds to a halt. Utterly predictably, Purley grinds to a halt at 5pm on a Friday night.

879
My hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire has a point when he talks of modern technology as a solution to many of the problems and as a means of raising safety standards—the issue at the heart of today's debate. I congratulate my hon. Friend on coming up with positive ideas as they will advance debates such as today's.
Only a couple of weeks ago I was reading a hook by Admiral Sandy Woodward, who was in charge of the British expeditionary force to the Falkland Islands. When he was flying home at the end of his 100 days in the Falklands—where he experienced the clamour and noise of battle—he considered the number of casualties in the war. He found that, during those 100 days, more people were killed on the roads in Britain than in the Falklands war. He mused over why it was that we took something like the Falklands so seriously—it was the focus of world attention—when more people were killed on Britain's roads.
The reason is that the Falklands became a matter of national pride, but road safety forms part of our daily life. We have all learnt to live with it—we all went to road safety lessons when we were at school. That is why debates such as today's are so important. They encourage Ministers to report to us on the steps that the Department of Transport is taking to reduce accidents and invite us to sit down and address sensibly the problems which are faced daily, hourly and by the minute on our roads.
Our roads are now busier than they have ever been, with 14 times as much traffic on them as when records began in 1926. The Government have long been encouraging people to be more responsible as road users, both as drivers and pedestrians, but with the ever-increasing volume of traffic, new measures must be constantly sought to improve safety.
Our roads are among the safest in the European Union. However, because of what some observers have entitled the greatest epidemic of our time, about 4,000 people are involved in fatal accidents each year and more than 300,000 people are involved in less serious accidents. Although the figures for deaths and serious injuries caused by road accidents continue to show a welcome, encouraging downward trend—in 1993 they fell by 12 per cent.—we must still do all that we can to make our roads a safer environment for their users.
As well as the terrible human costs of road safety accidents, they impose a massive financial burden on society. According to the Department's own figures, an accident resulting in slight injury costs more than £9,000. If that accident is more serious, the average cost rises to £84,000, but should it tragically prove to be fatal, the cost is in excess of a massive £760,000.
In 1993, road traffic accidents in the London borough of Croydon, part of which I have the privilege to represent, cost society £52 million. That represents a vast waste of human and financial resources which no society can willingly bear without considering how the majority of those accidents can be prevented.
The Government's efforts to reduce accidents on our roads are working and I congratulate the Department of Transport on everything that it has done. The number of drink-driving incidents has reduced, but, unfortunately, drink-driving is still responsible for up to 14 per cent. of deaths on our roads. The need for deterrence is still as strong as it has always been.
880
I am aware that the Government's annual Christmas advertising campaign, which rams home the awful consequences of drink-driving, is due to start on 6 December. Over the years, that campaign has been successful in reducing the number of those who drink and drive. It has been assisted by the way in which society has come to view those who act in such an irresponsible manner. The attitude to drink-driving has changed drastically and people now view with contempt those who take the wheel when under the influence of alcohol. That shows how effective the medium of television advertising can be.
Mr. Deva: Those of us who drive are careful not to do so when under the influence of drink. People may go to a dinner party or a ball by taxi, consume some alcohol and then take a taxi home. In the morning one assumes that one is sober enough to drive a car, but there is no way or knowing whether one is under or over the limit. 'The instruction and advice available to the average driver on whether he should drive his car in the morning, having consumed alcohol the night before, is scarce. That problem has been on my mind for some time and I wonder whether my hon. Friend has any views on it.
Mr. Ottaway: I would have liked more notice of my hon. Friend's question, but I imagine that one should allow at least eight hours before driving. Perhaps my hon. Friend the Minister can provide an answer when he winds up. I believe that one can buy a personal breathalyser, but that there is some doubt about their reliability. If one has any doubt, one should not drive. I do not argue that no alcohol should be drunk, because I believe that the present threshold is about right. If one has drunk half a pint of shandy, for example, there is no reason why one should not drive home. Perhaps those of a scientific mind may be able to answer my hon. Friend's question later.
Under revised guidance in the Road Traffic Act 1991, the courts can ensure that drink-drivers and those who cause death through dangerous driving receive the sentences that they deserve and which reflect society's attitude to drivers who recklessly endanger lives by their selfish actions.
New and younger drivers remain high accident risks.Although they represent only 10 per cent. of all drivers,they are responsible for 25 per cent. of all accidental road deaths. I welcome the Government's announcement of new measures to reduce accidents caused by newly qualified drivers. Most important among them is the attempt through education to change attitudes. The Department of Transport has proposed the development of a scheme devised by the Driving Standards Agency in collaboration with the insurance industry, to give newly qualified drivers financial incentives. They would undertake a structured training course to improve the driving standards of that vulnerable group, designed to impart skills such as observation, hazard perception and awareness that are known to make drivers safer but which can take years to acquire. Drivers who successfully complete the six sessions that comprise the course could be guaranteed a discount on their insurance premiums, to reward skills that are so necessary to that high-risk category.
Automobile Association research showed that young, newly qualified drivers do not know how to drive safely and are sometimes known to choose to drive badly, often solely to impress their friends. The AA has asked the

881
Government to consider implementing measures to deter bad driving behaviour with lower penalty point thresholds for new drivers than for experienced motorists. I ask my hon. Friend the Minister carefully to consider those proposals and to work hand in hand with the insurance incentives that I mentioned.
Another major cause of traffic accidents is total disregard for speed limits by a small number of road users. Excessive speed is a contributory factor in 30 per cent. of all road accidents. That single most important behavioural factor endangers, especially in built-up areas, the lives of not only drivers but pedestrians. Of the seven people killed in traffic accidents in the borough of Croydon this year, six were pedestrians—speed being a primary cause.
The introduction of speed cameras in certain areas has reduced deaths and serious injury by up to 40 per cent. That is a remarkable achievement, but detectors that alert a driver when a radar trap or camera is ahead are, according to the police, increasing in popularity. It is not illegal to supply such equipment—only to use it. Until there is a sea change in public opinion against motorists who speed, there will be drivers who continue to believe that the law applies to everyone but themselves and who will look for ways to avoid being caught.
There are more subtle ways of preventing road accidents. For more than 70 years, we have taken part in an annual ritual which leads to more road accidents—caused by the lack of daylight in the darker hours that we experience when the clocks are put back one hour in September. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!] Twilight, when many people are on their way home from work or school, is a time when traffic accidents are notoriously common. I raised that matter when I intervened on my hon. Friend the Minister's opening speech, and his response was fair. I appreciate that the matter embraces a number of Departments, but I hope that the Government will address the issue seriously. As we have just heard, there is a strong feeling that something straightforward can be done to reduce the number of accidents. As most hon. Members know, the Daylight Extra group, supported by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, is actively campaigning on that issue. The transition would be achieved simply by failing to put back the clocks one autumn. We would then go on to double summer time the following summer.
I am sure that my hon. Friend the Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Waterson), who has taken a particular interest in that subject, will develop that theme in due course. The pure financial benefit of that inaction has been estimated by the Policy Studies Institute at more than £200 million, but the reduction in the cost of human lives—an estimated 140 fewer fatalities and just under 2,000 fewer injuries on the roads—is a much more compelling argument. British summer time was maintained throughout the winters of 1968–71 as an experiment which the House ended in 1970. Opposition has come mainly from the agricultural and construction industries, but subsequent analysis shows that the experiment was effective in reducing the number of road casualties, especially among pedestrians and children.
The number of lives saved by wearing seat belts in rear seats of cars is about the same as would be saved by an extra hour of daylight. The Government have proved their
882
commitment to safety by implementing the former measure; I sincerely hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will consider carefully the benefits of that simple but effective measure.
Another issue that has a great bearing on the number of accidents that take place each year is the urban road environment. Many steps can be taken to make our local roads safer, such as traffic calming through the use of speed ramps; chicanes; improved road markings; and other measures. My hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam mentioned the need for more humping on local roads. This has become a valuable tool in slowing down traffic and has helped to avoid pedestrian injuries and fatalities. My hon. Friend is probably well aware, however, that local communities are sometimes upset that local roads that they have used for years have become irritatingly slow.
Lady Olga Maitland rose—
Mr. Ottaway: Before I give way to my hon. Friend, may I say that mothers in my constituency want more humps while residents in the same roads want fewer.
Lady Olga Maitland: I thank my hon. Friend for giving way on this extremely important topic. My long-suffering constituents have put up with those wretched humps for years. When I talk to the highways department of Sutton council, however, I discover that people hate them. Councillors make that admission with a rueful laugh. When I ask why they stick to humps without considering the litany of other ideas that would achieve the same objective, the answer is that we are stuck in a groove on this issue. The time has come to look at the wider selection and move away from those wretched humps.
Mr. Ottaway: I partially agree with my hon. Friend. As Abraham Lincoln said, you cannot please all the people some of the time—let alone some of the people all the time.
The most vulnerable sectors of society, but mainly children, have great difficulty judging the speed of oncoming traffic. In Croydon, 80 children on average are injured, some seriously, each year. The Government's successful campaign, "Kill your speed—not a child", helps to force home the message that traffic speed in urban areas all too often has tragic consequences. Thankfully, however, in certain areas including parts of my constituency, traffic-calming measures have reduced accidents in known urban black spots by as much as 20 per cent. The schemes have the benefit of improving road safety without necessarily reducing traffic volume and I hope that many more local authorities will consider using them.
Before dealing with passenger and driver safety, I should like to make a further plea to my hon. Friend the Minister. I took my driving test some 30 years ago and passed it the first time, having been examined on the "Highway Code". But what I was examined on 30 years ago bears no resemblance to the road signs that I now see around the country. One may read in the newspapers what new signs mean—"straight on" or "no right turn", for instance—but it is an ad hoc way of learning about new regulations. It is a fundamental principle of British law that ignorance of the law is no excuse, but that does not help when we are trying to improve road safety and reduce the number of accidents.

883
I suggest that when a fundamental change is made to road signs or regulations, the Department of Transport might distribute to all holders of driving licences a copy of the new "Highway Code". I do not know how many drivers there are but, if we assumed that there were 20 million and that printing and distribution costs were about £1 a head, the cost would be £20 million. It may be substantial but it would be worth while if it resulted in greater awareness of new road safety regulations.
I have so far confined my comments to accident prevention but I deal now with driver and passenger safety. Although I welcome the reduction in the number of accidents which I have mentioned, users must be able to be confident that, in the unfortunate event of an accident, their vehicle would provide protection. More than 90 per cent. of accidents are due to human error while very few are caused by mechanical failure or the inadequacy of vehicle equipment.
However, poor maintenance of vehicles can have tragic consequences. The fatal accident at Sowerby bridge in 1993, caused by a heavy goods vehicle having poorly maintained brakes, led to the death of six people. The promotion of safer vehicles by the Department of Transport through research and constant updating of standards is crucial. Research has shown that, although enhanced vehicle construction standards do not prevent many accidents, substantial reductions in accident severity can be achieved by using better-built vehicles. Many manufacturers have recently adopted such enhanced standards.
The introduction of passenger and driver air bags, anti-lock brakes and crash bars, has probably made a major contribution to the reduction in the number of fatalities and serious injuries in the past decade. Many features are now being supplied in standard production models in reaction to heightened awareness of safety. Indeed, safety is often a more prominent feature of advertisements than speed, which also assists in the necessary shift in public opinion.
Following the tragic accident on the M40, when the whole nation felt for the 12 pupils from a midlands school who were killed in a minibus accident, the Government introduced a package of measures to improve the safety of minibuses and coaches. First, my hon. Friend the Minister has taken steps through the European Commission to introduce the compulsory fitting of seat belts in all minibuses and coaches used specifically for the transport of children. I do not share the views of the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley), who criticised the Government for not taking adequate action in time. Were she ever to be part of the governing party, she would realise that governing the country is not easy, especially when one has to take steps through the European Commission. I believe that the action taken by my hon. Friend the Minister is utterly reasonable and sustainable.
Secondly, the Government have amended the public service vehicle carrying regulations to ensure that the three-for-two concession, whereby three children were permitted to travel in a double seat, was no longer allowed. I congratulate the Department on that. Such measures can and do work.
In a serious road accident involving a Croydon school minibus in 1993, it was generally recognised that pupils were saved from more serious injury by their seat belts.
884
That has led to the borough of Croydon introducing a £40,000 plan aimed at installing seat belts in all Croydon school coaches.
Standards are rising but there is an ever-increasing hidden danger on our roads—the breed of vehicle now termed "cut and shut". As I am sure the House knows, this is a practice whereby two write-offs are welded together to make one complete but corrupted vehicle. Each year in the United Kingdom up to 150p00 written-off vehicles are rebuilt and returned to the roads. They may have been so badly damaged that they are deemed to be beyond repair, but they can he legally reused. In 1993, the Royal Automobile Club and vehicle inspections across the country uncovered some 800 cars that had been created in that way. That figure, applied to the whole second-hand car market, is very disturbing.
There is nothing wrong with making financial write-offs roadworthy if the cars are repaired well, resulting in a safe and reliable vehicle. However, there are increasing examples of substandard work undertaken by unqualified and uncaring profiteers who produce unsafe and potentially lethal vehicles which they then sell to unsuspecting purchasers. As a result, unsuspecting motorists, many buying their first cars, are placed at risk. Some are lucky enough to discover the defect, but others may be seriously injured or even killed when a badly repaired write-off crashes. I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister can look at that aspect, if not in his winding-up speech, perhaps in the future.
Since 1979, the Government have been at the forefront of road safety campaigning. Many measures, including the introduction of seat belts, standards for child restraints and tougher penalties for drink-drivers, have resulted in a 40 per cent. reduction in total road traffic casualties, a 44 per cent. drop in serious injuries and a massive 66 per cent. fall in the number of deaths caused by drink-driving. However, the Government cannot ensure that people use the roads responsibly. They can only encourage good driving practice and legislate against those who endanger themselves and others through reckless behaviour on the roads.
The drive for improved road safety is and must continue to be a partnership between the Government, the police, local authorities and, above all, those who use the roads. Motorists and pedestrians must bear responsibility for their own safety and they must ensure that their actions do not endanger themselves or others. Public information campaigns and visible roadside technology are both increasing people's perception of the risk of being caught. However, until we see a change in public opinion, as we have seen on the drink-driving issue, there will always be those who believe that being caught and fined is the worst that can happen to them when they show a total disregard for the law. We must strive to make them understand that the result could be much, much worse.
1.16 pm
Mr. Nigel Waterson: I am delighted to have the opportunity to participate in this important debate and I am even more delighted to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, South (Mr. Ottaway) who, in his inimitable fashion, has put his finger on some of the crucial issues relating to road safety. I shall touch on two central topics. One is the effect of road design on safety statistics and the other is daylight saving, which

885
has already been covered by one or two hon. Members, including my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, South.
As you may know, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for some time, there has been quite a campaign to ensure that we change our clocks so that we are on the same time as most of Europe throughout the year. I genuinely believe that it is an idea whose time has come. One need only run through the host of organisations concerned with road safety and many others that back the proposal to understand the massive support generally for such a proposition.
In October this year, an NOP survey showed that three quarters of British people were in favour of the change including, surprisingly, 62 per cent. of Scots. That is an amazing statistic when one considers that traditionally, the three groups in opposition to the proposal have been the Scots, farmers and builders. The Scots seem to be coming round to the idea, possibly because the statistics show that they would benefit proportionately more than the rest of the country, according to the experts, in terms of saving lives and preventing injuries on the roads. Even the National Farmers Union, at least in England and Wales, has dropped its previous opposition to the proposal, no doubt again persuaded by the road traffic figures.
The honour roll of organisations and individuals supporting the proposal is far too long to go through here. We have heard about the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, about Age Concern, and about the organisation of which I am happy to be a member—the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, or PACTS.
Having considered all the arguments, I introduced a ten-minute Bill, the Summer Time (Amendment) Bill, on the subject some months ago. When I read the Order Paper, I was horrified to find that my ten-minute Bill was on the same day as Scottish questions. Both sides of the House were awash, if I may use that expression, with Scottish Members. Even so, the Bill was carried comfortably by 103 votes to 86. I believe that on a more typical day on a free vote there would be a more significant majority in favour of the proposal. I think that there would be support from all parties and, indeed, from all the countries making up the European Union.
It is perhaps a matter for regret that the fairly simple proposal that I am recommending was not featured in the Gracious Speech. I hope that one of the lucky private Members in the ballot yesterday will take it up. If that happens, I hope that the proposal will ultimately acquire Government support, and it will be seen through.
Apart from road safety, the proposal has a variety of arguments and factors in its favour. It is clear that there would be an enormous benefit to the British tourist industry. I do not apologise for mentioning that during a road safety debate, representing as I do one of the country's premier resort towns. It is estimated by the British Tourist Authority and the English tourist board that an extra £1 billion-worth of revenue would be attracted to tourism by the change that I am advocating.
It is reckoned that £250 million would be saved on electricity bills alone by introducing the change. We often lose sight of doing business with Europe, but there is the irritating difference in time of one hour, or even two hours
886
in some instances, when we travel to the European mainland on business or when we do business on the telephone or by means of fax or telex.
Also to be considered is security in a broad context—I shall deal with roads specifically later in my speech. I have in mind the security of women of any age walking alone after dark, young children going out after dark and the elderly. It is a regrettable fact of modern life that in constituencies such as mine, elderly people often have a sort of self-imposed curfew when it becomes dark. They are unwilling to go out or to answer their door after dark. The change would give an enhanced feeling of security as well as actual security to those groups in our society.
Overwhelmingly, the most important single reason at the top of the list for double summer time, or central European time, as it is sometimes called, is road accidents. We have heard about that aspect already. It is estimated that such a change would mean 140 fewer deaths on our roads and 520 fewer serious injuries. That would result in an annual saving, apart from all the grief and unhappiness caused by such accidents, of over £200 million, including national health service costs.
In Scotland, double summer time would result in an overall reduction of about 60 deaths and serious injuries each year. As I have said, that would be a greater reduction proportionately than that for England and Wales.
If right hon. and hon. Members have not had the opportunity of reading Mayer Hillman's pamphlet entitled "Time for Change", I commend it to them. It is published by the Policy Studies Institute. It sets out with relentless logic and in considerable detail the arguments for the change.
There is still a sort of instinctive reaction against the change that I am advocating because of worries about dark early mornings and children going to school, for example. A mythology seems to have built up since the days of the Wilson Government, which some hon. Members may just remember, when the experiment was tried unsuccessfully.
The expert evidence is clear. It shows that although there might be a modest increase in the number of accidents first thing in the morning, there would an enormous net saving because of fewer accidents in the evenings. The reason for that seems to be principally that drivers' concentration is less acute when they are driving home in the evening than it is first thing in the morning.
Mr. Deva: Is my hon. Friend aware that medical evidence from the Royal College of Surgeons and from opticians shows that, as twilight falls, it is much more difficult for the eyes to adjust to deepening gloom rather than the other way round when the day becomes lighter? It is part of the aging process that people find it more difficult to see properly as it becomes darker.
Mr. Waterson: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his obviously expert knowledge of the aging process. I was not aware of that research and I am grateful to him for adding yet another brick to the wall of the inevitability of that provision eventually becoming part of British law.
The PSI report makes it clear that if clocks are put forward one hour, more journeys home in the evening could be made in daylight. As more of our population are fortunately employed in white-collar occupations and start work a little later in the mornings, problems with the

887
darker earlier hours are becoming fewer. The evidence is clear and detailed. The attention paid by all road users, not only drivers but children going home from school and other pedestrians making their way home, deteriorates as the day wears on.
I commend the PSI report to the House. It states:
"In the four winter months alone from November to February inclusive, and taking into account road accidents on all seven days of the week, there are over 50 per cent. more fatal and serious injuries among adults in the peak hours from 4 pm to 7 pm as from 7 am to 10 am, and nearly three times as many among children in the peak hours from 3 pm to 6 pm as from 7 am to 10 am."
As we know, there have been many legislative changes in recent years in respect of the behaviour of all types of road users. As has already been said, in 1992 the then Transport and Road Research Laboratory analysed the likely effects of the introduction of double summer time and I have quoted the figures of 140 fatalities, 520 serious injuries and 1,300 lesser injuries that could be avoided.
My second point relates to the effect of design on road safety. We have heard much about design. One issue when designing roads is that of speed cameras. The Road Traffic Act 1991 introduced new dangerous driving offences and it made the use of cameras for speeding and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant) very sensibly pointed out, for traffic light jumping, very much easier. The latest figures show that there has been a 37 per cent. reduction in deaths and serious injuries as a result of the use of cameras. That is very heartening.
There are also much broader questions about the design of roads. In my intervention during the Minister's excellent speech, I pointed out that motorways are, on the whole, safer to drive on than dual carriageways which, in turn, are safer to drive on than single carriageways. The evidence for that is clear.
I want to link that argument with a current issue that affects my constituents most significantly. That is the proposal for the new A27 road between Lewes and Polegate. There are many arguments in favour of that scheme, and I shall adumbrate them again shortly with my hon. Friend the Minister for Railways and Roads. For example, there are environmental reasons. One of the issues that the anti-roads lobby seems incapable of grasping is that, on occasions, road schemes actually assist the environment.
There are many economic arguments for the road scheme in my constituency of Eastbourne and in other parts of east Sussex. There are tourism implications in terms of access to the town, which is very difficult at the moment, and there is linking with other road schemes, including the A22 new route, work on which started at the beginning of the month. As you follow such matters closely, Mr. Deputy Speaker, you will know that the Government have allocated £25 million to that scheme.
Therefore, it is all the more surprising that a group of protesters is opposing that scheme. I suppose that, in the modern age, it is inevitable that any road scheme, no matter how innocuous, attracts protesters like a magnet. That rag-tag group of opponents includes some of those who may fairly be called the great and the good who happen to have their second homes near the route, some people, including some local Liberal Democrats, who happen to have their homes close to the proposed route, and, inevitably, the Friends of the Earth. The road is
888
extremely dangerous at the moment and it can be made significantly safer simply by dint of turning it into a standard dual carriageway.
I shall quote briefly some statistics. The Sussex police have recorded 141 injury accidents, resulting in 267 casualties. There have been seven fatalities, 63 serious injuries and 197 slight injuries on that stretch of read during the five years to December 1993. That equates to 31 personal injury accidents per 100 million vehicle kilometres, which is extremely high compared with other types of roads. It is estimated, in a report to the county council's highways and transportation committee, that that has cost the community more than £10.5 million altogether—a very significant figure indeed.
Traffic flows on the A27 are very heavy, with 22,000 vehicles a day. It is well within the ordinary parameters of what is required in respect of traffic flows for modern dual carriageways. In fact, the report also points out that
"In safety terms, there are significant gains to be made. The accident rate is approximately one third"—
that is, for a dual carriageway—
"of that of a single carriageway."
I am indebted to Mr. Brian Stoodley, a leading local surgeon at Eastbourne district general hospital, who has taken an interest in the issue. He is one of the excellent medical team in our local hospital who literally must pick up the pieces of lives and of people when they are injured or killed in tragic accidents.
I underline the point that people in the anti-roads lobby and Opposition Members from time to time oppose roads, often without seeing the safety and other implications in certain road schemes. I do not say that every road scheme is needed. Some road schemes can rightly be criticised, but many road schemes—the A27 Lewes to Polegate is a classic example—will not only enhance the environment and the local economy but will be significantly safer than the existing road. If that means that my constituents will remain alive and well rather than be killed or injured, I am very much in favour of the scheme. I support the Government's integrated, widespread approach to all elements that will make road safety such a success story.
1.34 pm
Mr. Nirj Joseph Deva: I am grateful to be allowed to follow my distinguished colleagues in speaking in the debate. My hon. Friend the Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Waterson) has just made a very interesting and articulate speech, putting the case for increasing daylight hours. He has pursued the matter with some vigour, and I commend his efforts to the House.
The people of Brentford and Isleworth, Chiswick and Hounslow are very concerned about road safety. My constituency is bordered by Heathrow airport and is blessed with motorways which allow access to the heart of London. As a consequence, my constituents suffer a daily stream of traffic to and from London and the airport.
In recent months, it has become obvious that the traffic in the area will get worse unless we do something to address it. I refer to the proposal by the British Airports Authority to build terminal 5 at Heathrow, which will double the airport's capacity from 48 million to about 80 million passengers a year. My constituents wonder how those people will be transported to and from the airport. If they are to be carried by road, it will have some bearing on my constituents' safety.

889
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Minister for Transport in London on attempting to make it safer for motorists to use the road system in my area. I congratulate him particularly on installing the traffic lights system at Chiswick roundabout which has enabled the traffic to flow far more easily. In the past I received letters from elderly constituents who said that they were terrified to go near the roundabout before the installation of traffic lights. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for his foresight and vigour in implementing that system.
The Government have a superb record on road safety. As we have heard this morning, the number of road fatalities has decreased by 40 per cent. since 1979, serious injuries have decreased by 44 per cent. since 1979, drink-driving related road deaths are down by 66 per cent., and motor cycle fatalities are down by 63 per cent. Those are bald facts which the Labour party must recognise as a substantial achievement by the Government. The Government have taken the bull by the horns and acted to improve road safety.
The Government have looked at future trends very carefully. It is obvious that the amount of road traffic will increase and in London particularly there must be a balance between road traffic and public transport.
I am concerned—I would like the Minister to take note of this—that my constituents have had to suffer a number of road works on major arterial roads in the area. Many cones have been stuck all over roads, causing motorists to change lanes and creating traffic jams. As my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant) has said, it is not very nice and it is also very irritating and quite dangerous. I ask my hon. Friend: why do cones have to stay in the same place for so long? I recognise that repair and maintenance work must be carried out, but why is it that every time I drive in that area no one is doing very much work, but the cones are still there? I receive letters asking me to explain that, so I should be grateful if my hon. Friend the Minister would do something about a matter that causes great concern and irritation to my constituents.
Various new and radical ideas have been suggested by my hon. Friends during the debate. I want to add a radical idea that may prove helpful. I have noted that motorists on motorways, especially in wet or foggy conditions, tend to drive extremely fast. They come close to the car in front and seemingly ignore the fact that stopping distances increase with the speed.
With today's modern technology and with all the radar equipment, is not it conceivable to fit cars with a warning bleep that would be activated if a motorist approached the car in front of him at too high a speed and without allowing a safe stopping distance? That would be an automatic means of telling drivers to slow down and put sufficient space between their cars and those in front. I am sure that the technology to provide such a device exists. Perhaps my hon. Friend the Minister would encourage research into that. I do not know what the state-of-the-art technology may be, but I am sure that there is a simple solution as it would be based on radar, which we have had since the 1930s.
I hope that the Government will continue to deal with road safety with the vigour and determination they have shown since they took office. I listened carefully to the
890
speech of the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) and tried to concentrate on her main theme. Unfortunately, I did not find her speech either comprehensive or comprehensible. I am sure that my hon. Friend the Minister will put that right.
1.42 pm
Lady Olga Maitland: I have great pleasure in bringing up the rear from the Back Benches in such an important debate. It is also a great pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Mr. Deva). He raised a point that I wanted to raise, so I shall simply give him my total support on the problem of what I call motorway madness.
There is an argument for promoting research into developing some sort of radar system to stop cars coming too close or speeding. I dread the experience of a driver of a powerful car roaring up the motorway with lights full on—he would blow his horn if he could—and coming right up behind me, almost trying physically to push me aside. That is not safe driving. Likewise, that monster might come right up behind me and then zip to the left and overtake on the inside. That sort of behaviour is pernicious and extremely dangerous. Currently, the only thing that brings such a monster under control is the sight of a police patrol car.
Mr. Miller: The hon. Lady touches on an important matter—drivers' motorway habits. She described someone overtaking her on the inside. That has some bearing on driver education. Why is it that time and again there are lots of cars in the second and third lanes of motorways, but none in the first lane? Perhaps she contributed to the problem by not moving to the nearside lane at the right time.
Lady Olga Maitland: The hon. Gentleman missed the point. One can be driving along in the fast lane legitimately, but if a car rushes up behind at well over 100 mph it can put normal good motorway behaviour out of kilter. No matter how impatient, it is totally unacceptable for any motorist to weave in and out of the traffic as the hon. Gentleman described, although he has a point as motorists must stick to the appropriate lane. None the less, that does not mean that they have to hop around like jack-in-the-boxes because a road monster has leapt up behind them. That is motorway madness and it spins out of control. We must consider more measures to bring it into proportion.
The debate has touched on many topics, including seat belts. While I congratulate the Government on their enormously important campaign to introduce seat belts and the education that went with it, which has resulted in everyone being aware of the fact that they must belt up if they sit in the front seats, regrettably the campaign to encourage people to belt up in the back seats has not taken off. Far too often they are not doing so. I congratulate the royal family, who seem to be meticulous about wearing their seat belts when they sit in the back—especially the Princess of Wales. I want that campaign to go further.
On car design, hon. Members said that improved technology has resulted in cars with more powerful engines. I hope that the Government will join a campaign to encourage the use of small, nippy and effective cars on the basis that small is beautiful. The Minister touched on that, but if we are to go down the sensible route of getting people into sensible cars, we must get away from the idea

891
that it is smart to drive an enormous, high-performance car. I say so with some feeling. I drive a modest car, a Ford Sierra estate with a roof rack, which is in the motherly rather than the racing mode.
Other Conservative Members looked somewhat askance when my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant) outlined his radical ideas for traffic lights at night. Although it caused some amusement, radical ideas often get the brush-off in the first instance and I urge him to continue trying to persuade the Government to legislate for that if the idea has some merit and to back it up with some factual information. It is said that we must think the unthinkable, or we shall never achieve. It is too difficult for me to say whether I would support his ideas, but they should be fully explored.
Mr. Fabricant: I thank my hon. Friend for her kind words. But to paraphrase Disraeli, "You laugh at me now, but the time will come when you will hear me".
Lady Olga Maitland: Speed cameras have undoubtedly played a useful role on the roads and their use should be increased. Unfortunately, drivers are beginning to get the idea that the cameras are not a deterrent as they will not catch up with them. We must therefore ensure that they are backed by some sort of power or sanction. It is not enough merely to monitor motorists. We must catch up with the offenders.
The topic of red routes has not been raised today, but there is great feeling about it in my constituency, particularly in Cheam village. If my hon. Friend the Minister opens his map of London he will see that a red route passes through Cheam village. It is a quiet village with broad streets that could easily take almost six cars abreast. As a result of the proposal to introduce a red route, parking has been driven off the streets and local shopkeepers will lose trade.
Cheam is already suffering from village starvation of services. If the retailers cannot provide their services, they will go out of business, which in turn will affect the elderly, the disabled and quick shoppers because they cannot avail themselves of the services of local shopkeepers. Does the red route have to go through the quiet, safe little village of Cheam, which is way outside the intensely urban area of London? I beg my hon. Friend to reflect on the question. He has doubtless already received representations from my constituents, but I should like to emphasise that the feeling in my constituency is strong and hostile.
On a more positive note, I congratulate the Government on their tremendous success in reducing the level of accidents in this country. It is yet another tribute to our efforts to bring rationality to the roads and to save lives, and the success should be shouted from the roof tops. We should be proud of it as it is a credit to us. I was sorry that the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) spoke grudgingly about an achievement that has changed the map of Britain in terms of road safety.
Ms Walley: Does not the hon. Lady understand that if we do not have the same number of spot checks on vehicles, there will be an increase in the number of dangerous vehicles on our roads? The Minister might say
892
that there is no suggestion of that, but he should know what took place during the course of the Deregulation and Contracting Out Bill.
Lady Olga Maitland: I thank the hon. Lady for her intervention—she sounded somewhat defensive.
Families have been tragically torn apart because a loved one has been killed, very often by a drunk driver. I speak with personal experience because the wife of one of my first cousins was killed in an accident, having been smashed into by a drunk driver. She was barely 30, had two young children and left a grieving widower.
All too often my constituency's local papers, the Sutton and Cheam Herald and the Sutton Borough Guardian, feature appalling car crashes that have occurred as a result of drink-driving. In any week one can guarantee at least one third of the court cases reported will cover a drink-driving charge. Last year alone, nationally, more than 500 people died as a result of drink-driving. The encouraging news is that the figure has fallen by a half over the past 10 years. In 1984, more than 1,000 people were killed. That shows that today's programme of stick, carrot and persuasion is changing public attitudes. Drivers involved in accidents are more likely to be breath-tested, but less likely to fail than they were 10 years ago.
As we move into the Christmas season of office parties, now is the time for the Government, as they always do, to step up their advertising campaign on drink-driving. Although some people were startled by the shock approach of those advertisements and the horror they revealed, frankly it was worth it. If that campaign can cut the number of people killed in drink-driving accidents this year from 500 to 250, it would save many more families from suffering a devastating bereavement and a miserable Christmas.
Mr. Fabricant: My hon. Friend will probably not recall it because she is far too young, but when the then Minister of State for Transport, Barbara Castle, introduced penalties against drink-driving she was interviewed by the BBC and other media. They portrayed her action as draconian because it was considered that she was trying to deter people from having a good time. Surely that demonstrates how far we have moved on from those ignorant days.
Lady Olga Maitland: I agree with my hon. Friend. I pay tribute to Baroness Castle for her efforts to prevent drink-driving.
How interesting it is to note how social habits have changed. It is now the normal way of life for a couple invited to a party to discuss who will drink and who will drive. It is quite normal for a host to serve soft drinks and a party goer who sticks to orange juice or tomato juice is no longer regarded as a wimp or a killjoy.
Parents also play a vital role when their children give parties by insisting that all the guests should stay overnight. That may mean we have households of sleeping bags all over the floor and no space at the breakfast table in the morning, but, as parents, we are acutely aware that we should not allow young people to drive after going to a party.
When I attend constituency association dinners I notice that many people determinedly leave their cars at home and arrive by taxi. When we have a dinner at the House of Commons the guests hire a coach. Attitudes have not

893
changed by accident, but because the Government have taken determined action to promote good behaviour on the roads and I congratulate them on that.
I think that we could still go further and we should look at banning drivers from drinking any alcohol. I know that that is the subject of much debate and my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, South (Mr. Ottaway) has already suggested that perhaps one or two drinks is permissible. I have the feeling that we have reached the point when drivers should not be allowed to drink. For one thing, it is extremely 'difficult to know what is one's real limit—everyone has a different benchmark. Three glasses of wine may knock one person out, while another person may be safe to drive. I think that it would be better to say that drivers should not drink at all.
Such a prohibition would help to reach the worst offenders—those heavy drinkers, usually male, in their mid-20s. Research shows that young men reach their peak age of misbehaviour in terms of drink-driving at 24. Next comes 29-year-old men, who are also high-risk offenders and, when stopped, are found to have drunk themselves blatantly over the limit, as though they could not give a damn.
The other road menace is the white spirit drinker, who sticks to gin or vodka and who takes advice from no one—that is, until we make the penalty really fit the crime. We need to create that deterrence. Unless we hit those drivers hard and impose penalties that hurt, they will carry on regardless.
I welcome the considerable powers that the courts have been given as a result of Government concern. Although the maximum penalty for someone who kills a person while under the influence of alcohol is five years' imprisonment, the courts should not hesitate from passing more custodial sentences when appropriate. They should certainly not hesitate about withdrawing a driver's licence and banning someone from the roads, not just for two or three years, but at least for 10 years or even for life. When I have suggested that to lawyers and judges they have argued that that is not practicable because such people would return to the roads anyway. I do not accept that argument, and we should examine seriously the question of banning drivers for life.
I know that my hon. Friend the Minister wishes to reply to the debate, but I will make two more points. My hon. Friends the Members for Croydon, South and for Eastbourne (Mr. Waterson) expressed their concern about changing to double summer time. It is iniquitous to have rolled along all these years with an inconvenient mode, which makes life difficult for business men and is dangerous for road users.
It is estimated that 2,000 accidents a year occur when dusk falls earlier in the afternoon, including 120 deaths. I urge my hon. Friend the Minister to press on with supporting double summer time. I cannot imagine anyone who would object. There is a myth that children can go to school only in daylight and that people can wake up only in daylight. It is a fact that people are most alert in the morning, even if it is dark. In the afternoon and early evening, people are weary and do not concentrate so well. That is when they need all the light available.
894
I was lucky enough to be drawn 17th in the ballot for private Members' Bills. I have not yet decided the subject of my Bill, but I am seriously considering whether the rules and regulations for newly qualified drivers should be stiffened, and penalties imposed in the first year or two of their driving lives. Drivers under 21 are involved in 1,000 of the almost 3,500 fatal accidents that occur every year. They are positively lethal and it is time to give serious thought to measures that could bring them under control.
If such drivers committed offences that exceeded a minimum limit in their first year of driving, they could be compelled to retake their driving test.
Ms Walley: Is the hon. Lady able to say whether the Minister would approve such legislation introduced under the private Member's Bill procedure?
Lady Olga Maitland: I have every reason to believe that it would have his support. I am sure that it would receive across-the-board support. It should be a non-contentious issue, and I should be sorry if the Opposition obstructed its passage.
Mr. Miller: No. It would find sponsors among Opposition Members.
Lady Olga Maitland: That is good to know.
In an earlier intervention, I raised the question of traffic calming. I urge my hon. Friend the Minister to encourage local authorities to adopt more flexible attitudes to traffic-calming measures. I am not convinced that road humps are the only way to control speeding drivers. Local authority traffic departments take the view that they must follow the Department's guidelines, but they should not follow only one route.
The Department of Transport has produced some colourful booklets about alternative schemes, but somehow the message is still not getting through. Not only is it unpleasant to go over those humps in a conventional car, but, as the Minister has admitted, we should look at the problems faced by low-platform buses that are coming on stream throughout the country to help not only the disabled but many other people. They would find the humps difficult to cope with. Ambulances that must drive up residential streets riddled with those humps have a dangerous task. Imagine what it is like when an ambulance carries someone with a spinal injury. It defies belief that patients are subjected to journeys that could make them more devastatingly ill than they already are. The point has been made and I have the impression that the Minister will look into it further.
I congratulate the Minister and his Department on the enormous progress that has been made in attitudes towards road safety. We have changed society's attitudes through schools, teaching children how to ride bicycles, and educating people on how to behave on the roads and on drink-driving. My hon. Friend should not flinch from taking the credit which is entirely due to him.
2.5 pm
Mr. Norris: With permission, Mr. Deputy Speaker. We have had an excellent debate this morning and I am glad of an opportunity to refer to a number of the points that have been made and to try to answer as many as I can.

895
The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms Walley) and I have sat on opposite sides of the Dispatch Box for several years and I have heard her make a number of speeches. In all honesty, today's was not one of her best. A classic error that permeates the Opposition's thinking and which we heard trotted out again today is that, the minute we try to make an organisation with the slightest responsibility, direct or tangential, for safety even remotely more efficient, it necessarily results in reductions in safety standards.
Mr. Miller: My hon. Friend did not say that.
Mr. Norris: With respect to the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Mr. Miller), I listened carefully and the record will show that that is exactly what she said. Moreover, it was the tenor of what she said, and what she was not prepared to say explicitly she implied. To put the matter to rest, may I make it clear that we have made it a cardinal principle of all the deregulation legislation that we have introduced—it is a cardinal principle of the concept of deregulation—that it means getting rid of unnecessary regulation that does not contribute to safety, better health or higher living standards but is simply bureaucratic nonsense.
The hon. Lady was not on the deregulation Bill Committee whereas I was. I sat there month in and month out, as did the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston. Try as they might during the Bill's proceedings, there was not one occasion when the Opposition could show that there was even the possibility that safety standards might be compromised. That was a given, and it remains a given.
In the context of road safety, I admit that we have required efficiency savings from the Vehicle Inspectorate, for example. The inspectorate responded constructively, as it always does, and those savings will be available to taxpayers to spend in areas where there is a need. The savings will be derived from eliminating waste, from restructuring and from redesigning responsibilities, which responsible organisations are doing all day long. There will be no reduction in enforcement activity or in safety levels because the Government are fundamentally committed to the concept of safety in the office, in factories, homes, schools, the workplace and, more important, on the roads. Let there be no doubt about that.
The hon. Lady mentioned the availability of police resources. My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary recently wrote to chief constables about key policing objectives. There is general agreement that one of their objectives should be to ensure that road traffic law is properly enforced in the most efficient and cost-effective way. He has commissioned a thorough study of the use of public resources and established a working group of officials, including members of the police and HM inspectorate.
It appears that some functions are not central to the police's responsibility—for example, escorting abnormal loads, although the hon. Lady mentioned a number of others which could be said to fall into the same category—where it might be possible to release expensive and expert police resources for more useful work. They would, by definition, be areas of activity where no great technical expertise was demanded or fairly straightforward supervision jobs. Before anyone says that escorting an abnormal load requires expertise, I must
896
point out that it is a discrete skill and it may be possible with such activities to obtain a more rational deployment of services. If so, we would be keen to do so.
Ms Walley rose—
Mr. Miller rose—
Mr. Norris: I will give way first to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North as a matter of protocol.
Ms Walley: I have listened carefully to what the Minister says. The important point of principle in this instance is that the police have the power to stop vehicles on the road. That power needs to operate in conjunction with safety checks carried out on vehicles or in respect of any other problems that may arise. Is the Minister saying that he does not foresee a continuing role for the police with regard to their stop and search powers?
Mr. Norris: Of course I foresee a continuing role for the police in respect of stop and search powers, the Vehicle Inspectorate and traffic. The hon. Lady will know that in Northern Ireland Vehicle Inspectorate officials as well as the police have the power to stop. It provides an interesting opportunity to see what happens when one extends the principle. There may be merit in it and, if so, we should explore the notion further.
Mr. Miller: I am sure that the Minister will be aware that professional drivers of abnormal loads are deeply worried about the proposal that has been floated to remove police officers from escort duties as they feel that it would further the tendency described by the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Lady Olga Maitland) in her peroration about motorway madness. Does he accept that solving the problem mentioned by the hon. Member for Cambridgeshire, South-West (Sir A. Grant)—taking breath tests at the scene of all deaths on the road—will have resource implications and can be dealt with only by involving more police officers?
Mr. Norris: Let me make it clear that I am not suggesting—nor has it been suggested during the consultation—that there should be no escorts for abnormal loads. That is not the issue. It is perfectly proper for people to express their concern. It is part of the innate conservatism of this country that the minute one suggests any change, people rush to defend the status quo. It is important that one always ensures that a change is for the better before one makes it. It is clear that there are some advantages to be gained from at least considering the proposal and the caveat mentioned by the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston is sensible. In contrast to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North, he made a useful contribution to the debate on the issue of prosecution policy. I do not accept that there is evidence that it is a question of police resources. I gave the House some impressive statistics—I shall not repeat them—about police stops where breath tests are administered. The hon. Gentleman's point is a serious one and I may touch on it in a second. I do not think that the resources issue is the key to it. The key to it, as he quite rightly said, is how one reconciles the principle of consent, which neither he nor I would willingly set aside, with the important benefit that might be derived from a change. He expanded on that point very well.

897
The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North mentioned bull bars. I was grateful to her for that, as it is an important point. As I am sure she knows, the technical position is that, unfortunately, some vehicles which have bull bars fitted as standard have European type-approval; there is also the question of after-fitting. I am afraid that it is not easy to take immediate action, as she suggests. Although in theory great danger could arise, we are concerned to be sure of the effect of bull bars in practice. The first question I asked when the matter was put to me was whether we could relate bull bars to a given number of additional accidents. The evidence is not great.
The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North is right to say that it is a real irony that although manufacturers have made great progress with crumple zones and soft fronts to reduce the impact of accidents on pedestrians, one sees fitted to vehicles, often for purely cosmetic reasons, as the hon. Lady said, pieces of equipment that have no practical use. In practice, such vehicles are unlikely to encounter a bull; we can be reasonably certain of that. Most bull bars are fitted to vehicles which are capable of driving up the side of Everest, but which scarcely ever leave the metalled road.
Ms Walley rose—
Mr. Norris: Does the hon. Lady want to say something? Incidentally, I know that she cannot be here for all my remarks and I quite accept that.
Ms Walley: Certain organisations, such as the Staffordshire Ambulance Trust, have voluntarily withdrawn bull bars from their vehicles. Would it be possible for the Minister to devise a way in which to redefine bull bars that were not being used for the purpose for which they were specifically designed—that is, for off-road vehicles? Would that be a way in which to deal with the problem? That would mean that fewer people would be likely to be involved in serious accidents caused by collisions.
Mr. Norris: I understand the hon. Lady's concern to try to seek a solution to the problem. As I said, there is the difficulty that certain vehicles have European type-approval for the fitting of bull bars. As with seat belts in coaches, one can make progress only at the rate that the Community allows. In some countries in the Community, there may be a more genuine need to have this fitment than there is in the United Kingdom.
My hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Sir K. Carlisle), when Minister for Roads and Traffic, took action because he was especially concerned about the issue. I erred in not referring earlier to his contribution at the Department. He contacted the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders and pressed upon it the desirability of not fitting bull bars as standard. In general, there has been a good response from manufacturers, though sadly not a unanimous one.
Mr. Gordon McMaster: I am grateful to the Minister for giving way, especially as I have had to flit in and out of the Chamber all morning. While he is on the topic of European directives, could he say a few words about the Government's intentions as regards the proposed directive on the design of coaches? I have had
898
a letter from a Mr. Masterton of Delta Coaches in Elderslie in my constituency who is concerned that the directive will greatly endanger road safety.
Mr. Norris: I recognise the hon. Gentleman's concern, and that of coach operators and coach builders. We intend to be scrupulous in examining the details of the proposed directive to ensure that it is compatible with sensible construction and use regulations and will not unduly hinder the operations of responsible coach operators. I understand that the hon. Gentleman has written to me about the matter. That is excellent, and I will ensure that he receives a prompt reply to his constituent's concern.
My hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, South-West (Sir A. Grant) was right to invite us to engage in some lateral thinking and it is an invitation that I willingly accept. Several hon. Members have made suggestions on which I shall reflect seriously. When my hon. Friend said—it was a phrase that I shall use on other occasions—that we are looking for fewer bad drivers and fewer bad cars, that summed up exactly what we are trying to derive from the debate and from our current thinking.
My hon. Friend rightly said that it is a scandal that perhaps nearly one in 10 motorists may not be properly insured. His argument that an insurance certificate should be displayed on the windscreen is a serious one. There is a case, too, for an MOT test certificate to be displayed.more obviously, when appropriate. I undertake seriously.to consider the proposition.
I hope that my hon. Friend will not mind my saying that it is not the first time that I have heard the argument that insurance certificates should be placed on windscreens. However, there are factors to be taken into account such as the need to show that vehicle excise duty has been paid, clutter on the windscreen and difficulty of enforcement, for example. If I may, I will write to my hon. Friend to tell him about the recent work that we have undertaken. Perhaps I shall be able to discuss the matter with him on another occasion. He has raised a serious proposition.
My hon. Friend's point about the progressive deterioration of eyesight was extremely well made. The deterioration takes place one day at a time. It is only when circumstances such as my hon. Friend described come about that we realise that we shall not live for ever and that we are deteriorating day by day. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his contribution to the debate.
The arguments that the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston advanced about statistical analyses of convictions and prosecution policies were well made. They raise complicated matters and we must take account of issues such as a reluctance to convict and the implications of the tariff system before we take action.
I undertake to draw the hon. Gentleman's remarks to the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary because I think that they merit that referral. I am grateful to him for what he had to say.
Mr. Miller: I hope that I made it clear in my earlier remarks that we have just passed the closing date for consultation with the Law Commission. I understand that the commission, as a matter of course, will read the report of what we have to say on these issues when framing its

899
recommendations. As for the motor manslaughter charge, it would be helpful if the Minister would put his views on record.
Mr. Norris: I do not want to be drawn into a debate on that issue at this stage, for several reasons. First, we are coming to the end of our allotted time, and the matter was not raised earlier. It might be an abuse—
Mr. Miller: I raised it.
Mr. Norris: The hon. Gentleman is right. I withdraw what I so recently said. He raised the matter, but not specifically in terms of addressing the Law Commission.
Secondly, the matter is not exclusively the responsibility of the Department of Transport. It comes within the responsibilities of other ministerial colleagues. Thirdly, I would want to reflect carefully on the precise form of words that one might want to use to make a submission.
Mr. Miller: Ducking.
Mr. Norris: Those who suggest that the absence of one clear statement is ducking away from a problem tend to be the sort of people who always assume that there is a straightforward answer to all life's great and complex issues. That is invariably the wrong answer and I fear that that might well be the case here if we were to respond intemperately.
My hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire (Mr. Fabricant) raised several points. With regard to photographs on driving licences, let me make it clear that we propose no alteration to the arrangements whereby an individual may or may not carry a driving licence. As is the case now, a licence will be required to be produced in appropriate circumstances. The important point is that there is an issue about impersonation in driving tests and when specific licences, such as HGV, PSV and taxi licences, are being sought. It has been acknowledged that photographs would go a long way towards dealing with those problems. Some 85 per cent. of respondents to consultation on the proposition have already said that they believe photographs would be a great asset.
The use of cameras at pedestrian crossings is entirely.consistent with our thinking. The use of cameras in.relation to bus lane enforcement will increasingly become necessary because, as our traffic system becomes more sophisticated and, as the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North said, as police resources are stretched, we will have to consider how we can use technology to help us maintain a proper system of enforcement.
I have an important point to make about traffic lights. I am aware of the "amber flash to proceed with caution" system and the discreet left turn when the lights are at red. One of the features of the systems in the United States is that they generally work on fixed-time traffic lights whereas we tend to have vehicle-sensitive systems so that the lights change only when vehicles approach. Therefore, there would be few gains from the American system in this country.
I hope that my hon. Friend will not mind me saying that I slightly disagree with him about frustration. I fear that my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Mr. Deva) got it exactly right when he questioned why a driver who is prepared to go through a red light now—and who one presumes at least bothers to stop and look both ways first—will be less safe if he
900
drives on, perhaps without bothering to look both ways, because having seen the proceed with caution signal, he assumes that he can proceed without taking the elementary precautions.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Staffordshire for his suggestions. He did say that he did not expect everyone necessarily to agree with him, but that his comments would be thought-provoking and worth while and that they certainly were.
My hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, South (Mr. Ottaway) referred to the greatest epidemic of our time—a timely phrase. He mentioned the reissue of the "Highway Code." My hon. Friend might be interested to know that when we reissued the "Highway Code" recently after updating it, the demand from ordinary members of the public was quite extraordinary. One million copies were issued in the first month after the new "Highway Code" was issued. That illustrates the fact that my hon. Friend's point was common sense. We believe that there is merit in people reacquainting themselves with what is nowadays a more complex road safety situation than it was hitherto.
I noted what my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, South said about issuing the "Highway Code" to the 25 million drivers in this country and the many more people who should be aware of it. That would obviously be a significant exercise. However, I hope that my hon. Friend is encouraged by our experience.
My hon. Friend the Member for Croydon, South made a good point about cut-and-shut cars and we will keep that issue under review as there are some worrying aspects. However, the fact that a vehicle has previously been seriously damaged does not prevent it from being perfectly safe provided that the repair has been carried out expertly.
My hon. Friend the Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Waterson) carried on from his successful ten-minute Bill and went into some detail on the advantages of the Daylight Extra campaign. I will not repeat the point that I made. One of my colleagues was kind enough to say that I had acknowledged that there is a technical advantage which is simply undeniable in relation to road safety and I am happy to confirm that. I noted my hon. Friend's points about his scheme in relation to the A27.
My hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and.Isleworth made several worthwhile points. The cones hotline number is 0345 504030. This is a good opportunity to make one point absolutely clear. The other day, I read a wonderful article by Richard Littlejohn. It was the usual wonderful trenchant stuff with which squire Littlejohn normally regales us, saying, "It can't be any use; they have moved the cones only three times." That is the classic misapprehension of what the system is designed to do. It is designed to explain precisely why the cones are present, rather than to move them. The three occasions on which we have had to say, "Goodness, we have obviously got it wrong," were the failures of the system. The success of the system is that many people who ring the hotline receive a good response, and they acknowledge that the cones are there for a reason.
On distance-measuring technology, my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth will be pleased to know that the Prometheus project is going on in Europe, in which Jaguar is playing a part—
It being half-past Two o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.

Points of Order
2.30 pm
Mr. Gordon McMaster: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You will recall that, at the height of the cash-for-questions sleaze controversy last month, a number of Conservative Members, not least among them the Prime Minister, accused Mr. Al Fayed, the chairman of Harrods, of attempting to blackmail the Government by threatening to reveal ministerial impropriety. You will recall also that the Prime Minister referred those allegations to the legal authorities.
Your duties in the Chair this morning, Mr. Deputy Speaker, might have prevented you from hearing that the Crown Prosecution Service has stated that Mr. Al Fayed has been cleared of those allegations. In fact, according to the Crown Prosecution Service, the meeting between the Prime Minister and an intermediary did not disclose
"the commission of any criminal offence by Mr. Al Fayed"
and
"further police investigations were not warranted."
In the light of that, should not Mr. Al Fayed be given the opportunity to give evidence to the Privileges Committee, so that the truth about that squalid scandal can be revealed to the House and to the—
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Geoffrey Lofthouse): Order. That is a matter not for the Chair but for the Privileges Committee. The Chair has now ruled on it.
Mr. Dennis Skinner: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: I hope that it is a different point of order.
Mr. Skinner: It is a different point of order, because I am not going to deal with the Select Committee at all. What concerns me is that, as the charge of blackmail has now been found to be untrue and the Tory paymaster has been let off by the Crown Prosecution Service, it seems necessary for the Prime Minister to come to the House and make a statement—
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. It is the same point of order, and I have already ruled on it.
Mr. Max Madden: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Is it the same point of order?
Mr. Madden: I am afraid not, Mr. Deputy Speaker. You will know that, as a result of statements made in the House, the Prime Minister has refused to answer parliamentary questions on those matters. Is it now in order for hon. Members to table questions concerning the Department of Trade and Industry report into the House of Fraser? I should like guidance from you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, on whether questions about those matters are now permissible. As you know, they have been blocked for a considerable time. If it is possible for such questions to be tabled, I seek your guidance, as I believe that it is very important indeed that Mr. Al Fayed now has an opportunity of giving his version—
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I can deal with that point. The hon. Member for Bradford, West (Mr. Madden) has
902
been a Member for a long time. He knows that, if he supplies his questions to the Table Office, it will advise on whether they are in order.

JOINT COMMITTEE ON CONSOLIDATION, amp;c., BILLS
Ordered,
That Mr. Michael Bates be discharged from the Select Committee appointed to join with a Committee of the Lords as the Joint Committee on Consolidation, amp;c., Bills and Mr. Hartley Booth be added to the Committee.—[Mr. Conway.]

DATA PROTECTION
Ordered,
That the provisions of Standing Order No. 14 (Exempted business) shall not apply to the Motion in the name of Sir George Young relating to the salary and pension of the Data Protection Registrar.—[Mr. Conway.]

Legal Aid
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Conway.]
2.33 pm
Mr. Hartley Booth: A year ago, I was approached by a constituent whose story portrays the other side of the legal aid coin which has been much in the news and which has been roundly condemned. There is no need to repeat the well-known scandal, which was universally condemned, of some of the richest families receiving millions of pounds of legal aid. The only official reply we received was the statement that "rules are rules and are the same for rich and poor alike". Thus I understood the Lord Chancellor to explain the position in a recent Radio 4 interview. I hope that he will not respond in the same way to what I will reveal to the House today. I have every confidence that the Lord Chancellor's long tradition of equity will allow him to see the merits of the argument which I respectfully put before the House. I hope that he will change some existing rules to assist people.
The aspect of the legal aid scheme which I raise today needs urgent attention. It is illustrated by the case of my constituent, Mrs. A, who came to my surgery in Finchley. She was a teacher who had suffered an unfortunate injury at school which had been compounded by medical negligence in hospital. She had apparently been close to appointment as a head teacher, but as a result of her injuries her promising career was ended. I am told that the evidence of medical negligence in her case was quite strong, with doctors prepared to testify in her favour, and because of the loss of future earnings the damages could have been substantial. However, she was not able to claim legal aid benefit as she was just over the means threshold and her husband earned too much. Her problem was made more acute by the difficulties and costs associated with caring for a disabled dependent family member.
Thousands of people suffer from this predicament: their income is just too large for them to receive legal aid. My constituent was denied the chance to sue the perpetrators of her injuries because she received state invalidity benefit of just over £4,000 a year, which took her over the income threshold of about £7,500 per year.
The rules for calculating disposable income in order to establish eligibility for civil legal aid are set out in schedule 2 to the Legal Aid (Assessment of Resources) Regulations 1989, which is statutory instrument 1989/338. According to paragraph 5 of the statutory instrument, all applicants who are in receipt of income support are eligible for civil legal aid regardless of their capital costs. In calculating a person's disposable income, it is important to note that payments of disability living allowance, attendance allowance, constant attendance allowance and payments from the social fund are disregarded under paragraph 6. However, the same is sadly not true of payments of invalidity benefit, which count towards a person's disposable income.
My constituent's case throws up a number of anomalies that should be addressed. First, it is crazy that one arm of the state is providing benefits which prevent a member of the public from going to court when, with the help of that second arm of the state, she could gain damages to pay back the state.
904
Secondly, it is wholly anomalous and unjust that some allowances are disregarded for the purpose of means testing, but that invalidity benefit is not.
The Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department (Mr. John M. Taylor): Invalidity benefit is treated differently because it is not means-tested. It is no sign of anyone's wealth by way of income or capital; a millionaire can receive invalidity benefit. It is not means-tested and, for that reason, it is treated differently from the other benefits that my hon. Friend has mentioned.
Mr. Booth: I understand about the means testing of benefits, but to a member of the public—we are dealing with members of the public—it seems wholly inconsistent and, in administrative law terms, one aims to have consistency. The policy appears to the public to be inconsistent.
Thirdly, it is wrong for our judicial system to have rules that take no account of the merits of a particular case. This was a disabled person looking after a sick dependent child but, although some costs were allowed, the total costs of looking after that dependant could not be taken fully into consideration. It is difficult to allow discretion in our judicial system, of which the legal aid system is a part. We should be big enough to allow relevant discretion in appropriate cases of hardship.
Fourthly, the legal aid system would, under the clawback rules, ensure that any damages obtained would be used to repay the state the money granted for those very legal fees.
Fifthly, the case is one more example of the state penalising marriage. The husband's income should not have been taken into consideration. The Lord Chancellor has personally been a great crusader for marriage, so I hope that he will want to change that aspect of the rule.
Last but not least, the claim needs redress. It is a classic case where the litigant cannot appear in person—she is unwell. She cannot be expected to summon medical evidence in the witness box. The courts must be open to the likes of Mrs. A, otherwise justice is denied. It might be asked why the lady does not forgo the small amount of benefit she receives so that she can receive the legal aid she deserves. That would be a cruel suggestion because she needs that money on which to live. She cannot simply forgo that benefit.
It may be said that thousands of people are in the same position as Mrs. A, but it is not a typical case. It is an unusual and particular case which, as I have argued—although I understand my hon. Friend the Minister's comment—is inconsistent with the social security system.
The legal aid fund has received considerable attention during recent years. Indeed, the Lord Chancellor's advisory committee last year even held a seminar entitled "Reinventing Legal Aid". Criticism has been defended by his Department on the basis that it has been increasingly generous in funding law suits and it points to the fact that rises in legal aid payments form the largest increase in Government spending since 1979. Apparently the result is that more solicitors are doing legal aid work, contrary to public perception. The Lord Chancellor has announced plans for this year to increase payments by 3.8 per cent., which is almost 1.5 per cent. above inflation, while the fee income for solicitors and barristers has risen by more than 16 per cent.

905
I call on the Government again to review the workings of the legal aid scheme. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Minister who, a couple of years ago, was prepared to meet me to discuss some administrative proposals. What I suggested would have helped the administration of the legal aid system. I was grateful for the co-operation and help that I received from my hon. Friend at that stage. One proposal, for example, was to fax the relevant legal aid offices—a modern facility that, even now, is not permitted.
I call on the Lord Chancellor and my hon. Friend the Minister to reconsider and change the rule that denies constituents such as mine the ability to take their grievances to court because they are in receipt of invalidity benefit. There are other faults with the legal aid system that should be rectified. If someone such as Mrs. A ever managed to get to court, the position could well arise that the clawback would eat away every penny of benefit she had ever received. There should be a minimum amount of benefit that should never be taken away under any circumstances.
The level of contributions has been found irksome and onerous by some. A Mr. M, a chef of a cruise ship, had a negligently performed hernia operation—a case that eminently should come to court. As a result of his application for legal aid, he was asked for a contribution of £91 per month. He was unable to pay it, so the case could not go to court.
Another lady—a Mrs. N, who is a housewife—was involved in a road traffic accident. At the end of the process of trying to get legal aid, she was required to pay £49 a week, which she was unable to manage. That denied her access to the courts. It may be argued that there is no money to spend on bringing such cases to court. There would be money, if sensible and fair reforms were implemented.
In another life, when I worked in government and was charged with producing policies, I was always told," If you propose a policy, bring us some savings to pay for your expensive policy proposal." That is what I hope to do.
For hundreds of years, we have saved costs by using the simple principle of caveat emptor. Thousands of potential court cases have been avoided because the courts imposed on ordinary people and their lawyers the duty to be careful and watchful. The Government must apply the same thinking in other parts of the law.
The second largest category of legal aid bill is for boundary disputes, which are costly, time-wasting and usually caused by people who fail to pay proper attention to fencing their land. Huge savings could be found there, which could help us all and could help Mrs. A in her predicament. I hope that in time the Law Commission or the Lord Chancellor's Department will give my proposal adequate consideration—not this afternoon, as it is a big proposal.
I call for those changes for all the above reasons, but most particularly because a failure to change the rules would be administrative nonsense. It would be unfair to the taxpayer, who would stand a chance of recouping social security money, and most of all it would be unjust to the victim of negligence.
It is true that legal aid was never there for every conceivable case, but it was always there for people such as Mrs. A and I urge you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to agree that she should receive legal aid to bring her case.
2.46 pm
The Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department (Mr. John M. Taylor): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Finchley (Mr. Booth) on securing the debate and thank him for the unfailing courtesy that he has shown in our correspondence on legal aid matters. I am sorry that my hon. Friend has become concerned about the financial eligibility limits for legal aid and I hope that today's debate will go some way towards removing some of those doubts.
My hon. Friend began by mentioning some cases that have recently received considerable publicity because the recipient of legal aid was apparently wealthy. I know that he does not want me to concentrate on those, but I want to reassure him that the general problem is one that the Lord Chancellor and I have taken very seriously and we shall shortly be issuing a consultation paper. I shall ensure that my hon. Friend is sent a copy at the outset and would be delighted to receive any suggestions or comments that he may have.
I am sorry to learn of my hon. Friend's constituent's injuries and I hope that she has made as full a recovery as possible. As he is probably aware, I am prevented by the Legal Aid Act 1988 from intervening in any way in individual cases, since those applying for legal aid are entitled to their privacy. My comments on financial eligibility should not, therefore, be taken to refer to the way in which the rules were applied in particular cases and I hope instead to explain why the rules are as they are.
It may be helpful if I explain how financial eligibility for civil legal aid is calculated. Those with disposable incomes below £2,382 per annum pay no contribution. In most cases, the upper qualifying limits are £7,060 for disposable income and £6,750 for disposable capital. However, in view of the costly nature of personal injury cases, the Government consider that the limits should be higher to bring more people within the scope of the scheme. The limits for those cases are £7,780 and £8,560 respectively.
The key point is that we are talking about disposable income. People are not assessed on their wages, or even on what they take home in earnings or benefits, but on the income that they have left after a wide range of allowances have been made, including rent or mortgage and work expenses. My hon. Friend commented that there should be discretion within the legal aid system to take account of particular circumstances. The assessment officer can already make allowances at his own discretion, depending on the case.
My hon. Friend is particularly concerned about the eligibility for legal aid of those people who receive state benefits. Setting the eligibility limit is never easy and it may be inevitable that there will always be hard cases falling just outside it. However, the Government have tried to remove the most pressing difficulties. For example, in April last, the eligibility limit for green form assistance was raised by 15 per cent.—several times the rate of inflation—partly because those on the lower levels of invalidity benefit were not being covered by the scheme. However, some of those receiving larger amounts of invalidity benefit may still not be eligible for green form assistance. It would not be right to make invalidity benefit a passport to full civil legal aid as it is not

907
means-tested. It would clearly be wrong to grant legal aid to an applicant who may have significant other sources of capital or income.
My hon. Friend referred to the clawback of benefits from awards of compensation. The principle behind that is that people who receive damages for injury should not be compensated twice for any earnings that they may have lost—once in the form of state benefit and once as part of the damages award. The point that my hon. Friend has made—in effect, that if legal aid were to be extended, the recovery of benefits would be increased to the benefit of the Exchequer—is one that has been put to us before and is one that we shall think about further. However, I am bound to say that so far we have not been convinced that any extension of legal aid would, overall, result in a net increase of income to the Exchequer. In any event, the Lord Chancellor is shortly to introduce conditional fee arrangements that will provide a method of funding for those outside the legal aid limits, and I shall return to that point later.
More generally, my hon. Friend has mentioned that the income of the partner of the applicant is taken into account in the means assessment process. That provision includes not only married couples, but people who live together as if they were married. The thinking behind it is that a couple who live together will normally share their resources as well as their home. While the extent of that will vary between couples, joint income is frequently volunteered in means assessment in other areas such as mortgage requests, and is used in social security applications too.
The allowances made against expenditure in calculating eligibility for legal aid are also aggregated, so that, for example, when the partner who is not applying for legal aid is the one who pays the mortgage, the cost of that is none the less taken into account. It is also the case that, if individual means were assessed separately, it would be difficult to settle the ownership of the assets involved, which would open the way to abuse of the scheme. The means of a couple would not of course be considered together if they lived apart or there were a conflict of interest between them.
My hon. Friend considers it an injustice that, through a mechanism known as the statutory charge, money spent by the Legal Aid Board on a particular case must be repaid from any winnings—I am afraid that I must disagree. My view is that the statutory charge is fundamental to the justice of the legal aid scheme.
Mr. Booth: Does my hon. Friend accept that that was not part of my case? I was not criticising the court or the state for clawing back that money, but was arguing that it was nonsense for the state not to draw back that money when it could do so.
Mr. Taylor: In view of my hon. Friend's clarification, for which I am grateful, we may not be far apart.
I believe that the statutory charge is fundamental to the justice of the legal aid scheme. One can draw the parallel that someone paying privately must pay his lawyers as he goes along. If, at the end of the case, costs are awarded in his favour but his opponent does not pay up, he is obliged to pay his solicitor himself. After all, the solicitor has done the work. The effect of the statutory charge is to ensure that a legally aided client finds himself in the same position. If it did not exist, the legally aided client would in fact be getting a considerable bonus from the
908
state, which is not available to those paying privately. Just as the private client must deduct the possible cost of the action from the potential winnings when deciding whether the litigation is worth it, so must the person receiving legal aid.
The aim of legal aid is, as far as possible, to prevent lack of funds from becoming an insuperable obstacle to access to the law. That is not easy. Those who are unable to obtain legal aid must consider how important the matter is to them. Everyone, in everyday life, must balance his priorities and decide what to do with the money he has and what, perhaps reluctantly, he must relinquish. I can see no reason why taking legal advice or legal action should be immune from such discipline.
Legal aid eligibility is by necessity determined by set financial limits. As my hon. Friend is aware, there are many calls on public funds to widen the proportion of people or types of case eligible for legal aid and, more widely, in many other aspects of our lives. The public purse is not bottomless and the current eligibility limits are therefore determined against a background of competing priorities for Government expenditure. I believe, however, that the scheme is still a generous one.
My hon. Friend may also be interested to know that the Lord Chancellor will shortly be implementing the conditional fee provisions of section 58 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. That will allow lawyers to take cases on a "no win, no fee" basis, with the lawyer receiving an enhanced fee if the case is successful. Those arrangements will be available for personal injury cases, and will provide another means of financing legal proceedings for those who are ineligible for legal aid.
My hon. Friend also criticised the increase in legal aid fee income to the legal profession. The Lord Chancellor has long felt the need to secure better control in this sector and has progressively introduced prescribed hourly rates, and he is keen to extend standard fees still further.
My hon. Friend may also be aware that my Department has been engaged in a fundamental review of publicly funded legal service. It has been examining the principles behind the operation of the scheme and what it is that we are trying to achieve through legal aid. It will build on a number of recent initiatives such as franchising. We are likely to be seeking views on the proposals emerging from the review in the early part of next year.
We are also looking at the problem from a broader perspective. Lord Woolf is conducting a review of procedure in the civil courts, which was announced by the Lord Chancellor on 28 March, and it is to last two years. Lord Woolf s objective is to ensure that the civil justice system provides remedies that people can afford, within a reasonable time. In particular, he is looking at ways of making costs in smaller cases proportionate to the amount in dispute.
While I do not accept all the criticisms my hon. Friend has made of the legal aid scheme, I hope I have at least made clear the reasons behind various aspects of it. I hope also that he is reassured that some of the problems most commonly associated with the scheme are being re-examined from first principles.
Question put and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at two minutes to Three o'clock.

LORD CHANCELLOR'S DEPARTMENT

  Children Act
  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what guidelines have been issued to the judiciary and family courts on section 8 orders of the Children Act 1989; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  Guidelines are available to the judiciary and family courts in a range of authoritative

  1984–85

  1985–86

  1986–87

  1987–88

  1988–89

  1989–90

  1990–91

  1991–92

  1992–93

  1993–94

  271

  317

  360

  427

  474

  566

  683

  906

  1,093

  1,210

  It is estimated that the number of legal aid acts of assistance will grow to more than 4 million over the next three years.

TRANSPORT

  Bus Services (London)
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what action he proposes to take concerning the waiting times and reliability of bus services in London.

  Mr. Norris
  We are taking action in a number of areas. The London bus passengers charter incorporates tough quality of service targets which we set London Transport, covering areas such as waiting times and reliability of bus services. The charter provides a clear framework for bus operators to improve performance by focusing on the needs and views of their customers.

  Privatisation of the London Transport bus operating companies will bring the innovation and market responsiveness of the private sector to the provision of all London's bus services. Competitive tendering of London Transport's bus routes will ensure that services are provided as efficiently and cost effectively as possible.

  We will continue to support the development of a wide range of bus priority measures, with the aim of improving bus flows and making the bus a more attractive option for passengers. London Transport has installed electronic countdown signs on a number of London bus routes showing when to expect the next bus. The New Roads and Streetworks Act 1991 provides for the establishment of street works registers, which will enable London Transport to devise the most effective measures to reduce the impact of essential roadworks on bus services.

  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will publish a list of average waiting times
  376
  commentaries on the Children Act, which will include section 8 in the form of law reports on decided cases and, notably, the Children Act 1989 guidance and regulations, published by HMSO. In addition, in its last report, the Children Act advisory committee highlighted important cases, which included section 8 cases. Copies of the report are sent to all family judiciary.

  Legal Aid
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department when he will issue the consultation paper setting out proposals for change to the legal aid system; if he will alter the legal aid means of assessment; how much public money has been granted in criminal and civil cases in each of the last 10 years to applicants in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement on the cases for each of the next three years.

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  A consultation paper on eligibility for legal aid will be issued shortly that will canvass a number of proposals for change. The legal aid cost of civil and criminal cases, including the cost of legal advice and assistance, in each of the last 10 years, in £ million, was as follows:

  for a bus in each of the London boroughs; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Norris
  The information is as follows. It covers performance in quarter 2 1994–95, 26 June–17 September 1994:

  Boroughs

  Average Actual Waiting Time (mins)

  Barking and Dagenham

  7.04

  Barnet

  6.44

  Bexley

  7.40

  Brent

  6.03

  Bromley

  7.01

  Camden

  6.13

  City

  6.95

  Croydon

  6.40

  Ealing

  6.19

  Enfield

  5.40

  Greenwich

  7.48

  Hackney

  6.03

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  6.75

  Haringey

  5.95

  Harrow

  7.01

  Havering

  6.56

  Hillingdon

  6.13

  Hounslow

  6.56

  Islington

  6.12

  Kensington and Chelsea

  6.59

  Kingston

  6.77

  Lambeth

  6.88

  Lewisham

  6.97

  Merton

  8.02

  Newham

  7.06

  Redbridge

  6.95

  Richmond

  6.36

  Southwark

  6.87

  Sutton

  7.02

  Tower Hamlets

  6.87

  Waltham Forest

  7.00

  Wandsworth

  7.56

  Westminster

  6.22

  377
  Those figures relate only to high frequency services, for which a timetable is not generally published and most of which have weekday peak frequencies of five buses per hour or more.

  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will publish for each London borough the percentage chance of waiting 10 to 30 minutes for a bus; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Norris
  Information on waiting times is as follows. It covers performance in quarter 2 1994–95, 26 June–17 September 1994:

  Chance of Waiting Per cent.

  Boroughs

  Less than 10 minutes

  10–20 minutes

  20–30

  Over 30 minutes

  Barking and Dagenham

  75.12

  21.80

  2.59

  0.49

  Barnet

  79.38

  17.94

  2.22

  0.46

  Bexley

  73.27

  22.23

  3.57

  0.83

  Brent

  80.75

  16.76

  2.12

  0.37

  Bromley

  75.04

  21.00

  3.20

  0.77

  Camden

  80.07

  17.03

  2.40

  0.50

  City

  75.28

  20.34

  3.38

  1.00

  Croydon

  78.58

  18.18

  2.72

  0.52

  Ealing

  80.43

  17.18

  2.03

  0.36

  Enfield

  85.60

  13.02

  1.22

  0.16

  Greenwich

  71.63

  23.08

  3.96

  1.03

  Hackney

  80.79

  16.47

  2.23

  0.51

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  76.41

  19.49

  3.23

  0.87

  Haringey

  82.39

  15.48

  1.72

  0.40

  Harrow

  74.58

  22.41

  2.71

  0.30

  Havering

  78.55

  19.02

  1.98

  0.45

  Hillingdon

  80.70

  17.18

  1.90

  0.23

  Hounslow

  78.20

  18.13

  3.07

  0.60

  Islington

  80.31

  16.77

  2.41

  0.51

  Kensington and Chelsea

  77.11

  18.48

  3.44

  0.97

  Kingston

  77.15

  19.61

  2.79

  0.46

  Lambeth

  75.50

  19.62

  3.83

  1.05

  Lewisham

  74.70

  21.14

  3.38

  0.78

  Merton

  68.77

  24.53

  5.33

  1.37

  Newham

  74.94

  21.32

  2.96

  0.79

  Redbridge

  75.72

  20.98

  2.69

  0.62

  Richmond

  79.08

  17.69

  2.74

  0.50

  Southwark

  75.35

  20.22

  3.54

  0.89

  Sutton

  74.73

  21.90

  2.86

  0.51

  Tower Hamlets

  75.63

  20.37

  3.15

  0.85

  Waltham Forest

  75.92

  20.87

  2.58

  0.62

  Wandsworth

  71.72

  22.23

  4.58

  1.47

  Westminster

  79.50

  16.96

  2.82

  0.73

  This information relates to high frequency services, for which a timetable is not generally published, and most of which have weekday peak frequencies of five buses per hour or more.

  Airports
  Mr. William O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the provision of assistance to United Kingdom airports under the plans for the trans-European network.

  Mr. Norris
  The Commission proposal for a trans-European transport network and the related 378
  financing proposal are still under discussion and are not expected to be agreed until the middle of next year.

  Foreign Lorries
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which Governments intend to, or already have, imposed transit taxes on British trucks using their roads; at what rates; what representations he has made(a) to the Governments concerned and (b) to the EEC Commission to stop such taxes; and whether he intends to impose similar taxes on foreign lorries using United Kingdom roads.

  Mr. Norris
  Within the European Union Germany, Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg and the Netherlands intend to introduce in 1995 a joint scheme for charging goods vehicles over 12 tonnes gross weight for the use of any part of the motorway network in those countries. The scheme will apply to all such vehicles, without discrimination, including those registered in those five countries. An annual permit will cost 1,250 ecu, approximately £980, for vehicles with four or more axles and 750 ecu, approximately £590, for vehicles with two or three axles. Permits will also be available for a month, a week or a day at roughly proportional rates. The scheme is permitted under Council directive 93/89/EEC on the taxation and charging of heavy goods vehicles. The principles of the scheme and the rates to be charged were fully discussed by the Transport Council before it adopted the directive.

  On joining the Union Austria will adapt the road charging scheme it has operated for heavy goods vehicles for many years. Vehicles are charged per tonne of payload per kilometre travelled on Austrian roads up to a maximum of 300 schillings—approximately £17.50—per tonne of payload per month. Austria will make phased reductions in its charges over two years to align them with the maximum permitted in the directive.

  Subject to identifying suitable technology, we intend to introduce a system of electronic motorway tolling in Britain for all vehicles, which would apply to foreign as well as British registered vehicles.

  Mr. William O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will publish a report on the European Union's trans-European transport network listing the United Kingdom airports involved in the Community connecting points.

  Mr. Norris
  The European Commission presented a proposal for the development of a trans-European transport network at the Transport Council on 18 April 1994. The proposal covers general principles and the components of the network. The trans-European airport network would comprise airports of common interest situated within the territory of the Community which are open to commercial air traffic and which comply with specified criteria. On the basis of these criteria, airports would be grouped into three categories according to their function in the network. The Community connecting points would be the largest airports, whose main function is described in the proposal as linking the Community to the rest of the world. Negotiations on the airports network are not yet complete.
  379
  Under the criteria proposed by the European Commission, the United Kingdom airports qualifying as Community connecting points, on the basis of 1993 traffic levels, would be the London airport system—Gatwick, Heathrow and Stansted—and Manchester and Glasgow airports.

  Stations (Safety)
  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list all stations on British Rail and former British Rail networks and London Underground which are not staffed for any period when they are open to the public; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Watts
  No London Underground stations are planned to be unstaffed during the traffic day. The information requested in respect of British Rail and former British Rail networks is not held centrally and is therefore not readily available.

  I will write to the hon. Member.

  Mr. Austin-Walker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many people were the victims of assault on(a) a Network SouthEast train, (b) a Network SouthEast station, (c) a British Rail station in Greater London and (d) a British Rail train in Greater London for each year from 1979; and how many in each year were women.

  Mr. Watts
  The former Network SouthEast operational area fell within two of the British Transport Police's operational areas—London north and London south. The tables show reported crime on British Rail and the London Underground for London north and London south for the period 1 April 1992 to 31 March 1994. Comparable information before April 1992 is not readily available in the format requested and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  All Crimes

  Year

  Month

  London (North)

  London (South)

  1992

  (from April)

  12,570

  13,926

  1993

  15,214

  18,481

  1994

  (to March)

  3,536

  4,218

  1992

  April

  1,207

  1,196

  (iii),(iv): Violent Crimes

  London North

  Offence

  1992 (April–December)

  1993

  1994 (January–March)

  Staff

  Public

  Staff

  Public

  Staff

  Public

  Attempted murder

  —

  1

  —

  1

  —

  —

  Grievous bodily harm

  1

  12

  8

  19

  2

  6

  Wounding

  5

  19

  6

  28

  2

  52

  Actual bodily harm

  45

  136

  59

  197

  —

  —

  Common assault

  16

  25

  28

  58

  8

  20

  Assault on Police

  17

  —

  24

  —

  3

  —

  Other

  1

  9

  3

  3

  —

  1

  380

  All Crimes

  Year

  Month

  London (North)

  London (South)

  May

  1,341

  1,317

  June

  1,376

  1,528

  July

  1,439

  1,695

  August

  1,422

  1,656

  September

  1,481

  1,636

  October

  1,654

  1,726

  November

  1,355

  1,647

  December

  1,292

  1,510

  1993

  January

  1,329

  1,538

  February

  1,248

  1,541

  March

  1,511

  1,569

  April

  1,262

  1,435

  May

  1,142

  1,534

  June

  1,380

  1,513

  July

  1,403

  1,626

  August

  1,228

  1,584

  September

  1,279

  1,587

  October

  1,272

  1,493

  November

  1,178

  1,547

  December

  982

  1,453

  1994

  January

  1,040

  1,360

  February

  1,052

  1,236

  March

  1,434

  1,622

  (i),(ii): Sexual Offences

  London North

  Offence

  1992 (April–December)

  1993

  1994 (January–March)

  Rape

  1

  2

  1

  Indecent assault

  44

  57

  7

  Indecent exposure

  60

  101

  20

  Other

  7

  16

  8

  London South

  Offence

  1992(April–December)

  1993

  1994(January–March)

  Rape

  1

  3

  2

  Indecent assault

  69

  116

  15

  Indecent exposure

  131

  120

  37

  Other

  41

  97

  16

  381

  London South

  Offence

  1992 (April–December)

  1993

  1994 (January–March)

  Staff

  Public

  Staff

  Public

  Staff

  Public

  Attempted murder

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  1

  Manslaughter

  —

  1

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Grievous bodily harm

  1

  16

  2

  22

  —

  6

  Wounding

  3

  16

  3

  19

  —

  8

  Actual bodily harm

  74

  229

  85

  266

  22

  99

  Common assault

  36

  71

  47

  117

  23

  26

  Assault on Police

  7

  —

  25

  —

  8

  —

  Other

  2

  6

  1

  15

  1

  6

  (v):Robberies

  London North

  Offence

  1992 (April–December)

  1993

  1994 (January–March)

  Staff

  Public

  Staff

  Public

  Staff

  Public

  Robbery

  6

  159

  11

  302

  2

  100

  Assault with intent to rob

  —

  19

  1

  24

  —

  5

  London South

  Offence

  1992 (April–December)

  1993

  1994 (January–March)

  Staff

  Public

  Staff

  Public

  Staff

  Public

  Robbery

  5

  381

  26

  495

  10

  126

  Assault with intent to rob

  1

  4

  2

  17

  1

  21

  Dr. Spink
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when the planned 25 type 317 sliding door trains, or other replacement trains, will be available for service on the London, Tilbury and Southend line.

  Mr. Watts
  It is intended that replacement trains for the London, Tilbury and Southend line will become available following the entry into service of the new Networker trains currently on order under the £150 million leasing concession authorised last year. The timing of entry into service depends on detailed programming of associated infrastructure works.

  Trains (First Aid)
  Sir David Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what information he has on the proportion of British Rail trains carrying first aid kits; and if he will take steps to secure the provision for such kits in all trains in the future.

  Mr. Watts
  It is a requirement of railway group standards that all passenger trains carry first aid kits as part of their standard safety equipment. On freight trains, the crew are issued with personal first aid kits.

  East London River Crossings
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if, as part of his evaluation of possible new east London Thames crossings, he will obtain and publish estimates of the cost of(a) adding a single track of the docklands light railway to the proposed east London river crossing between Beckton and Thamesmead and (b) a singletrack tunnel for the docklands light railway on a similar alignment to the proposed road bridge.
  382
  Mr. Norris
  It would be for the proposer of any such schemes to make their estimates available.

  Central Line
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement about the causes of the near miss on the Central line on Saturday 8 October between Leytonstone and Stratford.

  Mr. Norris
  There was no near miss incident on the Central line between Leytonstone and Stratford on 8 October 1994.

  MV Derbyshire
  Ms Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport under which provisions of which Merchant Shipping Acts he has decided to delay publication of the marine accident investigation branch's most recent investigation into the loss of MV Derbyshire; when the marine accident investigation branch completed its report; and when he expects to publish the latest report.

  Mr. Norris
  No investigation into the loss of MV Derbyshire has been carried out by the Marine Accident Investigation Branch.

  Under the provision of section 33(7) of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988, the chief inspector of marine accidents was requested by my right hon. Friend to review the sonar and video material provided by the International Transport Workers Federation. The chief inspector expects to submit his findings and advice by the end of November, following which my right hon. Friend will announce what further action he intends to take.

ENVIRONMENT

  Homelessness
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) if he will publish the most recent available figures for outcomes from local authority inquiries in Great Britain under the homelessness legislation.

  (2) if he will publish the most recent figures for the number of homeless households in Great Britain, found accommodation by local authorities, analysed by priority need category.

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  The latest available information on homeless households dealt with by local authorities in England is for the quarter ending June 1994. During the quarter, notifications of completed inquiries were issued in 67,880 cases. Of these, 30,680 households were accepted for permanent rehousing, 29,680 of whom were in priority need; 16,150 households were found to be homeless but not in priority need and were given advice and assistance; 19,940 households were found not be homeless; and 1,110 households were found to be intentionally homeless.

  The number of households accepted for permanent rehousing in each of the priority need categories were as follows:-

  Household with dependent child(ren)

  17,420

  Household member pregnant

  3,440

  Household member vulnerable:

  Old age

  1,540

  Physical handicap

  1,630

  Mental illness

  1,680

  Young

  960

  Domestic violence

  1,740

  Other

  1,010

  Homeless in emergency

  260

  Total accepted and in priority need

  29,680

  For information about Wales and Scotland I refer the hon. Member to my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Wales and for Scotland.

  Special Advisers
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement concerning the cost to public funds of employing ministerial special advisers in his Department.

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  The Department employs four special advisers. Salaries for special advisers are negotiated individually in relation to their previous earnings and are confidential. There are, however, normally paid on a special adviser's salary spine of 34 points, ranging from £19,503 to £67,609. Appointments are non-pensionable, and the salary reflects this.

  Radioactive Wastes
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he received a copy of the report on the disposal of radioactive wastes in deep repositories prepared by the Royal Society; and what plans he has to respond to the report's recommendations.
  384
  Mr. Atkins
  The Department obtained a copy of the report on its day of publication and is considering its contents. Since the report was not made to Government, we do not propose to issue a response.

  Damping Grant
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what representations he has received about his Department's proposal to withdraw damping grant from London local authorities; if he will list the impact of such a proposal for each London local authority in(a) total cash terms and (b) the amount necessary to add to council tax bills equivalent to the amounts withdrawn; and if he will make a statement about his intentions.

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  We have received a number of representations from London local authorities on future plans for payment of SSA reduction grant. My right hon. Friend will announce his proposals for SSA reduction grant for 1995–96 very shortly as part of his statement on the local government finance settlement for England.

  Single Regeneration Budget
  Mr. Robert Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what arrangement she has made to monitor educational spending on different ethnic groups arising from the single regeneration budget.

  Mr. Curry
  I have been asked to reply.

  We shall expect adequate monitoring arrangements to be put in place to ensure that those sections of the community intended to benefit from SRB-supported projects do so.

  Clinical Waste
  Mr. Jon Owen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what advice he has given to manufacturers of women's sanitary products on the use of plastics in these products;

  (2) If he intends to issue guidelines to manufacturers of women's sanitary products on the use of plastics in these products;

  (3) If his Department has investigated the impact of the use of plastics in the manufacture of sanitary products upon marine pollution;

  (4) What assessment he has made of the extent of the marine pollution problem caused by the use of plastics in women's sanitary products;

  (5) If he will hold talks with representatives of water authorities over the use of plastics in women's sanitary products.

  (6) what measures his Department has taken to encourage women to bag and bin sanitary products rather than dispose of such products through the sewerage system.

  Mr. Atkins
  Discussions have been held with the Association of Sanitary Protection Manufacturers, the sewerage undertakers and other interested parties on ways to reduce the environmental problems posed by disposal of these products through the sewerage system. Product design, instructions to consumers on the methods of disposal and improvements to sewerage systems have been discussed. The provision of treatment for all significant discharges of sewage to the sea is expected to bring a major reduction of the problem. The Department
  385

  supports action to persuade consumers to dispose of used products in ways which respect the environment, and is encouraging a national "bag it, bin it" campaign, which is being developed by the water industry. The need for up-to-date and accurate information for the public on issues of this sort will also be addressed through the Government's "Going for Green" initiative.

  Mr. Jon Owen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) if he has considered declassifying women's sanitary products and nappies as clinical waste.

  (2) what considerations apply to the disposal of women's sanitary products (a) via the sewerage system and (b) in household waste; what advice his Department issues on the subject; and if he will make a statement.

  (3) if he will review the list of objects classified as clinical waste;

  (4) if he has considered the practical problems caused by the classification of sanitary products and nappies as clinical waste.

  Mr. Atkins
  Clinical waste is now defined in the Controlled Waste Regulations 1992. Guidance on what may fall within the definition of clinical waste is given in waste management paper 25. This guidance has been reviewed and a draft of revised guidance was issued for consultation in August last year.

  The Department considers that small quantities of sanitary waste from healthy households are non-hazardous and do not need to be dealt with in the same way as, for example, wastes from hospitals. The revised edition of waste management paper 25, to be published shortly, will urge a pragmatic approach to be taken by the regulatory authorities to this controlled waste stream. It will make it clear that disposal with normal household waste, if securely wrapped, can be an acceptable option.

  The Department supports action to persuade consumers to dispose of used products in ways that respect the environment and is encouraging a national "bag it, bin it" campaign being developed by the water industry.

  Humberside
  Mr. Michael Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he expects to lay the orders relating to the abolition of the county of Humberside.

  Mr. Curry
  We expect the order will be ready to be laid in the early new year.

  Timberwolf Crossbreed Dogs
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, pursuant to his answer of 21 November,Official Report, column 14, how many timberwolf crossbreed dogs are rgistered under the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976.

  Mr. Atkins
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer that I gave him on 22 November,Official Report, column 66.

  County Hall
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what information he has concerning the proposal from the Shirayama Shukosan Company to convert County hall, London SE1, into a Pacific-Asia centre; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  None, apart from what has been reported in the news media.
  386
  Mr. Tony Banks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will call in the original planning consent secured by the Shirayama Shukosan Company to convert County hall, London SE1; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  There are no powers to call in a planning application once consent has been granted. In the case of County hall, consents were granted after a public inquiry following planning appeals to my right hon. Friend.

  New Towns
  Mr. Whittingdale
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment who is to be the new chairman of the Commission for the New Towns.

  Mr. Gummer
  I am pleased to announce that I have appointed Dr. John Bradfield CBE as the new chairman of the Commission for the New Towns, with effect from 1 February 1995. In the meantime, Sir Neil Shields will remain as chairman until 31 January 1995.

  I am delighted that Dr. Bradfield has accepted this appointment, and I am looking forward to working with him as CNT chairman. I am sure he will bring a great deal of energy and expertise to the job of completing the new towns programme.

  At the same time I would like to pay warm tribute to Sir Neil Shields who has brought outstanding skills of leadership and diplomacy to his 13 years as chairman of the commission. Those years have seen enormous changes as the new town development corporations have been wound up and the sale of assets has gained momentum. Sir Neil has transformed the commission and coped with all these changes magnificently, while notching up a significant number of achievements for the new towns movement and building a strong base for the future.

  I would also like to pay tribute to Lord Finsberg. His role in the Council of Europe and the West European Union has restricted what he can do for CNT but his commitment to its work has been most important, and I am very pleased that he is prepared to continue as deputy chairman of the commission, thus providing the continuity which is so important at this time of significant change.

EMPLOYMENT

  Employment Schemes
  Sir Ralph Howell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what is the average payment made to providers in(a) North Norfolk Action, (b) Workstart and (c) all other similar schemes; and what was the total amount paid to all providers in the last year for which figures are available.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The Employment Department does not collect information centrally on the number of programme providers and the amounts paid to each of them. The fee paid to the providers per place per week in 1994–95 is:

  a) for North Norfolk Action, £52

  b) for Community Action, £40

  The total amount paid to all providers in 1993–94 was:

  a) for North Norfolk Action, £215,840

  b) for Community Action , £5.6 million

  387
  As community action began in July 1993, the figure does not represent the payments for a complete year.

  Workstart is a scheme designed to encourage employers to recruit long-term unemployed people. It pays employers £60 a week per recruit for the first six months and £30 per week for the second six. In 1993–94, £206,397 was paid to employers.

  Youth Training
  Mr. Chidgey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many 16 to 18-year-olds receive two days or more of quality training as a percentage of that age group.

  Mr. Paice
  Estimates from the spring 1994 labour force survey for Great Britain show that 76 per cent. of those aged 16 to 18 were in full-time education, on a Government employment or training programme or doing a recognised trade apprenticeship. Quality assurance procedures are in place for all Government training programmes funded by the Department but information on the quality of other training is not available.

  Special Advisers
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement concerning the cost to public funds of employing ministerial special advisers in his Department.

  Miss. Widdecombe
  The Department employs one special adviser.

  Salaries for special advisers are negotiated individually in relation to their previous earnings and are confidential. They are, however, normally paid on a special adviser's salary spine of 34 points, ranging from £19,503 to £67,609. Appointments are non-pensionable and the salary spine reflects this.

  Jobseeker's Allowance
  Mr. McCartney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment whether, under the proposed jobseeker's allowance, an unemployed claimant will be entitled, without incurring a payment sanction, to(a) decline a job offer without showing good cause where the hours of work would be less than 24 hours per week and (b) whether it will be a good cause for turning down a job offer where (i) the travelling time is excessive or (ii) the work-based expenses a person would incur would represent an unreasonably high proportion of their wages; and if he will make a statement.

  Miss Widdecombe
  These matters are still under consideration.

  Mr. McCartney
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if the jobseeker's allowance will be made available to all of those actively seeking work or training, including those under 18 years of age.

  Miss Widdecombe
  Our proposals for the jobseeker's allowance are that, as now, unemployed people must seek work actively in order to receive benefit.

  All 16 and 17-year-olds are guaranteed a suitable youth training place and most young people under 18 are, therefore, excluded from benefit. These arrangements will continue when jobseeker's allowance is introduced.

  Those 16 and 17-year olds required to be available for work and youth training who fall into specified categories
  388
  or who are at risk of unavoidable severe hardship will be paid within the structure of the jobseeker's allowance.

  Work Directives
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what directives are expected to be issued by the European Commission over the next six months which effect rights and conditions at work; and when they are due to be published.

  Miss Widdecombe
  The European Commission's recent White Paper on the future of European social policy states that a new work programme will be presented during 1995 following consultations on the White Paper's proposals. It is not yet known whether draft directives affecting rights and conditions at work will form part of that work programme, and the White Paper makes it clear that there is no consensus between member states about the need for further legislation on labour standards at European level.

  Ministerial Meetings
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment on what dates in the next 12 months he expects to meet other European employment Ministers; under what auspices; and what subjects are likely to be discussed.

  Miss Widdecombe
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I will meet other European employment Ministers in Brussels at the forthcoming Social Affairs Council on 6 December. There will be further Council meetings over the next 12 months under the French and Spanish presidencies and we anticipate a range of bilateral contacts with out opposite numbers. These discussions will cover a range of employment and social affairs issues.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

  Brendan Smyth
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Attorney-General (1) what reasons for the delay in extraditing Brendan Smyth were advanced by officials of the Irish Attorney-General's office during the contacts his officials had with them on 20 September 1993;

  (2) what reasons for the delay in extraditing Brendan Smyth were advanced by officials of the Irish Attorney-General's office during the contacts his officials had with them on 18 November 1993

  (3) what reasons for the delay in extraditing Brendan Smyth were advanced by the Irish Attorney-General's, office during the contacts his officials had with them on 14 October 1993;

  (4) what reasons for the delay in extraditing Brendan Smyth were advanced by officials of the Irish Attorney-General's office during the contacts his officials had with them on 6 December 1993;

  (5) if during their contacts with officials of the Irish Attorney-General's office on 20 September 1993, his officials made a specific request for the early extradition of Brendan Smyth;

  (6) if during their contacts with officials of the Irish Attorney-General's office on 14 October 1993, his

  389
  officials made a specific request for the early extradition of Brendan Smyth;

  (7) if during their contacts with officials of the Irish Attorney-General's office on 18 November 1993, his officials made a specific request for the early extradition of Brendan Smyth;

  (8) if during their contacts with officials of the Irish Attorney-General's office on 6 December 1993, his officials made a specific request for the early extradition of Brendan Smyth.

  The Attorney-General
  It is not customary to divulge dialogue on departmental business between United Kingdom officials and those of a foreign Administration.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Attorney-General what consideration he gave to interceding personally with the Irish Attorney-General when it became clear that the extradition request, in respect of Brendan Smyth, made by the Royal Ulster Constabulary in April 1993 was not being responded to positively by the office of the Irish Attorney-General; and if he will make a statement.

  The Attorney-General
  I consider that the contacts made by my officials with officials of the Irish Attorney-General's office, the dates of which have already been supplied to the hon. Member, were appropriate to the circumstances of the case.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Attorney-General on which date in 1992 the first approach was made to the Garda or the office of the Irish Attorney-General by the RUC or his office about the possible extradition of Brendan Smyth.

  The Attorney-General
  I am not aware of any such approach in 1992.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Attorney-General who intimated to his office, and when, that Brendan Smyth was likely on his own volition to surrender himself to the authorities in Northern Ireland.

  The Attorney-General
  The likelihood was intimated by his solicitor to the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland towards the end of November 1993, and that information was passed to officials of my Department on 29 November 1993.

NATIONAL HERITAGE

  Next Steps Agencies
  Mr. Kaufman
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will list the salary and other

  Type of grant/loan regime

  Grant/loan

  Eligibility

  Football Trust

  Major Projects Scheme (Capital projects to meet the recommendations of the Taylor Report)

  Grant

  FA Premier League, Football League, Scottish Football League clubs, and the National Stadia.

  Safety Scheme (Capital projects to meet local authority safety certification requirements) eg. CCTV, Floodlighting, PA Systems.

  GrantFA Premier League, Football League, and Scottish Football League clubs.

  Ground Improvements Scheme eg. Toilets, Family Facilities, Facilities for People with Disabilities.

  Grant

  FA Premier League, Football League, and Scottish Football League clubs.

  Transport Improvements Scheme

  Grant

  FA Premier League, Football League, and Scottish Football League clubs.

  Police Charges and Stewarding

  Grant

  Football League, Scottish Football League, and GM Vauxhall Conference clubs.

  390
  emoluments of the civil servant who did the work of, or work comparable to that of, the chief executive of each next steps agency established by his Department before the agency was established.

  Mr. Sproat
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: Prior to the establishment of the agencies, no single posts were responsible for the duties now carried out by the individual chief executives. Direct comparisons are not therefore possible. The details of the grades and staff involved and their salaries are as follows:
  Historic Royal Palaces (established 1 October 1989):
  Work previously occupied part of the duties of a Grade 3 office (salary at 1 October 1989: £40,900 plus £2,000 London bonus), and part of the duties of a Grade 5 officer (salary at 1 October 1989: £33,991).
  The Royal Parks (established 1 April 1993):
  Work previously occupied one full time Grade 6 officer (salary at 1 April 1993: £44,390) and part of the duties of a Grade 5 officer (salary at 1 April 1993: £49,790)

  All salary figures quoted are the scale maxima for London, but exclude any performance pay. It is not possible to estimate the amount of time spent on agency business by those officers only spending part of their time on it.

  In addition to the posts detailed above, a small amount of the time of a grade 2 officer and the Permanent Secretary would also have been taken up with matters now dealt with by the chief executive.

  Sports Stadiums
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will list the grants and loans currently available for the erection and development of sports stadiums for Football Association and other sports grounds.

  Mr. Sproat
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: Government funds for the erection and development of sports stadiums are mainly channelled through the Football Trust for Football, and the Foundation for Sport and the Arts elsewhere. In addition, Sportsmatch, the Governments's business sponsorship incentive scheme for sport, can award pound-for-pound matching funding for new or increased sponsorship of capital schemes aimed at grass roots sports, including sports grounds. The Sports Council may from time to time make grants towards capital projects at sports grounds. The council may also make interest-fee loans of up to £10,000 to assist in the provision of new or improved sports facilities or social amenities.

  A table detailing the various grant and loan regimes administered by these bodies follows;
  391

  Type of grant/loan regime

  Grant/loan

  Eligibility

  FA Contribution Account (Capital projects associated with; staging Euro '96, meeting the recommendations of the Taylor Report, and encouraging the development of the grassroots game)

  Grant

  FA Premier League, and Football League clubs.

  Scottish FA Contribution Account (Capital projects associated with meeting the recommendations of the Taylor Report, and encouraging the development of the grassroots game)

  Grant

  Scottish Football League clubs.

  FA Premier League Grant Scheme (Capital projects to meet either; local authority safety certification requirements, the recommendations of the Taylor Report, or ground grading criteria)

  Grant

  FA Premier League clubs.

  FA Premier League Loan Scheme (Capital projects to meet local authority safety certification requirements.

  Loan

  FA Premier League clubs.

  Football League and Scottish Football League loan scheme (Capital projects to meet the recommendations of the Taylor Report)

  LoanFootball League and Scottish Football League clubs.

  GM Vauxhall Conference Scheme (Capital projects to meet local authority safety certification requirements).

  Grant

  GM Vauxhall Conference clubs.

  Pyramid Safety Scheme (Capital projects to meet local authority safety certification requirements).

  Grant

  Non-League Football clubs (except GM Vauxhall Conference).

  Foundation for Sport and the Arts

  Capital and Revenue sports schemes

  Grant

  All sports grounds, except football

  Sportsmatch

  Capital and Revenue grassroots sports schemes, matching funds secured from business sponsorship.

  Grant

  Grassroots sports organisations.

  The Sports Council

  Capital Projects at sports grounds.

  Grant

  All sports grounds.

  Sports Facilities/Social Amenities

  Loan

  AH sports grounds.

EDUCATION

  Student Loans
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if she will issue guidelines to colleges and universities to ensure that no such establishment shall withhold or delay the issuing of an achieved diploma or certificate until a student loan has been repaid; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Boswell
  My right hon. Friend does not intend to issue such guidelines. College and university regulations covering the issue of academic awards are for institutions to determine.

  Exclusions
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if she will list for the last school year the number of exclusions from schools in each local authority area together with a summary of the principal reasons for such exclusions if available.

  Mr. Forth
  This information is not available centrally. Reports on maintained schools published by Ofsted do, however, include details of the number of exclusions in the 12 months preceding the school's inspection.

  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans she has to publish data on school exclusions.
  392
  Mr. Forth
  Reports on maintained schools published by Ofsted include information about exclusions in the 12 months preceding the school's inspection. My right hon. Friend is considering whether there is a need to supplement that information with any further published data on school exclusions.

  Student Maintenance Awards
  Mr. Bryan Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what information she has regarding the comparative levels of Government spending per student or otherwise on student maintenance awards, excluding the payment of tuition fees, in each of the member states of the European Union.

  Mr. Boswell
  Systems of financial support for students undertaking higher education courses vary widely across the EU, and the information requested is not available in a comparable form. The guide "The Main Systems of Financial Assistance for Students in Higher Education in the European Community", published by EURYDICE, provides a useful summary of the system in each member state. Copies were placed in the Library earlier this year.

  Student Loans Company
  Mr. Bryan Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what is the current level of the United Kingdom grant-in-aid for the running costs of the Student Loans Company Ltd.
  393
  Mr. Boswell
  Provision in the Supply estimates for the running costs of the Student Loans Company is £19–392 million for the financial year 1994–95.

  Mr. Bryan Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many representations she has received in the current academic year regarding delays in the processing of applications for student loans by the Student Loans Company Ltd.

  Mr. Boswell
  My right hon. Friend has received three letters about delays in the processing of loans. The Department has also received a number of telephone calls from both students and higher education institutions.

  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether the Student Loans Company is on target for repayments in 1994–95.

  Mr. Boswell
  The Student Loans Company has been set a target of collecting 94.5 per cent. of all moneys due by the end of the 1994–95 financial year. As at 31 October 1994, it had collected 93.5 per cent. of moneys due at that date. The company estimates that it will achieve the target for the financial year.

  Asylum Seekers
  Mr. Bryan Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans he has to charge asylum seekers full overseas student fee levels in respect of courses undertaken part-time in institutions of higher education.

  Mr. Boswell
  We are currently consulting institutions of further and higher education, and bodies concerned with student welfare, refugees and asylum seekers, about a proposal to amend the Education (Fees and Awards) Regulations to allow institutions to recoup full-cost fees from part-time overseas students, to fall in line with the regulations for full-time students. This could potentially affect asylum seekers as well as other students from overseas, but not those already granted refugee status or exceptional leave to remain. Institutions would not, however, be obliged to charge a higher fee and would be free to use their discretion.

  The consultation period ends on 30 November and a decision on possible amendment of the regulations will be made in the new year.

  Further Education Colleges (Governors)
  Mr. Bryan Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education on how many occasions she has given written approval to governing bodies of further education colleges for the remuneration of governors for their activities as governors and/or the taking and holding of an interest in college property in the current and two preceding financial years.

  Mr. Boswell
  None.

  Teaching Qualifications
  Mr. Bryan Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) what plans she has to introduce new competency-based vocational teaching qualifications for further education lecturers;

  (2) what instructions she has given to the Further Education Development Association to prepare for the creation of an education lead body for vocational teaching qualifications.
  394
  Mr. Boswell
  A preliminary review of the occupations in the further education sector and closely related areas will be undertaken during the first half of 1995. It is envisaged that the project steering committee for this work will be chaired by the chief executive of the Further Education Development Association.

  The outcome of the review will help inform decisions on any future lead body arrangements to consider vocational teaching qualifications in the further education sector.

  Grant-maintained Schools
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how much of the underspend in grant-maintained schools in 1993–94 contained in class X, vote 1 of the appropriation accounts 1993–94 will be returned to local authorities to spend on schools.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The accounts report an underspend in provision voted for recurrent expenditure on grant-maintained schools in 1993–94 of £102.674 million. Of that underspend, £88.348 million was in annual maintenance grants and £14.326 million in other grants.

  Expenditure by the Department on annual maintenance grants is recouped in full from local authorities. The reduction in the amount of grant required to be paid therefore resulted in a corresponding reduction in the amount required to be recouped. As a result, the underspend on annual maintenance grants remained within local authority budgets.

  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if she will break down the expenditure on grant-maintained schools, class X, vote 1 of the appropriation accounts 1993–94 to give the Department's contribution and the element of local government total standard spending involved.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  Total recurrent expenditure on grant-maintained schools in 1993–94 breaks down as follows:-

  £ million

  Annual maintenance grants

  1,011.652

  Other grants

  54.692

  Total recurrent expenditure

  1,066.344

  Expenditure on annual maintenance grants was recouped from local authority budgets. Thus, the remaining £54.692 million represents the Department's net contribution.

  College Lecturers
  Mr. Bryan Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what is the total number of lecturers employed in further education colleges.

  Mr. Boswell
  The total number of academic staff in LEA maintained colleges of further education in England in 1992–93 was 59,830; figures for part-time staff have been converted to full-time equivalents.

  Mr. Bryan Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what is the average cost to public funds of(a) a further education lecturer and (b) a higher education lecturer taking early retirement on health grounds.

  Mr. Boswell
  The information requested is not available. However, the average pension and retirement lump sum of all teachers and lecturers retiring on health
  395
  grounds within the teachers' superannuation scheme is shown in the table.

  Average Pension £

  Average Lump Sum £

  Male

  8,912

  26,738

  Female

  7,174

  21,518

  Secondary Schools (Admission Procedures)
  Mr. Stern
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if she will publish guidance to secondary schools on

  LEA-maintained colleges: Further Education Student Staff Ratios1

  1988–892

  1989–902

  1990–91

  1991–92

  1992–93

  LEA-maintained colleges

  10.2

  10.8

  11.1

  12.0

  12.6

  Sources:

  DFE surveys; Further Education Student Record, teachers in the maintained sector return (Form 618G) and the Annual Monitoring Survey.

  Notes

  1 Part-time students and members of staff have been converted pro-rata to full-time equivalents;

  2 The figures for 1988–89 and 1989–90 include the FE element of PCFC colleges.

  Grants for Education Support and Training
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary for Education if she will list, for each local authority, for(a) 1992–93, (b) 1993–94 and (c) 1994–95 the amount of money received from the training of youth and community workers category of GEST.

  Mr. Boswell
  The expenditure supported through the GEST programme for training for youth and community work for each local education authority in each year is set out in the table.

  GEST allocations to LEAs for training of youth and community workers

  LEAs

  1992–93 (£000)

  1993–94 (£000)

  1994–95 (£000)

  Corporation of London

  0.0

  0.0

  0.0

  Camden

  5.0

  5.0

  4.4

  Greenwich

  5.0

  6.3

  5.7

  Hackney

  5.0

  5.8

  3.0

  Hammersmith

  5.0

  5.0

  1.9

  Islington

  5.0

  5.0

  2.7

  Kensington and Chelsea

  5.0

  5.0

  1.5

  Lambeth

  5.0

  5.9

  2.3

  Lewisham

  5.0

  6.1

  4.9

  Southwark

  5.0

  6.1

  3.6

  Tower Hamlets

  5.0

  5.0

  4.1

  Wandsworth

  5.0

  6.0

  2.4

  Westminster

  5.0

  5.0

  3.0

  Barking

  5.0

  5.0

  3.7

  Barnet

  5.0

  9.1

  6.7

  Bexley

  5.0

  5.9

  5.9

  Brent

  5.0

  6.9

  4.2

  Bromley

  5.0

  8.2

  2.5

  Croydon

  5.0

  9.0

  7.0

  Ealing

  5.0

  7.9

  3.1

  Enfield

  5.0

  7.5

  7.1

  Haringey

  5.0

  5.0

  3.7

  Harrow

  5.0

  5.7

  4.1

  Havering

  5.0

  6.4

  6.6

  Hillingdon

  5.0

  6.4

  2.0

  Hounslow

  5.0

  5.8

  5.7

  Kingston upon Thames

  5.0

  5.0

  2.8

  396
  whether they should, in appropriate circumstances, include an interview with parents in their admission procedures.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  Guidance on the use of interviews in school admission procedures is contained in circular 6/93, "Admissions to maintained schools". This was issued to all schools in July 1993.

  Further Education Colleges
  Mr. Bryan Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what was the ratio of academic staff to students in further education colleges in each of the last five years.

  Mr. Boswell
  Information for the most recently available five years is as follows.

  GEST allocations to LEAs for training of youth and community workers

  LEAs

  1992–93 (£000)

  1993–94 (£000)

  1994–95 (£000)

  Merton

  5.0

  5.0

  3.4

  Newham

  5.0

  6.0

  5.3

  Redbridge

  5.0

  6.2

  6.2

  Richmond upon Thames

  5.0

  6.0

  2.7

  Sutton

  5.0

  5.0

  2.8

  Waltham Forest

  5.0

  5.7

  4.8

  Birmingham

  11.5

  29.4

  25.6

  Coventry

  5.0

  8.8

  7.6

  Dudley

  5.0

  8.4

  6.9

  Sandwell

  5.0

  8.3

  7.2

  Solihull

  5.0

  6.0

  6.4

  Walsall

  5.0

  7.6

  6.8

  Wolverhampton

  5.0

  7.2

  5.7

  Knowsley

  5.0

  5.0

  3.5

  Liverpool

  5.3

  13.4

  11.8

  St.Helens

  5.0

  5.6

  5.2

  Sefton

  5.0

  8.5

  7.8

  Wirral

  5.0

  9.7

  8.9

  Bolton

  5.0

  8.0

  6.9

  Bury

  5.0

  5.1

  4.2

  Manchester

  5.3

  12.6

  9.9

  Oldham

  5.0

  6.6

  6.5

  Rochdale

  5.0

  6.5

  4.9

  Salford

  5.0

  6.6

  5.3

  Stockport

  5.0

  8.3

  7.9

  Tameside

  5.0

  6.1

  5.4

  Trafford

  5.0

  5.8

  4.3

  Wigan

  5.0

  9.2

  8.4

  Barnsley

  5.0

  6.5

  4.5

  Doncaster

  5.0

  8.7

  8.1

  Rotherham

  5.0

  7.5

  7.3

  Sheffield

  5.7

  13.6

  10.4

  Bradford

  5.7

  14.6

  13.0

  Calderdale

  5.0

  5.8

  4.7

  Kirklees

  5.0

  11.2

  9.9

  Leeds

  8.1

  20.1

  17.5

  Wakefield

  5.0

  9.0

  7.6

  Gateshead

  5.0

  5.6

  4.8

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  5.0

  7.7

  6.1

  North Tyneside

  5.0

  5.2

  5.1

  South Tyneside

  5.0

  5.0

  3.5

  397

  GEST allocations to LEAs for training of youth and community workers

  LEAs

  1992–93 (£000)

  1993–94 (£000)

  1994–95 (£000)

  Sunderland

  5.0

  9.0

  7.3

  Isle of Scilly

  0.0

  0.0

  0.0

  Avon

  10.7

  26.2

  22.0

  Bedfordshire

  6.1

  16.1

  13.4

  Berkshire

  9.9

  23.0

  16.3

  Buckinghamshire

  7.7

  20.4

  16.3

  Cambridgeshire

  8.1

  20.0

  15.2

  Cheshire

  10.8

  27.8

  26.5

  Cleveland

  6.5

  15.9

  16.4

  Cornwall

  5.0

  13.6

  11.8

  Cumbria

  5.4

  13.9

  10.5

  Derbyshire

  10.2

  26.4

  21.3

  Devon

  11.3

  30.2

  23 0

  Dorset

  6.4

  18.9

  12.7

  Durham

  6.9

  16.5

  15.1

  East Sussex

  7.5

  19.6

  15.0

  Essex

  16.9

  43.9

  30.8

  Gloucestershire

  5.9

  16.0

  7.9

  Hampshire

  18.1

  48.3

  35.4

  Hereford and Worcester

  8.1

  21.6

  17.6

  Hertfordshire

  11.6

  29.4

  24.8

  Humberside

  10.2

  25.7

  23.8

  Isle of Wight

  5.0

  5.0

  3.2

  Kent

  17.7

  46.3

  30.8

  Lancashire

  15.5

  41.4

  31.4

  Leicestershire

  10.8

  26.1

  24.5

  Lincolnshire

  6.3

  17.2

  9.5

  Norfolk

  8.4

  21.7

  16.3

  North Yorkshire

  8.3

  21.4

  18.2

  Northamptonshire

  6.8

  18.3

  13.0

  Northumberland

  5.0

  8.8

  9.1

  Nottinghamshire

  11.4

  28.1

  25.4

  Oxfordshire

  7.5

  18.2

  13.1

  Shropshire

  5.0

  13.2

  11.0

  Somerset

  5.8

  14.9

  10.1

  Staffordshire

  11.5

  29.4

  26.1

  Suffolk

  7.7

  20.1

  16.0

  Surrey

  11.7

  29.4

  18.7

  Warwickshire

  5.7

  13.8

  10.7

  West Sussex

  8.0

  20.7

  18.0

  Wiltshire

  6.5

  17.5

  12.6

  Total

  700.0

  1,400.00

  1,100.00

  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many authorities bid for funds from the reducing truancy category of GEST for(a) 1992–93, (b) 1993–94 and (c) 1994–95; and if she will list the successful authorities and the amount they received for both years.

  Mr. Forth
  The "Reducing Truancy" category of the grants for education support and training scheme was introduced in 1992 and expanded into a "Truancy and Disaffected Pupils" category in 1993. In the first, 1993–94, round there were 82 bids and 74 were successful. For the 1994–95 round, there were 101 bids, of which 86 were successful. Details of individual allocations are as follows:

  GEST scheme 1993–94: Reducing Truancy Approved Expenditure (on which DFE pays 60 per cent. grant)

  LEA

  Allocation (£ 000's)

  Barnsley

  106.7

  Bedfordshire

  166.0

  Berkshire

  94.3

  Birmingham

  282.3

  Bradford

  200.0

  398

  GEST scheme 1993–94: Reducing Truancy Approved Expenditure (on which DFE pays 60 per cent. Grant)

  LEA

  Allocation (£ 000's)

  Brent

  250.0

  Camden

  148.7

  Cheshire

  130.0

  Cleveland

  130.0

  Coventry

  167.5

  Croydon

  102.4

  Derbyshire

  165.4

  Devon1

  157.5

  Doncaster

  99.8

  Dorset

  71.1

  Dudley

  185.0

  Durham1

  160.0

  East Sussex

  60.0

  Enfield

  118.0

  Gateshead

  160.0

  Gloucestershire

  116.0

  Greenwich

  216.7

  Hackney

  205.0

  Hammersmith

  70.0

  Hampshire

  192.0

  Haringey

  145.0

  Hertfordshire

  83.0

  Hillingdon

  45.0

  Hounslow

  50.4

  Humberside

  139.0

  Isle of Wight

  19.2

  Islington

  156.6.

  Kensington

  117.1

  Kent

  96.5

  Kirklees1

  153.5

  Knowsley

  195.0

  Lancashire

  208.2

  Leeds

  352.9

  Leicestershire

  224.1

  Lewisham

  114.0

  Liverpool

  181.6

  Manchester

  357.3

  Merton

  31.2

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  200.0

  Newham

  150.0

  Norfolk

  65.4

  North Tyneside

  80.6

  Northamptonshire

  83.0

  Nottighamshire

  200.0

  Oldham

  83.4

  Oxfordshire

  150.0

  Rochdale

  120.0

  Rotheram

  74.3

  Salford

  77.8

  Sandwell

  184.0

  Sefton

  68.9

  Sheffield

  90.0

  Solihull

  10.0

  South Tyneside

  81.5

  Southwark

  68.7

  Staffordshire

  23.8

  Stockport

  200.0

  Sunderland

  24.3

  Tameside

  161.0

  Tower Hamlets

  213.0

  Trafford

  40.0

  Wakefield

  95.0

  Walsall

  152.5

  Waltham Forest

  37.5

  Wandsworth

  158.0

  Warwickshire

  51.0

  Westminster

  16.0

  Wirral

  107.5

  Wolverhampton

  116.3

  74 LEAs Total allocations:

  9,607.5

  1 subsequently indicated unable to take up allocation.

  399

  Gest scheme 1994–95 truancy and disaffected pupils approved expenditure (on which DFE pays 60 per cent. grant)

  LEA

  Allocation (£ 000's)

  Avon

  116.0

  Barking and Dagenham

  60.5

  Barnet

  43 5

  Barnsley

  144.4

  Bedfordshire

  162.0

  Berkshire

  99.4

  Bexley

  48.5

  Birmingham

  501.2

  Bradford

  270.3

  Brent

  320.0

  Buckinghamshire2

  111.7

  Bury Cambrid

  71.5

  geshire

  189.4

  Camden

  185.1

  Cheshire

  211.0

  Cleveland

  130.0

  Cornwall

  168.0

  Coventry

  191.2

  Croydon

  104.0

  Cumbria

  170.0

  Derbyshire

  233.3

  Devon

  179.5

  Doncaster

  132.8

  Dorset

  124.2

  Dudley

  215.0

  Ealing

  112.0

  East Sussex

  268 0

  Essex

  130.5

  Gateshead

  160.0

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  145.0

  Hampshire

  480.3

  Haringey

  171.0

  Harrow

  73.1

  Havering

  59.7

  Hertfordshire

  197.9

  Hillingdon

  47.0

  Hounslow

  53.4

  Humberside

  175.0

  Isle of Wight

  12.0

  Islington

  216.3

  Kensington and Chelsea

  132.0

  Kent

  188.7

  Kirklees

  225.7

  Knowsley

  342.0

  Lambeth

  138.0

  Lancashire

  336.6

  Leeds

  550.2

  Leicestershire

  206.3

  Lewisham

  208.5

  Lincolnshire

  25.0

  Liverpool

  255.0

  Merton

  175.0

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  235.9

  Newham

  255.2

  Norfolk

  111.5

  Northamptonshire

  101.3

  North Tyneside

  90.3

  Nottinghamshire

  205.0

  Oxfordshire

  150.0

  Rotherham2

  89.3

  St. Helens

  128.0

  Salford

  122.6

  Sandwell2

  355.0

  Sefton

  127.5

  Sheffield

  90.0

  Shropshire

  59.2

  Solihull

  13.0

  Somerset

  47.0

  South Tyneside

  201.0

  Southwark

  87.3

  400

  Gest scheme 1994–95 truancy and disaffected pupils approved expenditure (on which DFE pays 60 per cent. grant)

  LEA

  Allocation (£ 000's)

  Staffordshire

  270.0

  Stockport

  210.0

  Suffolk

  75.0

  Sutton

  81.2

  Tameside

  161.0

  Tower Hamlets

  362.2

  Trafford

  36.0

  Wakefield

  118.6

  Wandsworth

  157.4

  Warwickshire

  115.0

  Westminster

  34.0

  West Sussex

  156 0

  Wigan

  230.0

  Wiltshire

  25.0

  Wirral

  104.7

  Wolverhampton

  180.6

  86 LEAs Total allocations:

  14,052.5

  2 subsequently indicated unable to take up all or part of allocation.

  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many authorities bid for youth action funds from GEST for(a) 1992–93, (b) 1993–94 and (c) 1994–95; and if she will list the successful authorities and the amount they received for each year.

  Mr. Boswell
  Funding for the youth action scheme through the GEST programme began in 1993–94. Bids were received from 94 authorities in 1993–4 and 34 in 1994–95.

  The successful authorities and the amount of expenditure supported in each year are set out in the table.

  GEST allocations to LEAs for youth action schemes

  LEAs

  1993–94 (£000)

  1994–95 (£000)

  Corporation of London

  0.0

  0.0

  Camden

  139.0

  105.0

  Greenwich

  147.0

  93.0

  Hackney

  0.0

  0.0

  Hammersmith

  0.0

  0.0

  Islington

  0.0

  0.0

  Kensington & Chelsea

  0.0

  0.0

  Lambeth

  0.0

  0.0

  Lewisham

  0.0

  0.0

  Southwark

  0.0

  0.0

  Tower Hamlets

  147.0

  104.0

  Wandsworth

  0.0

  0.0

  Westminster

  0.0

  0.0

  Barking

  0.0

  0.0

  Barnet

  0.0

  0.0

  Bexley

  0.0

  0.0

  Brent

  0.0

  0.0

  Bromley

  0.0

  0.0

  Croydon

  0.0

  0.0

  Ealing

  147.0

  90.0

  Enfield

  147.0

  97.0

  Haringey

  147.0

  93.0

  Harrow

  147.0

  83.0

  Havering

  0.0

  0.0

  Hillington

  0.0

  0.0

  Hounslow

  0.0

  0.0

  Kingston upon Thames

  0.0

  0.0

  Merton

  0.0

  0.0

  Newham

  147.0

  93.0

  Redbridge

  0.0

  0.0

  Richmond upon Thames

  0.0

  0.0

  Sutton

  108.2

  113.0

  401

  GEST allocations to LEAs for youth action schemes

  LEAs

  1993–94 (£000)

  1994–95 (£000)

  Waltham Forest

  147.0

  91.0

  Birmingham

  0.0

  0.0

  Coventry

  147.0

  93.0

  Dudley

  147.0

  133.0

  Sandwell

  0.0

  0.0

  Solihull

  99.0

  72.0

  Walsall

  0.0

  0.0

  Wolverhampton

  73.5

  60.0

  Knowsley

  0.0

  0.0

  Liverpool

  0.0

  0.0

  St Helens

  0.0

  0.0

  Sefton

  0.0

  0.0

  Wirral

  0.0

  0.0

  Bolton

  0.0

  0.0

  Bury

  0.0

  0.0

  Manchester

  147.0

  109.0

  Oldham

  0.0

  0.0

  Rochdale

  0.0

  0.0

  Salford

  0.0

  0.0

  Stockport

  0.0

  0.0

  Tameside

  0.0

  0.0

  Trafford

  0.0

  0.0

  Wigan

  0.0

  0.0

  Barnsley

  0.0

  0.0

  Doncaster

  143.0

  105.0

  Rotherham

  138.3

  132.0

  Sheffield

  0.0

  0.0

  Bradford

  147.0

  131.0

  Calderdale

  0.0

  0.0

  Kirklees

  0.0

  0.0

  Leeds

  0.0

  0.0

  Wakefield

  0.0

  0.0

  Gateshead

  147.0

  0.0

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  0.0

  0.0

  North Tyneside

  147.0

  91.0

  South Tyneside

  0.0

  0.0

  Sunderland

  0.0

  0.0

  Isles of Scilly

  0.0

  0.0

  Avon

  0.0

  0.0

  Bedfordshire

  0.0

  0.0

  Berkshire

  0.0

  0.0

  Buckinghamshire

  0.0

  0.0

  Cambridgeshire

  147.0

  91.0

  Cheshire

  147.0

  97.0

  Cleveland

  0.0

  0.0

  Cornwall

  0.0

  0.0

  Cumbria

  147.0

  130.0

  Derbyshire

  0.0

  0.0

  Devon

  0.0

  0.0

  Dorset

  0.0

  0.0

  Durham

  0.0

  0.0

  East Sussex

  0.0

  0.0

  Essex

  0.0

  0.0

  Gloucestershire

  147.0

  92.0

  Hampshire

  0.0

  0.0

  Hereford and Worcester

  0.0

  0.0

  Hertfordshire

  147.0

  156.0

  Humberside

  0.0

  0.0

  Isle of Wight

  0.0

  0.0

  Kent

  0.0

  0.0

  Lancashire

  147.0

  135.0

  Raising standards in inner city schools allocations to LEAs

  LEA

  ESG(£000)

  1992–93 LEATG (£000)

  Total (£000)

  ESG (£000)

  1993–94 LEATG (£000)

  Total (£000)

  1994–95 SRB (£000)

  Greenwich

  110.8

  82.5

  193.3

  98.7

  117.0

  215.7

  160.8

  Hackney

  52.3

  70.0

  122.3

  118.4

  61.0

  179.4

  305.2

  Hammersmith

  179.5

  42.5

  222.0

  240.2

  120.1

  360.3

  277.0

  402

  GEST allocations to LEAs for youth action schemes

  LEAs

  1993–94 (£000)

  1994–95 (£000)

  Leicestershire

  0.0

  0.0

  Lincolnshire

  0.0

  0.0

  Norfolk

  0.0

  0.0

  North Yorkshire

  0.0

  0.0

  Northamptonshire

  0.0

  0.0

  Northumberland

  0.0

  0.0

  Nottinghamshire

  147.0

  105.0

  Oxfordshire

  147.0

  108.0

  Shropshire

  0.0

  0.0

  Somerset

  147.0

  98.0

  Staffordshire

  0.0

  0.0

  Suffolk

  0.0

  0.0

  Surrey

  0.0

  0.0

  Warwickshire

  0.0

  0.0

  West Sussex

  0.0

  0.0

  Wiltshire

  0.0

  0.0

  TOTAL

  4,082.0

  2,900.0

  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many authorities bid for funds from the raising standards in inner-city schools category of GEST for(a) 1992–93, (b) 1993–94 and (c) 1994–95; and if she will list the successful authorities and the amount they received for each year.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  Bids for funds from the grant "Raising Standards in Inner City Schools" were received from 52 authorities in 1992–93,47 in 1993–94 and 38 in 1994–95.

  The successful authorities and the amount of expenditure supported for each year are set out in the table. The allocations were paid from the Department's GEST programme in 1992–93 and 1993–94. Allocations for 1994–95 are being paid under the auspices of the single regeneration budget, which is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment.

  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Educationhow many authorities bid for funds from the raising standards in inner-city schools category of GEST foro(a) 1992–93, (b) 1993–94 and (c) 1994–95; and if she will list the successful authorities and the amount they received for each year.

  Mr. Robin Squire
  Bids for funds from the grant "Raising Standards in Inner City Schools" were received from 52 authorities in 1992–93,47 in 1993–94 and 38 in 1994–95.

  The successful authorities and the amount of expenditure supported for each year are set out in the table. The allocations were paid from the Department's GEST programme in 1992–93 and 1993–94. Allocations for 1994–95 are being paid under the auspices of the single regeneration budget, which is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment.
  403

  Raising standards in inner city schools allocations to LEAs

  LEA

  ESG (£000)

  1992–93 LEATG (£000)

  Total (£000)

  ESG (£000)

  1993–94 LEATG (£000)

  Total (£000)

  1994–95 SRB (£000)

  Islington

  256.8

  87.5

  344.4

  186.0

  139.3

  325.3

  191.2

  Lambeth

  146.7

  105.5

  252.2

  279.7

  136.3

  416.0

  276.9

  Lewisham

  162.5

  87.5

  250.0

  162.2

  96.6

  258.8

  258.8

  Southwark

  78.0

  72.0

  150.0

  121.5

  60.8

  182.3

  142.9

  Tower Hamlets

  353.2

  38.4

  391.6

  339.1

  218.5

  557.6

  528.3

  Wandsworth

  103.0

  69.0

  172.0

  296.0

  129.0

  425.0

  469.9

  Brent

  129.0

  36.0

  165.0

  282.0

  52.7

  334.7

  336.6

  Haringey

  —

  —

  —

  104.3

  52.1

  156.4

  —

  Newham

  —

  —

  —

  212.7

  33.8

  246.5

  —

  Birmingham

  192.3

  77.7

  270.0

  351.6

  44.4

  396.0

  680.6

  Dudley

  202.5

  92.2

  294.7

  229.3

  112.0

  341.3

  327 1

  Walsall

  —

  —

  —

  14.0

  3.5

  17.5

  —

  Wolverhampton

  254.6

  51.8

  306.4

  186.1

  93 0

  279.1

  366.7

  Knowsley

  —

  —

  —

  71.5

  38.5

  110.0

  —

  St Helens

  36.0

  38.3

  74.4

  61.4

  31.0

  92.4

  98.5

  Wirral

  126.8

  141.4

  268.2

  151.6

  140.0

  291.6

  289.8

  Bolton

  —

  —

  —

  41.0

  21.9

  62.9

  —

  Manchester

  484.9

  15.1

  500.0

  544.5

  91.3

  635.8

  555.2

  Barnsley

  111.0

  54.0

  165.0

  187.4

  12.6

  200.0

  538 9

  Doncaster

  102.1

  58.9

  161.0

  73.3

  93.2

  166.5

  254.0

  Rotherham

  29.5

  73.6

  103.1

  79.5

  27.5

  107.0

  108.8

  Sheffield

  134.0

  66.0

  200.0

  150.0

  75.0

  225.0

  265.0

  Bradford

  163.0

  337.0

  500.0

  328.6

  296.4

  625.0

  343.0

  Kirdklees

  —

  —

  —

  73.2

  39.4

  112.6

  —

  Leeds

  271.3

  30.0

  301.3

  247.6

  12.4

  260.0

  272.3

  Gateshead

  134.0

  66.0

  200.0

  138.7

  68.3

  207.0

  207.0

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  212.9

  65.2

  278.1

  202.6

  60.0

  262.6

  279.0

  North Tyneside

  125.0

  29.8

  154.8

  121.1

  17.0

  1381

  131.7

  South Tyneside

  —

  —

  —

  130.0

  70.0

  200.0

  —

  Avon

  88.1

  43.0

  131.1

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Cheshire

  —

  —

  —

  134.0

  66.0

  200.0

  —

  Cleveland

  97.5

  52.5

  150.0

  107.9

  58.1

  166.0

  127.0

  Derbyshire

  —

  —

  —

  125.0

  58 0

  183.0

  —

  Humberside

  —

  —

  —

  130.0

  70.0

  200.0

  —

  Lancashire

  —

  —

  —

  397.0

  192.0

  589.0

  —

  Nottingham

  180.0

  120.0

  300.0

  380.4

  128.1

  508.5

  173.1

  Total

  4,517.4

  2,103.4

  6,620.8

  7,098.1

  3,136.8

  10,234.9

  7,965.1

NORTHERN IRELAND

  Emergency Hospital Admissions
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will provide a table showing the number of emergency hospital admissions by region for each of the last five years.

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

  Year

  Number of emergency admissions in Northern Ireland (excluding psychiatric and mental handicap specialities

  1989–90

  120,234

  1990–91

  118,148

  1991–92

  123,402

  1992–93

  121,336

  1993–94

  125,988

  NHS Trusts
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what has been the turnover of each NHS trust in each year since its inception.
  404
  Mr. Moss
  Six trusts were established in Northern Ireland from 1 April 1993. The turnover of each trust for 1993–94 was as follows:

  £'000

  Belfast City Hospital Trust

  79,678

  Eastern Ambulance Trust

  6,491

  Greenpark Trust

  41,414

  Royal Group of Hospitals Trust

  113,621

  Ulster, North Down & Ards Hospitals Trust

  48,951

  Craigavon Group of Hospitals Trust

  39,883

  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland which NHS trusts failed to(a) break even, (b) keep within the external financing limit and (c) record a 6 per cent. return on capital; and by what percentage and sum in each year since their inception.

  Mr. Moss
  Six trusts were established in Northern Ireland from 1 April 1993. No trust failed to break even, or failed to keep within its external financing limit. The Royal Group of Hospitals trust was the only trust which did not record a 6 per cent. return. Its return was 5.9 per cent.

  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what surpluses or deficits were recorded by each individual NHS trust in each year since its inception.
  405
  Mr. Moss
  Six trusts were established in Northern Ireland from 1 April 1993. Surpluses were recorded by each individual health and social services trust in 1993–94 as follows:-

  £ (000's)

  Belfast City Hospital Trust

  2,628

  Eastern Ambulance Trust

  88

  Greenpark Trust

  876

  Royal Group of Hospitals Trust

  1,594

  Ulster, North Down & Ards Hospitals Trust

  797

  Craigavon Group of Hospitals Trust

  686

  NHS Private Facilities
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many patients have been treated in NHS hospitals' private facilities in each of the last five years, by region.

  Mr. Moss
  Information is not held in the form requested. The table provides details on the numbers of treatments carried out on a private basis in public hospitals in Northern Ireland in each of the last five years.

  Year

  Ordinary admissions

  Day cases

  Outpatient attendances

  1989–90

  1636

  948

  2863

  1990–91

  1983

  933

  3221

  1991–92

  1971

  1115

  2573

  1992–93

  1938

  1291

  2419

  1993–94

  2101

  1781

  2813

  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will provide an estimate for the value of fundholding allocations retained by general practitioner fundholders at the year end in each of the last four years, by region.

  Mr. Moss
  It is estimated that in 1993–94, the first year of fundholding in Northern Ireland, GP fundholders underspent by approximately £2.7 million—;8.8 per cent. of their total budget. Discussions about the level of savings to be retained by practices are not yet completed.

  Patient Complaints
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many patient complaints there were in each of the last five years, by region.

  Mr. Moss
  There were 1,590 hospital patient complaints in Northern Ireland in 1993–94.
  406
  Information about complaints made against family health services practitioners in Northern Ireland is not collected centrally. Information is available on those complaints which were investigated formally under the Health and Personal Social Services (Services Committee) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1973 and is given in the table.

  Year

  Number of complaints investigated formally

  1989

  12

  1990

  16

  1991

  13

  1992

  11

  1993

  25

  NHS Private Patient Facilities
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much income has been generated by NHS hospitals' private patient facilities in each of the last five years, by region.

  Mr. Moss
  Private patient income by health and social services board and trust was as follows:-

  Board

  1989–90 £

  1990–91 £

  1991–92 £

  1992–93 £

  1993–94 £

  Eastern

  1,278,235

  1,510,981

  1,776,835

  2,344,038

  137,259

  Western

  175,220

  97,578

  138,514

  198,426

  243,298

  Northern

  273,708

  258,672

  330,825

  347,427

  253,680

  Southern

  226,982

  182,672

  183,600

  289,549

  140,718

  Trust

  Belfast City Hospital Trust

  412,499

  Eastern Ambulance Trust

  1,233

  Greenpark Trust

  314,857

  Royal Group of Hospitals Trust

  1,308,380

  Ulster, North Down and Ards Hospitals Trust

  463,060

  Craigavon Group of Hospitals Trust

  227,339

  The six trusts were established on 1 April 1993.

  Legal Actions
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will publish details of the total costs incurred by each health board and each education and library board in Northern Ireland in each of the last five years in defending actions assisted through legal aid which have arisen from(a) fair employment and (b) equal opportunities legislation.

  Mr. Moss
  The information is not held in the form requested and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

HEALTH

  Measles
  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the current vaccination campaign against measles; and what assessment she has made of the risk that some children may not be immune to the disease.

  Mr. Sackville
  It is too early to assess the effectiveness of our immunisation campaign against measles, but by the end of the third week of the campaign we estimate that more than 4.5 million children had been immunised. Initial reports from districts estimate that about 90 per cent. of the target population are being immunised in the initial phase of the campaign.

  Public Health Laboratory Service data based on extensive national surveillance has revealed that measles susceptibility in the school age population is sufficient to sustain a measles epidemic of the size forecast.

  Rubella Vaccine
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when her Department first became aware of the research leading to the production of the rubella vaccine.

  Mr. Sackville
  Rubelle vaccine was developed from a cell line, MRC5, taken from a foetus terminated at a national health service hospital in 1966. This information has been in the public domain since the vaccine was introduced in 1970. Details of the MRC5 cell line were published in an article in "Nature Magazine" in 1970 and the origin of the vaccine is mentioned in the memorandum, "Immunisation against Infectious Disease", copies of which are available in the Library.

  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what authorisation was given by(a) Department and (b) any other official group charged with monitoring the ethics of research to the development of the rubella vaccine from the cells of an aborted child.

  (2) who authorised clinical trials of the rubella vaccine; and when these were conducted.

  Mr. Sackville
  This research and the clinical trials were conducted nearly 30 years ago and the information requested is not available.

  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what clinical trials of the rubella vaccine derived from the cells of an aborted child were conducted on children; what were the processes for consent; and if volunteers were informed of the vaccine's origin.

  Mr. Sackville
  The research was undertaken by vaccine manufacturers and such details are not available. The hon. Member may wish to contact the manufacturers of the vaccine who are listed in the memorandum "Immunisation against Infectious Disease", copies of which are available in the Library, for such information.

  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what were the medical grounds under which the unborn child, whose cells were taken to culture the rubella vaccine, was aborted.

  Mr. Sackville
  The cell line from which the rubella virus was cultivated was taken from a foetus which was terminated in a national health service hospital for psychiatric reasons. The foetus was not terminated to provide the source of the cell line.
  408
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health who conducted the research and development of the rubella vaccine.

  Mr. Sackville
  The research was conducted by Professor S. Plotkin at the Wistar insitute, Philadelphia.

  Rubella
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will quantify the risk of an under 16-year-old contracting rubella this winter.

  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health on what grounds her Department has concluded that a rubella epidemic is imminent; and when her Department first arrived at this conclusion.

  Mr. Sackville
  A rubella epidemic is not imminent. In 1993, outbreaks of rubella in unimmunised older boys and young men led to a rise in cases of rubella in pregnant women. Rubella vaccine has been included in the present measles and rubella schools immunisation campaign to bring forward the elimination of rubella in pregnancy by five years and thereby hasten the eradication of the congenital rubella syndrome. Immunising girls and boys against rubella protects both from the disease. It is especially important for girls but also for boys as unprotected boys who catch rubella can transmit the disease to susceptible pregnant women.

  Measles Vaccine
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what are the reasons for the shortage of supply of the measles only vaccine.

  Mr. Sackville
  Measles vaccine has not been in routine use in this country since the introduction of the measles/mumps and rubella vaccine in 1988. It has only been available on a "named-patient" basis. Manufacturers have therefore had no need to retain large stocks.

  Health Authority Staff
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many staff have been employed by category by each district health authority in each of the last five years.

  Mr. Malone
  This information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Christmas Expenditure
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much public money will be spent on entertaining, Christmas decorations and other festive activities this Christmas season by her Department and Government agencies answerable to her Department; and of this sum how much will be spent in Ministers' private offices and official residences.

  Mr. Sackville
  Disaggregrated information of this nature is not available. Any such costs which may arise are covered by the hospitality expenditure of the Department which is published in the annual report, copies of which are in the Library.

  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many official Christmas cards she and her Ministers intend to send in 1994; how much these cards will cost(a) to buy, (b) to post and (c) in staff time to sign, address and place in envelopes; and if she will place in the Library

  409
  a sample copy of the official Christmas card she intends to send this year.

  Mr. Sackville
  Some 2,300 charity Christmas cards, copies of which will be placed in the Library, will be sent at an estimated purchase and postal sum of £1,360.

  Equal Opportunities
  Ms Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if the results of the survey on the ethnic origin of nursing, midwifery and health visiting staff are yet available.

  Mr. Sackville
  Ethnic group data on nursing and midwifery staff were collected in September 1993 non-medical work force census. The results were published in October in the statistical bulletin 1994/11, copies of which will be placed in the Library.

  Community Care
  Mr. Kirkwood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of the budget allocated to community care is being spent on(a) residential nursing homes and (b) nursing homes by each health authority; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Bowis
  Health authority accounts and financial returns do not provide information on whether long-term healthcare is provided in a national health service hospital or independent nursing home.

  Cancer Services
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how and when she plans to respond to the consultation on the document "A Policy Framework for Commissioning Cancer Services".

  Mr. Sackville
  The Department is currently assessing responses to the consultation. We expect to make decisions early in 1995.

  Special Advisers
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement concerning the cost to public funds of employing ministerial special advisers in her Department.

  Mr. Sackville
  The Department employs one special adviser.

  Salaries for special advisers are negotiated individually in relation to their previous earnings and are confidential. They are, however, normally paid on a special advisers' salary spine of 34 points, ranging from £19,503 to £67,609. Appointments are non-pensionable and the salary spine reflects this.

  Benzodiazepines
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many pills are in each unit which manufacturers supply to pharmacists for NHS use of(a) temazepam, (b) zopiclone, (c) other benzodiazepines and (d) other anti-depressants.

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not available centrally. Although an applicant for a product licence for any medicine is required to submit details of proposed pack sizes to the licensing authority the decision on which of those sizes is marketed at any time rests on their commercial judgment.

  Blood Transfusion Centre, Brentwood
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will tabulate(a) the advantages and (b) the disadvantages for clinicians and patients in Newham of the proposed closure of the Brentwood blood transfusion centre.

  Mr. Sackville
  The National Blood Authority has made it clear that under its proposals services to clinicians, to patients and to donors in all areas will be maintained or improved. The authority has undertaken a thorough and widespread consultation on its proposals and the results will be carefully considered before decisions are made.

  NHS Work Shifts
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what controls exist on the length of work shifts or the numbers of hours worked each week in(a) paramedic emergency services or (b) NHS patient transport services; and to what extent these differ between direct NHS providers of such services and subcontractors.

  Mr. Sackville
  There are no central controls on the length of shifts worked by ambulance staff, apart from the requirements of the drivers' hours regulations.

  Health Care in London (Leaflet)
  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether the leaflet, "Changing the Focus of Health Care in London", is to be distributed to all London households.

  Mr. Malone
  It is not intended to distribute the leaflet to all London households.

  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many leaflets, "Changing the Focus of Health Care in London" have been printed; what was the cost of(a) design and production, (b) printing and (c) distribution of these leaflets; how many other such leaflets have been produced and distributed in each year since 1979; and if she will list their names, quantities produced and total cost of each leaflet.

  Mr. Malone
  Twenty thousand leaflets have been printed. The cost of design and layout was £4,530. The cost of printing was £2,482—;giving a cost per leaflet of 35p. All figures are exclusive of value added tax.

  A sample copy of the leaflet has been distributed at first-class letter rate to 65 key managers in the national health service and local authorities in inner London. The managers have been asked to state how many further copies they will require in order to make the leaflet available to members of the public in hospitals, clinics, health centres, general practitioner surgeries, local libraries and neighbourhood resource centres. If necessary, a further print run will be undertaken to meet demand.

  In addition I have written to London Members of Parliament with a copy of the leaflet. The London primary health care forum has not previously published or circulated any other literature.

  Copies of "Changing the Focus of Healthcare in London" will be placed in the Library.

  Tobacco Advertising
  Mr. Barron
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which of the measures announced in the statement made on 13 May relating to a voluntary agreement on tobacco
  411
  advertising have so far been (a) agreed with the industry and (b) implemented; and what is the timescale for (i) agreement and (ii) implementation of each of the remaining measures.

  Mr. Sackville
  The new voluntary agreement on tobacco products advertising and promotion will be published shortly. It will set out the details of implementation of the measures announced on 13 May.

  NHS Trusts
  Mr. Redmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will name the chief executives of NHS trusts and authorities in Devon and Cornwall.

  Mr. Sackville
  The chief executives in the Cornwall and Devon area are as follows: Cornwall and Isles of Scilly district family health services authority, Mr. Ron Spencer; Cornwall healthcare NHS trust, Mr. Philip Sanders; Cornwall and Isles of Scilly learning disabilities NHS trust, Mrs. Gina Brocklehurst; Royal Cornwall hospitals NHS trust, Mr. Brian Milstead; Plymouth and Torbay health authority, Mr. W. Jennings; Exeter and North Devon health authority, Mr. Peter Jackson; Exeter and District community health services NHS trust, Mr. Thomas Grady; Northern Devon healthcare NHS trust, Mrs. Julie Acred; Plymouth community services NHS trust, Mrs. Sue DeGilio; Royal Devon and Exeter healthcare NHS trust, Mr. Mark Taylor; South Devon healthcare NHS trust; Mr. Tony Parr; and Westcountry ambulance services NHS trust, Mr. Mike Willis.

  Junior Doctors and Dentists
  Mr. David Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many junior doctors and dentists by region in England are contracted for more than 72 hours a week in on-call posts; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Malone
  At 30 September 1994, the returns from the 14 English regional task forces on junior doctors' hours were as follows:

  Region

  Hard-Pressed posts contracted for over 72 hours a week

  Northern

  242

  Yorkshire

  653.5

  Trent

  184

  East Anglian

  170.5

  NW Thames

  315

  NE Thames

  492

  SE Thames

  213

  SW Thames

  206

  Wessex

  110

  Oxford

  140

  South Western

  46

  West Midlands

  293

  Mersey

  194

  North Western

  615

  Total

  3,874

  This represents a fall of over 40 per cent. in the number of posts in this category since March.

  I am very pleased with this significant increase in the rate at which these posts are being eliminated. This is evidence of the hard work done by regional task forces and by hospitals in tackling the problem of long hours.
  412
  There are, however, still too many posts where junior doctors are being asked to work long hours and the Government will continue to work with the medical profession and NHS managers to ensure that the "New Deal on Junior Doctors' Hours", a copy of which is in the Library, is implemented in full.

  Blood Transfusion Service
  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representation she has received regarding blood transfusion centres in the north west; and if she will make a statement.

  (2) what assessment she has made on the affect on services in Lancashire and Cumbria if the closure of Lancaster blood transfusion centre is to be allowed to go ahead.

  Mr. Sackville
  Six parliamentary questions have been asked by hon. Members concerning the National Blood Authority's proposal for blood transfusion centres in the north-west and Ministers have received 109 letters as at 23 November.

  The National Blood Authority has made it clear that, under its proposals for reorganisation of the transfusion centres, current levels of service in Lancashire and Cumbria would be maintained and improved. The authority has undertaken a thorough and widespread consultation on its proposals. Full consideration will be given to the results of the consultation before decisions are made.

  Burnley Health Care Trust
  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations she has received in the last three months arising from problems with the management of Burnley healthcare NHS trust; and if she will make a statement.

  Mr. Sackville
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave him on 1 November,Official Report, column 1084–85. Since then, we have received some further representations about Burnley healthcare national health service trust, including a petition comprising some 7,000 signatures. This calls for the reinstatement of Mr. Ian Mahady, and has been forwarded to the investigation team.

  Munchausen's Syndrome
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to her answer of 22 November,Official Report, column 87, if she will list those hospitals (a) where research projects are in progress into the effectiveness of covert video surveillance in cases of suspected Munchausen's syndrome by proxy and (b) where the same technique is in use but not as part of a research project.

  Mr. Bowis
  The research covers all methods used by paediatricians in identifying suspected Munchausen's syndrome by proxy. The only hospital using covert video surveillance of which we are aware is the North Staffordshire hospital centre.

  Malaria
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what action her Department is taking against the incidence of malaria.
  413
  Mr. Sackville
  Malaria is not endemic in the United Kingdom. The Department gives advice about the precautions that should be taken when travellers from the United Kingdom are travelling to endemic areas in the Department's free booklet, "Health Advice for Travellers", which is updated as necessary on Prestel. Guidance on appropriate prophylaxis against malaria for specific parts of the world is available to doctors and practice nurses from the Public Health Laboratory Service malaria reference laboratory, which also has a helpline for travellers.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  Special Advisers
  Mr. Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement concerning the cost to public funds of employing ministerial special advisers in his Department.

  Mr. Goodlad
  My Department employs two special advisers.

  Salaries for special advisers are negotiated individually in relation to their previous earnings, and are confidential. They are, however, normally paid on a special advisers' salary spine of 34 points, ranging from £19,503 to £67,609. Appointments are non-pensionable, and the salary spine reflects this.

  Vetting Procedures
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans he has to provide information to embassies concerning the practice of enforced subject access to criminal records in the vetting of United Kingdom citizens; what United Kingdom embassies abroad use a similar procedure to vet foreign nationals; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Goodlad
  There are no plans to provide such information to embassies in the United Kingdom. United embassies abroad are not instructed to employ these or similar procedures.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans he has to introduce enforced subject access procedures as part of his Department's assessment of those individuals who are not positively vetted; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Goodlad
  There are no plans to introduce such procedures.

  Macedonia
  Sir Russell Johnston
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made towards the establishment of an association agreement between the European Union and Macedonia; what is the policy position of Her Majesty's Government with particular reference to the Greek stance; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Baldry
  The United Kingdom and other member states have urged an early solution to the bilateral dispute between the Macedonians and Greece. This would enable the EU to develop its relations with the Macedonians, for example by concluding a trade and co-operation agreement.
  414
  Sir Russell Johnston
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the position of Her Majesty's Government regarding the exclusion of Macedonia from the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe because of a Greek veto; and what representations he has made to the Greek Government.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  We support Macedonia's immediate admission to the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe as a full participating state. We have expressed our concern at its exclusion repeatedly and will do so again at the meeting of CSCE heads of state and Government in Budapest on 5 to 6 December. The Greek Government are in no doubt about our position. We have urged them to lift their block.

  Rwanda
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the progress that has been made to establish an international tribunal on genocide following recent events in Rwanda; what crimes against humanity will be investigated by the international tribunal on genocide in Rwanda; and what contribution the United Kingdom is making to the establishment of the international tribunal on genocide in Rwanda.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The Security Council established an international criminal tribunal for Rwanda by resolution 955 of 8 November 1994, which we co-sponsored.

  Under the statute, the tribunal has jurisdiction over persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of Rwanda and Rwandan citizens responsible for such violations committed in the territory of neighbouring states, between 1 January 1994 and 31 December 1994. Its jurisdiction includes genocide and serious violations of the laws of war as well as certain crimes against humanity committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against any civilian population on national, ethnic, racial or religious grounds.

  The Secretary-General will shortly make recommendations as to the practical arrangements for the tribunal. We will consider any United Kingdom contributions in the light of his report.

  Slovenia
  Sir Russell Johnston
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress has been made towards the establishment of an association agreement between the European Union and Slovenia; what is the policy position of Her Majesty's Government with particular reference to the Italian stance; and if he will make a statement

  Mr. Baldry
  The content of a negotiating mandate for an association agreement with Slovenia has been agreed, but a bilateral problem between Italy and Slovenia has prevented the Foreign Affairs Council from approving the mandate. We have made it clear, including to the Slovenian Prime Minister on his recent visit to London, that we want this mandate to be agreed as soon as possible and have urged the parties to resolve their differences.

  Sudan
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the present programme of activity of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Sudan; and if he is receiving any co-operation from the Government of Sudan.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The UN special rapporteur, Dr. Biro, has presented a second interim report on the human rights situation in Sudan to the UN general assembly. The Sudanese Government have not responded to Dr. Biro's request for co-operation

  Lithuania
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what issues were discussed with the Prime Minister of Lithuania, Mr. Adolfus Slezevicius, on his recent visit here; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  Discussions with Prime Minister Slezevicius covered developments in the Lithuanian economy, prospects for increased trade between Britain and Lithuania and Lithuania's relations with Russia.

  Kenya
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when the British high commissioner in Nairobi last visited the Rift valley area in Kenya; and what conclusions he came to about the security and human rights position in the area.

  Mr. Baldry
  Our high commissioner in Nairobi visited Rift Valley province in October and November this year. Security has improved markedly. Displaced victims of inter-ethnic fighting in 1992–93 have begun to return to their homes with the help of a Government of Kenya-sponsored joint programme supported by UNDP, NGOs and bilateral donors, including the Government.

  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when the British high commissioner in Nairobi last visited the Rift valley area in Kenya; and what conclusions he came to about the security and human rights position in the area.

  Mr. Baldry
  Our high commissioner in Nairobi visited Rift Valley province in October and November this year. Security has improved markedly. Displaced victims of inter-ethnic fighting in 1992–93 have begun to return to their homes with the help of a Government of Kenya-sponsored joint programme supported by UNDP, NGOs and bilateral donors, including the Government.

  Extradition
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will ensure that evidence presented during extradition proceedings is made subject to cross examination.

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  I have been asked to reply.

  Extradition is the means by which individuals are returned to stand trial for offences allegedly committed in another country. It is for the courts of the country where the offence is alleged to have occurred to test the evidence and decide on guilt.

  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what consideration 416
  is given to the possible treatment of an individual after extradition in deciding on an extradition order.

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  I have been asked to reply.

  The Government enter into extradition arrangements only where they are satisfied as to the fairness of the criminal justice system of the country concerned.

  Under section 12 of the Extradition Act 1989 the Secretary of State cannot order the surrender of an individual where it would be unjust or oppressive to do so.

  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list those quangos to which he is responsible for appointing members.

  Mr. Goodlad
  The quangos for which my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is responsible for appointing members are:

  Foreign and Commonwealth Office;

  Britain-Russia Centre;

  British Association for Central & Eastern Europe;

  British Council;

  Commonwealth Institute;

  Great Britain-China Centre;

  Marshall Aid Commemoration Commission;

  Westminster Foundation for Democracy;

  Diplomatic Service Appeals Boards;

  Wilton Park Academic Council;

  Wilton Park International Advisory Council;

  Foreign Compensation Committee;

  Overseas Development Administration;

  Commonwealth Scholarship Commission;

  Crown Agents Holding and Realisation Board;

  Advisory Committee on Overseas Economic and Social Research

  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many members of quangos to which he is responsible for appointing members have stood as candidates for borough, city, district or county councils for(a) the Conservative party, (b) the Labour party and (c) the Liberal Democrat party.

  Mr. Goodlad
  Candidates are not asked to provide information on their political careers unless holding of political office is a prerequisite of their appointment.

  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many members of quangos to which he is responsible for appointing members currently serve as councillors representing(a) the Conservative party, (b) the Labour party and (c) the Liberal Democrat party.

  Mr. Goodlad
  Candidates are not required to provide information on their political careers unless their political career is a prerequisite of the appointment or the holding of political office disbars them from the appointment in question.

  Rwanda and Burundi
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent meetings he has had to discuss the situation in(a) Rwanda and (b) Burundi; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Baldry
  My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary most recently discussed these subjects with the Belgian and French Foreign Ministers on 11 and 18 November respectively, and with President Moi of Kenya on 16 November. My noble Friend, the Baroness Chalker of Wallasey, discussed these matters with President Moi when he called on my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 15 November and with the Belgian Foreign Minister yesterday. Today she will discuss these issues
  417
  with her European counterparts during the Development Council in Brussels.

  Burundi
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports he has received regarding violation of human rights in Burundi; what representations he has made to the Government of Burundi on these reports; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Baldry
  The Burundi Government submitted their own report to the United Nations human rights committee in July, and a report by Amnesty International of 17 May 1994 also alleged widespread human rights violations. My noble Friend, Baroness Chalker of Wallasey, discussed these matters during wide-ranging talks with the Burundi Government in Bujumbura in August. The UN centre for human rights has established an office in Bujumbura and is providing technical assistance, to which we are contributing.

WALES

  Royal National Eisteddfod
  Mr. Llwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what was the precise reason for the absence of a Welsh Office Minister from the royal national eisteddfod in 1994; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Richards
  It was with regret that I had to decline the royal national eisteddfod's invitation to attend this year's eisteddfod because of a long-standing personal commitment. I very much look forward to attending the 1995 Colwyn eisteddfod, which will be held in my constituency.

  Quangos
  Mr. Sykes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales which quangos his Department has abolished since 1979.

  Mr. Redwood
  The public bodies abolished since 1979 are as follows:

  Executive

  Cwmbran Development Corporation

  Welsh Water Authority

  Advisory

  (1)Agricultural Regional Panels for North and South Wales (2)

  Careers Service Advisory Council for Wales

  Celtic Sea Advisory Committee

  Committee for Under Fives Initiative

  Committee on Opportunities for Volunteering

  Health Education Advisory Committee for Wales

  (2)Housing Management Advisory Panel for Wales

  Perinatal Mortality Survey Group

  Review Group on Mental Illness Services in Dyfed

  Review of Community Nursing Services for Wales

  Training, Enterprise and Education Advisory Group for Wales

  Wales Advisory Body for Local Authority Higher Education

  Standing Working Group

  Welsh Committee of the Health Services Board

  Welsh Committee on Alcohol Misuse

  Welsh Committee on Drug Misuse

  Welsh Computer Strategy Committee

  Welsh Council

  Welsh Language Translation Advisory Panel

  418
  Tribunals

  Milk and Dairies Tribunal for Wales

  (1)Replaced in 1980 by the Agriculture Advisory Panel for Wales

  (2)The final meeting of the Panel was held on 29 July 1994; no successor body is planned.

  Mr. Sykes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many quangos his Department was responsible for(a) in 1979 and (b) in the latest year for which a number is available.

  Mr. Redwood
  The information is as follows:

  Executive

  Advisory

  Tribunal

  Total

  (a)1979

  16

  21

  3

  40

  (b)1994

  24

  28

  11

  63

  These figures exclude the NHS, and include eight new valuation tribunals.

  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) how many members of quangos to which he is responsible for appointing members have stood as parliamentary candidates for(a) the Conservative party, (b) the Labour party and (c) the Liberal Democrat party.

  (2) how many members of quangos to which he is responsible for appointing members have stood as candidates to borough, city, district or county councils for (a) the Conservative party, (b) the Labour party and (c) the Liberal Democrat party.

  (3) how many members of quangos to which he is responsible for appointing members have previously served as councillors representing (a) the Conservative party, (b) the Labour party and (c) the Liberal Democrat party.

  Mr. Redwood
  The information is not held centrally.

  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many known members of(a) the Conservative party, (b) the Labour party and (c) the Liberal Democrat party currently serve on quangos to which he is responsible for appointing members.

  Mr. Redwood
  Appointments to public bodies are made on the basis of merit, aptitude and suitability to meet the demands of the post.

  Nominees on the Welsh Office register of candidates, from which appointees are drawn, are not required to give details of any political affiliation. Some 93 per cent. of nominees do not volunteer any information, and therefore no information about their affiliation is held.

  The analysis of serving members of public bodies appointed by the Welsh Office who have volunteered, at the time of their nomination to the register, the nature of their political affiliation is as follows:

  Political

  Number

  Percentage of Appointees

  Conservative

  36

  4.5

  Labour

  9

  1.1

  Liberal Democrat

  1

  0.1

  Plaid Cymru

  1

  0.1

  419
  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list those quangos to which he is responsible for appointing members.

  Mr. Redwood
  The information is given in "Appointments by the Secretary of State for Wales 1 September 1994" which is available in the Library of the House.

  1988–89

  1989–90

  1990–91

  1991–92

  1992–93

  Clwyd

  227

  319

  356

  440

  605

  Dyfed

  228

  297

  308

  369

  539

  Gwen

  220

  252

  209

  436

  451

  Gwynedd

  149

  211

  147

  294

  265

  Mid Glamorgan

  363

  426

  577

  777

  975

  Powys

  29

  48

  53

  54

  96

  South Glamorgan

  486

  493

  589

  644

  848

  West Glamorgan

  220

  275

  305

  266

  328

  Wales

  1,922

  2,321

  2,544

  3,280

  4,107

  1 It includes complaints concerning the hospital and community health service and family health services. Pembrokeshire figures are included with east Dyfed as Dyfed FHSA covers both health authority areas.

  Munchausen's Syndrome
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what representations he has had to approve(a) the use of covert video surveillance in hospital wards with children with parents suspected of Munchausen's syndrome by proxy and (b) a code of practice to be agreed with the area child protection teams with respect to such surveillance; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Redwood
  None.

  Training and Enterprise Councils
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will publish the data he has on TEC performance on(a) youth training, (b) training for work and (c) other schemes.

  Mr. Redwood
  The inter-TEC comparison tables were published on 25 August 1994. These tables covered the seven key performance indicators for all 82 TECs in England and Wales. A copy of the publication has been placed in the Library of the House.

  Custom House School
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he expects a decision concerning a property in the curtilage of Custom House CP school; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Richards
  The Welsh Office wrote to Clwyd county council on 20 October seeking clarification on a number of points in connection with this matter. A decision will be reached as soon as possible after the council has responded.

  Freight Traffic
  Mr. Hanson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what steps he is taking to encourage freight traffic to use rail services rather than road.

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  On 17 October 1994, my right hon. Friend relaunched the freight facilities grant scheme. This is an environmental grant available from the Welsh

  Hospital (Private Patients)
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how much income has been generated by NHS hospitals' private patient facilities in each of the last five years, by region.

  Mr. Richards
  The information, by district health authority area, is given in the following table:

  Office to encourage firms to take heavy lorries off the roads by helping them to invest in rail freight facilities.

  National Rivers Authority
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) what consultation he has had with the chairman of the NRA Wales region concerning the numbers of salmon and seatrout/sewin taken by water bailiffs in the River Taff for the purposes of assisted fertilisation at the hatchery; and what evaluation has been made of the relative strength of the homing instinct of naturally spawned salmon in the Taff catchment headwaters relative to those spawned in the hatchery;

  (2) what consultation he has had with the chairman of the Wales region of the NRA in relation to the numbers of migratory salmonoid in the River Taff crossing (a) Black weir, (b) Llandaf weir and (c) Radyr weir on spawning runs for each year since 1985; and if he will give the figures for this year to date;

  (3) what consultations he has had with the chairman of the Wales region of the NRA in relation to the effectiveness of the Taff fish passes installed at (a) Black weir, (b) Llandaf weir and (c) Radyr weir since their construction; in what year each was installed; what evaluation has been made of their effectiveness; and if he will make a statement;

  (4) what consultations he had with the chairman of the National Rivers Authority Wales region and the chairman of the Cardiff Bay development corporation concerning the impact of the piling operations for the Cardiff Bay barrage on salmon and seatrout/sewin spawning runs into (a) Taff and (b) Ely during 1995 and 1996.

  Mr. Redwood
  None.

SOCIAL SECURITY

  Incapacity Benefit
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether, in seeking the agreement of members of the panel on assessment of incapacity to publication of
  421
  their names, he informed them of the statements made by the Minister for Social Security and Disabled People (a) in his answer on 20 January, Official Report, column 800, that the report on the proposed medical test would include the membership of the panel, and (b) to Standing Committee E on 1 February, that their names would be publicly available; and if he will invite those who did not agree to publication to reconsider the matter in the light of those statements.

  Mr. Hague
  No. Panel members were made aware of our wish to publish their names in the report. I believe it is appropriate to respect the wish of any panel member that their name should not be made public. I have no plans to ask them to reconsider the matter.

  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many members of the panel on assessment of incapacity were, or are, employed or contracted by(a) the Benefits Agency medical service, (b) the Department of Social Security and (c) the Department of Health.

  Mr. Hague
  Fifteen members of the panel are employed by the Benefits Agency medical services, two members by the Department of Social Security and two by the Department of Health.

  Dr. Howells
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what number or percentage of claimants are expected to be eligible for incapacity benefit in the Porth, Tonypandy, Aberdare and Pontypridd areas.

  Mr. Hague
  The information requested is not available.

  The number of sickness benefit and invalidity benefit claimants in Great Britain expected to transfer to incapacity benefit is just under 2 million.

  Compensation (Reclaim of Benefits)
  Mr. Beith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social in what circumstances stat benefits are

  Class 1

  Class 2

  Class 3

  Class 4

  Date from

  Employee1 per cent.

  Employer1 per cent.

  Weekly rate £

  Weekly rate £

  per cent.

  6 April 1980

  6.75

  13.72

  2.50

  2.40

  5

  6 April 1981

  7.75

  13.72

  3.40

  3.30

  5.75

  6 April 1982

  8.75

  13.72

  3.75

  3.65

  6

  6 April 1983

  9

  11.952

  4.40

  4.30

  6.3

  6 April 1984

  9

  11.452

  4.60

  4.50

  6.3

  6 April 1985

  9

  10.45

  4.75

  4.65

  6.3

  6 October 1985

  5 7 93

  5 7 9 10.453

  3.50

  3.40

  6.3

  6 April 1986

  579

  5 7 9 10.45

  3.75

  3.65

  6.3

  6 April 1987

  579

  5 7 9 10.45

  3.85

  3.75

  6.3

  6 April 1988

  579

  5 7 9 10.45

  4.05

  3.95

  6.3

  6 April 1989

  579

  5 7 9 10.45

  4.25

  4.15

  6.3

  5 October 1989

  2 plus 94

  5 7 9 10.45

  4.25

  4.15

  6.3

  6 April 1990

  2 plus 9

  5 7 9 10.45

  4.55

  4.45

  6.3

  6 April 1991

  2 plus 9

  4.6 6.6 8.6 10.4

  5.15

  5.05

  6.3

  6 April 1992

  2 plus 9

  4.6 6.6 8.6 10.4

  5.35

  5.25

  6.3

  6 April 1993

  2 plus 9

  4.6 6.6 8.6 10.4

  5.55

  5.45

  6.3

  6 April 1994

  2 plus 10

  3.6 5.6 7.6 10.2

  5.65

  5.55

  7.3

  Notes:

  1 Not Contracted-out rates shown.

  2 Includes the National Insurance surcharge under the National Insurance Surcharge Act 1976. The surcharge was gradually reduced from 3.5 per cent. until its abolition on I October 1984.

  3 Lower employee and employer contribution rates were introduced for employees on lower earnings. The Upper Earnings Limit for employers' contributions was abolished.

  4 A revised structure for employee contributions was introduced. Employees now pay an initial contribution of 2 per cent. on earnings up to the Lower Earnings Limit and then a main contribution rate of 9 per cent. (now 10 per cent.) on the balance of earnings up to the Upper Earnings Limit.

  5 A new Class IA contribution was introduced in 1991–92. It is paid by employers, at the highest contribution rate, on the cash equivalent for tax purposes of the benefit of cars and fuel provided to their employees for private use.

  422
  reclaimed from recipients of tribunal awards for dismissal from the services for pregnancy, on the same basis as they are reclaimed from recipients of industrial injury compensation; and how much has been reclaimed from such recipients of compensation.

  Mr. Evans
  The recoupment of benefits for industrial tribunal awards is operated by the employment services. Recoupment applies if benefits are paid as a result of an unfair dismissal from work for which compensation is later awarded. Unlike the compensation recovery scheme, which covers awards made for industrial injury and is administered by Benefits Agency, recoupment is not dependant on the size of settlement. Information on total amounts reclaimed in these circumstances is not available.

  Attendance Allowance
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many(a) requests for reviews and (b) appeals concerning attendance allowance have been received by his Department since April 1992.

  Mr. Hague
  For the period 1 April 1992 to 31 October 1994, the information is in the table.

  Attendance Allowance

  Requests for reviews

  375,000

  Appeals

  8,9000

  Note:

  Source: Analytical Services Division, DSS

  National Insurance Contributions
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what changes there have been in all national insurance contributions in each of the last 15 years.

  Mr. Arbuthnot
  The rates for each class of contribution are in the table:

  Income Support
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is his calculation of the amount that will be paid in each of the next five years in income support job seeker's allowance, presuming that unemployment remains at its present level, and of the amount that would be paid if the present system of income support/unemployment benefit remained in force.

  Mr. Roger Evans
  The information is not available in the form requested. I refer the hon. Member to the social security department report, CM2513, for the latest published estimates of expenditure on benefits for unemployment, and to the reply given to the hon. Member for Rochdale (Ms Lynne) on 24 November 1994,Official Report, column 279, which provides an estimate of the savings resulting from the introduction of the job seeker's allowance.

  Child Support Agency
  Mr. Speller
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many annual periodic review notices have been sent out by the Child Support Agency.

  Mr. Burt
  The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Miss Ann Chant, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from Miss Ann Chant to Mr. John Spellar, dated 24 November 1994:
  I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the total number of annual periodic review notices sent out by the Child Support Agency.
  At present, this information could only be collected at disproportionate cost. Data on the number of periodic review forms issued will be collected on a regular basis in the future, although figures are unlikely to become available before April 1995.
  Since August 1994, the Agency has been collecting figures on the number of periodic review forms returned. Latest available figures show that 1,478 forms were returned during August.

  Ms Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security from what source and when the money was raised to reimburse the £4,800 of public funds spent on the lunch held at Plymouth Child Support Agency centre on 25 March; and what disciplinary action was taken against the staff responsible.

  Mr. Burt
  The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Miss Ann Chant, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from Miss Ann Chant to Ms Joan Ruddock, dated 24 November 1994:
  I am replying to your recent Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the party held at the Agency's Plymouth Centre.
  Staff disciplinary action within the Agency, like the rest of the Department of Social Security is a confidential matter between management, personnel and the staff involved. I cannot therefore provide you with any further details which would not breach that confidentiality. I repeat that appropriate disciplinary action was taken against those officials who had shown poor judgement. The £4,880 involved was privately donated within the Agency to avoid any loss to public funds. Again, it would not therefore be appropriate for me to provide further information.

  Benefit Payments, Lewisham
  Ms Ruddock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many claimants have been prevented from receiving benefits as a result of the habitual residence test in the parliamentary constituency of Lewisham, Deptford 424

  for each month since its inception; of those refused how many went on to appeal; and how many won their appeals.

  Mr. Roger Evans
  The administration of income support is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member with such information about income support as is available. Information about housing benefit arid council tax benefit is collected annually from local authorities and is not yet available.

  Letter from Mr. Michael Bichard to Ms Joan Ruddock dated 24 November 1994:
  The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking for details of the application of the Habitual Residency Test in Lewisham, Deptford since its inception in August 1994.
  The full range of information requested for Income Support (IS) is not routinely collected in the format requested. This is because Benefits Agency boundaries do not correspond with those of Parliamentary constituencies. However, I have placed at Annex A information which has been obtained from the Lewisham District Office which comprises the offices of Lewisham, Brixton, Greenwich, Hither Green and the Oval and handles IS claims from customers resident in the London postcode areas SE6, SE10, SE12, SE23, SE8, SE4, SE14 and part of SE13.
  Since 1 August 1994, 34 appeals have been received by the Lewisham District Office following the disallowance of IS as a result of the application of the Habitual Residence Test. To date none of these appeals have been heard by the Social Security Appeals Tribunal.
  Information on Housing and Council Tax Benefits is not yet available and is collected by the Department of Social Security from local authorities annually. In the meantime you may wish to contact the London Borough of Lewisham direct.
  I hope you find this reply helpful.

  Compensation Recovery Unit
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how much the compensation recovery unit has recovered from individuals with an asbestos-related disease in each of the last five years, by region.

  Mr. Roger Evans
  This is a matter for 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 Richard to Mr. Alan Milburn, dated 24 November:
  The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking how much the Compensation Recovery Unit (CRU) has recovered from individuals with an asbestos related disease in each of the last five years by region.
  The full range of information you requested is not available. This is because the CRU's computer system records cases involving victims of asbestosis rather than asbestos related diseases. In addition, information relating to cases settled prior to 1993 is no longer held on the computer system and could be obtained only at a disproportionate cost.
  Information is not readily available to break the data that is available down into regions and to obtain this would also be at a disproportionate cost.

  The total amounts recovered by CRU relating to victims of asbestosis is:

  1 April 93–31 March 1994 — £408,665.

  1 April 94–21 November 1994 — £651,164.

  I hope you find this reply helpful.

OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION

  Tobacco Projects
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what Overseas Development Administration aid has been given to tobacco projects since 1985.

  Mr. Baldry
  On account of increasing evidence to show that health risks associated with tobacco consumption will affect developing countries severely, it has been Her Majesty's Government's policy since early 1991 that the overseas aid programme should not be used for any purpose which identifiably supports the tobacco sector, despite its importance as a source of export earnings in some countries. Prior to the introduction of this policy, £1.65 million was committed between 1989 and 1991 to two tobacco projects in Malawi.

  Kenya
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about money being made available for educational purposes in Kenya by the Overseas Development Administration; and if he will indicate which projects are aimed at primary, secondary and higher education and the amounts of money allocated to each sector.

  Mr. Baldry
  Apart from a small amount of continuing assistance to the Kenya and Mombasa polytechnics, and some training, ODA's commitment to higher education in Kenya will end in 1994–95. There is no allocation for secondary education. The focus of our programme now is to strengthen primary education.

  Total disbursements this financial year in the education sector are expected to be some £3 million, of which nearly two thirds will be for primary education.

  Aid
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the percentage

  British bilateral aid to Indonesia 1979–1993/94 (£ thousand)

  ODA Programme

  CDC

  Other1

  Gross Public Expenditure

  Calendar Year

  1979

  7,485

  2,811

  1,424

  11,728

  1980

  7,954

  1,635

  1,601

  11,190

  1981

  5,809

  7,535

  2,006

  15,350

  1982

  8,891

  6,055

  2,273

  17,219

  1983

  7,422

  2,843

  2,273

  12,538

  1984

  10,546

  15,473

  2,273

  28,292

  1985

  229,507

  1,869

  2,273

  33,649

  1986

  5,190

  1,435

  2,273

  8,898

  1987

  7,121

  2,829

  2,273

  12,223

  Total

  89,925

  42,485

  18,669

  151,079

  Finacial Year3

  1987–88

  7,850

  4,537

  2,273

  14,668

  1988–89

  10,743

  4,350

  2,273

  17,366

  1989–90

  9,003

  9,707

  2,273

  20,983

  426
  of gross domestic product spent on overseas aid in each of the European Union countries for the years 1992–93 and 1993–94.

  Mr. Baldry
  Figures for the percentage of gross domestic product spent on aid in each of the European Union countries on a financial year basis are not available.

  Figures for net ODA expenditure as a percentage of GNP for these countries in 1992 and 1993 are as follows:-

  1992

  1993

  Belgium

  0.38

  0.39

  Denmark

  1.03

  1.03

  France

  0.63

  0.63

  Germany

  0.39

  0.36

  Greece

  N/A

  N/A

  Ireland

  0.16

  0.19

  Italy

  0.31

  0.30

  Luxembourg

  0.29

  0.32

  Netherlands

  0.86

  0.81

  Portugal

  0.31

  0.30

  Spain

  0.28

  0.27

  United Kingdom

  0.31

  0.31

  Source:

  OECD

  Note:

  These figures exclude assistance to the non-developing countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union.

  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what measures he is taking to ensure that aid money is spent on poverty relief, humanitarian aid and economic development.

  Mr. Baldry
  Aid money will continue to be spent on activities aimed at promoting the economic and social development of other countries, and the welfare of their people. All projects are subject to economic, social and environmental appraisal.

  Indonesia
  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much aid has been given to Indonesia in each year since 1979 and in total.

  Mr. Baldry
  The requested information is given in the table following.
  427

  British bilateral aid to Indonesia 1979–1993/94 (£ thousand)

  ODA Programme

  CDC

  Other1

  Gross Public Expenditure

  1990–91

  17,564

  5,550

  2,273

  25,387

  1991–92

  21,200

  10,952

  2,273

  34,425

  1992–93

  21,398

  9,041

  2,251

  32,690

  1993–944

  22,207

  10,439

  2,227

  34,874

  Total

  109,965

  54,576

  15,843

  180,385

  Source:

  British Aid Statistics

  Notes

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

  2 This was the final year in which ATP projects were financed as mixed credits. Thereafter they were funded as soft loans. ATP expenditure fell from £15.7 million in 1985 to L0–5 million in 1986.

  3 From 1987–88 onward expenditure is only available on a financial year basis. It is not possible to separately allocate 1987–88 expenditure to 1987 and 1988. For this reason it is not possible to give a total figure for expenditure since 1979.

  4 The figure for 1993–94 are provisional.

  Mr. Gapes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what aid and trade projects are currently being financed in Indonesia; and to what individual and total value.

  Mr. Baldry
  The following aid and trade provision projects are currently being financed in Indonesia.

  £ million

  Project

  Export Value

  ATP Value

  Steel Bridging

  9.930

  6.642

  Navigational Aids

  9.906

  6.386

  Bandung Television Studio

  11.735

  9.734

  Cigading Port Extension

  17.280

  13.266

  Scattered Diesels

  6.887

  5.891

  Citayam/Cibinong Railway

  23 000

  20105

  Cigading/Serpong Railway Rehabilitation

  31.861

  24.690

  Radio Communication System for the Ministry of Forestry

  37.234

  34.111

  Radio Studio Rehabilitation

  6.330

  5.040

  Shortwave Radio Transmitters

  29.000

  26.911

  Flight Simulator Consultancy

  0.439

  0.439

  Western Universities Equipment

  14.284

  13.671

  Bali and Medan Airport Security

  11.452

  10.455

  Jambi Power Station

  5.740

  5.345

  Flight Simulator

  4.969

  4.659

  Steel Bridging II

  3.831

  3.669

  Cikampek/Padalarang Toll Road Consultancy

  1.700

  1.700

  Western Universities Training Centre Consultancy

  2.214

  2.214

  Total

  227.792

  194.928

  Development Packages
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans he has for extending long-term development packages to(a) the countries of the former Soviet Union and (b) other low income countries.

  Mr. Baldry
  Although the majority of countries of the former Soviet Union are not classified as low-income, they need technical assistance to further their transition to democracy and market economies alongside the resources available from the private sector, the international financial institutions and the European Union. We will continue to provide such assistance through our much respected know-how fund. Concurrently, we will continue to provide substantial long-term development assistance to low-income countries.

  Russia
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the current level of British Government aid to Russia; and what plans there are to increase this sum, to help the Russian Government to improve safety within the Russian nuclear industry.

  Mr. Baldry
  We have committed a total of £1.2 billion in assistance to Russia bilaterally and through the European Union. We also contribute through international financial institutions. There are no current plans to increase this sum to improve safety in the Russian nuclear industry. Though the fundamental responsibility for nuclear safety lies with the Russian Government, we have to date contributed £24.5 million through the nuclear safety account and through EU nuclear safety programmes.

  Aid
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress is being made in meeting United Nations aid expenditure targets.

  Mr. Baldry
  In 1993, United Kingdom net assistance totalled £1,945 million, equivalent to 0.31 per cent. of GNP—higher than the average for all OECD development assistance committee donors of 0.29 per cent. The UN target is 0.7 per cent. Similarly, in 1992, the latest year for which figures are available, the United Kingdom's net assistance to the least-developed countries was 0.10 per cent. of GNP, compared to the DAC average of 0.09 per cent. The UN target is 0.15 per cent.

  The Government have not accepted any timetable for reaching these targets. Future levels of aid will continue to depend upon our economic circumstances and on other calls on public expenditure.

  Rwanda
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps the Government are taking to facilitate the process of rehabilitation and reconstruction in Rwanda to ensure peace and stability in the region.

  Mr. Baldry
  A co-ordinated international effort is needed to rehabilitate and reconstruct Rwanda. We have encouraged the IMF and IBRD to act quickly; missions have already visited. Britain was the first to support the UN programme for human rights monitors. We will play
  429
  an active part in regional meetings to promote peace and stability planned for early 1995.

  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what steps are being taken to provide bilateral humanitarian aid to(a) Rwanda and (b) to neighbouring countries which have been adversely affected by the influx of Rwandan refugees; and if he will make a statement.

  (2) what measures he has initiated in order to assist the plight of the refugees who have fled Rwanda and who remain displaced within Rwanda.

  Mr. Baldry
  Since the start of the crisis we have committed £60 million of humanitarian aid for Rwanda and for Rwandan refugees in neighbouring countries. We continue to monitor the situation closely and since May 1994 five separate assessment missions have visited the region.

  Aid and Trade provision
  Mr. Foulkes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will set up a departmental review of the criteria used in making decisions about funding of projects under the aid and trade provision.

  Mr. Baldry
  [holding answer 23 November 1994]: I refer the hon. Member to the answer my right hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Sir M. Lennox-Boyd) gave on 21 March 1994, Official Report, column 24, to the hon. Member for Cyon Valley (Mrs Clwyd). As a result of the ATP review the decision-making processes for aid and trade provision projects have been brought into line with those applied for other bilateral aid projects.

  As my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary told the House on 17 November, the Overseas Development Administration is reviewing carefully all the projects and activities it funds, including those under the aid and trade provision, to see whether there are any others approved under our previous understanding of the Overseas Development and Co-operation Act 1980 which might also fall outside the interpretation of the Act given by the High Court recently. The Government have no plans for a further review of the criteria for decisions about funding of projects under the aid and trade provision.

SCOTLAND

  NHS Trusts
  Mr. Kynoch
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will announce his decision on the fourth wave of NHS trust applications; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Lang
  Following public consultation on the eight fourth wave trust applications, reports have been submitted to me by Argyll and Clyde, Borders, Dumfries and Galloway, Greater Glasgow, and Lanarkshire health boards and by the Common Services Agency. These reports did not identify any serious flaws in the proposals for trust status.

  As with all trust applications, these have been considered against the published criteria of benefits for patients, management competence, the involvement of
  430
  clinicians and other healthcare professionals in management, and financial viability.

  The proposed trust arrangements meet these criteria and therefore I have decided to give my approval to the trust applications from Argyll and Bute unit, Borders Community Health Services, Borders General hospital, Dumfries and Galloway community services unit, Glasgow dental hospital and school, Lanarkshire Healthcare, Dumbarton unit which will become Lomond Healthcare NHS trust, and the Scottish Ambulance Service. These trusts will become operational from 1 April 1995.

  I have also approved the proposal by Greater Glasgow health board that its care for the elderly unit should be integrated with the existing acute trusts in the city.

  The result of my decisions is that all units on the mainland of Scotland will be operating as NHS trusts from 1 April 1995. There are no plans for the units managed by the three islands health boards, the Scottish Blood Transfusion Service and the state hospital to become NHS trusts at the present time.

  The trusts are achieving considerable success and are quickly demonstrating greater benefits to the public with record numbers of patients being treated, waiting lists and waiting times coming down and new services being developed in hospitals and in the community.

  Health Care International
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland who was responsible for monitoring differing aspects of Health Care Intenational development in Clydebank in Scottish Enterprise National, Scottish Office, Locate in Scotland and Dunbartonshire Enterprise; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  Officials in the relevant organisations monitored the assistance offered to the company in accordance with the normal procedures relating to the schemes in question. With regard to the offer of regional selective assistance—the largest single element of the assistance package offered to the company—my right hon. Friend's officials made appropriate checks to ensure that the company was complying with the terms of the offer prior to the release of each instalment of grant.

  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when he was first aware of economic difficulties at Health Care International in Clydebank; and what action he took.

  Mr. Stewart
  Officials of Locate in Scotland and Scottish Enterprise have been involved in discussions about the company's financial position over the last three months and my right hon. Friend has been kept informed of developments.

  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what account he took of the Irish Industrial Development Authority's decision on support of Health Care International when he agreed to support Health Care International in Clydebank.

  Mr. Stewart
  Decisions to offer financial assistance to Health Care International were made after the same rigorous appraisal as applies to all decisions in respect of such assistance, and determined by reference to the same criteria. In the context of the appraisal process, decisions taken by inward investment agencies in other countries are taken into account where, for example, they affect the
  431
  level of grant necessary to secure a mobile project. In this particular case, as the company had already made it clear that its preference was for a Scottish location, no specific account was taken of the indicative offer which the company had previously received from the Irish industrial development authority.

  Glasgow
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is now the policy of Locate in Scotland as regards the promotion of the City of Glasgow district council area as a location for consideration for inward investment; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Stewart
  Locate in Scotland is fully aware of the many advantages Glasgow offers as a business location and continues to market it—and all other parts of Scotland—to potential investors.

  Planning
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will ensure that financial considerations will not override consideration of other criteria such as architectural and landscape heritage in planning appeal decisions.

  Mr. Stewart
  Planning appeal decision are made on the basis of a series of considerations put forward by the parties involved. As required by statute, the first among these is the contents of the approved development plan, if relevant; other material considerations, involving environmental, employment and financial considerations, are taken into account. The weight to be attached to each will be a matter of judgment, based on the facts and circumstances of each case.

  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to alter the level of resources allocated to local authorities for planning responsibilities as a result of the current review of the planning system.

  Mr. Lang
  Central Government support for local authority revenue expenditure—aggregate external finance—is, with the exception of the specific grants component, not hypothecated to particular local authority services. There are no plans to alter the methodology underpinning the distribution of that support.

  Teachers
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many students have been awarded(a) a postgraduate certificate in teaching and (b) a bachelor of education in each year since 1990–91; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  The information is set out in the table below:

  Number of students awarded:

  Year

  PGCE

  BEd

  1990–91

  1,139

  620

  1991–92

  1,412

  538

  1992–93

  1,442

  858

  There continues to be a health level of interest in teaching as a career. Through our controls over student places on courses of initial teacher training we seek to
  432
  keep the number of trainee teachers broadly in balance with projected teacher requirements.

  Sustainable Development
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what progress he has made towards ensuring that plans for development in Scotland will include sustainable development considerations as a necessary feature for approval to be granted by local authorities.

  Mr. Lang
  Sustainable development is a key theme in our national planning policy guidelines. Planning authorities must take account of these in the preparation of development plans and in determining planning applications.

  To date, we have published NPPGs on the planning system, business and industry, land for housing, land for mineral working, archaeology and planning and renewable energy. Drafts have been issued on waste, roadside facilities and A9 policy. Others currently in preparation cover retailing, planning and transport, sport and recreation and skiing.

  Physical Education Teachers
  Mr. Hain
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the average annual cost of employing a physical education teacher.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  Information about teaching costs is not held centrally by subject specialism. The average cost of employing a secondary school teacher is estimated to be £25,296. This figure is derived from the total teacher costs, including promoted staff and employer overheads, which are generally estimated to be about 16.5 per cent. of the total pay bill.

  Tariff Rebate Subsidies Scheme
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what estimate he has made of the amount of public money paid out by his Department under the tariff rebate subsidies scheme between 1 January 1992 and 31 August 1993, in respect of the carriage southbound for Orkney or Shetland of empty containers.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: No such estimate has been made.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what systems his Department has operated to monitor and scrutinise tariff rebate subsidy claims made by or on behalf of(a) P and 0 Scottish Ferries Ltd., (b) Shetland Line (1984) Ltd. and Orkney Line and (c) Orcargo Ltd.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: Since 1 February 1994 each of the shipping companies has had to submit claims for tariff rebate subsidy in a standard format. Each company is required to submit a subsidy claim which has been certified by its auditors as fairly stated and properly and reasonably made in accordance with the conditions of the scheme. To assist the reporting accountants in this task, a comprehensive guidance note covering the rules and regulations of the TRS scheme has been issued. In addition to statutory annual accounts the companies are also required to prepare an approved services account and audit certificate which details total income and expenditure, including subsidy, in relation to approved services. The Department also retains the right to carry

  433
  out spot checks on each company's records to ensure adherence to the rules and regulations currently in force.

  Prior to 1 February 1994, all companies within the scheme, with the exception of P and 0 Scottish Ferries Ltd., were required to submit to the Department copies of invoices relating to freight shipments. P and 0 was required to submit regular information on carryings but was not required to submit copies of individual invoices because of the large number of invoices processed by that company. In all cases the companies were required to submit annually an approved services account and audit certificate.

  Shipping Subsidies
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what information he has on the time spent by the management consultants engaged by his Department to conduct studies to inform his shipping subsidies review in interviewing representatives of(a) P and 0 Scottish Ferries Ltd., (b) Streamline Shipping Co. Ltd. and (c) Orcargo Ltd. and (d) users of the bulk cargo shipping services to and from Orkney and Shetland.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: None. This was a matter for the consultants.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the cost to his Department of the consultant's inquiry into the shipping subsidy review in respect of the ferry services to northern and western isles.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: It was £137,500.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland on how many occasions officials of his Department discussed the future of the shipping subsidy scheme with representatives of(a) P and 0 Scottish Ferries Ltd., (b) Streamline Shipping Co. Ltd. and (c) Orcargo Ltd. after receipt of the report on the shipping subsidies review and prior to his announcement of the proposed new subsidy arrangements on 28 October; and if he will make a statement.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: Discussions took place on a number of occasions with a P and 0 Scottish Ferries Ltd about the operation of possible new subsidy arrangements in relation to passengers and accompanied cars. Prior to the decision to announce the withdrawal of freight subsidies with effect from 1 May 1995, information was obtained from P and 0 Scottish Ferries, the Streamline Shipping Group and Orcargo Ltd.

  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what notice was given by his Department inviting tenders to carry out the studies needed to inform his review of shipping subsidies in respect of the ferry services to Orkney, Shetland and the Western isles.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer given by my right hon. Friend on 26 May 1993, Official Report, column 587, to my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen, South (Mr. Robertson) where he indicated that the Scottish Office industry department would shortly be inviting tenders for the necessary studies. A number of suitable firms were subsequently invited to tender on 7 June 1993.
  434
  Mr. Wallace
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is his Department's planned expenditure on shipping subsidies on routes to and from Orkney and Shetland in(a) 1994–95 and (b) 1995–96.

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 24 November I994]: In relation to 1994–95 I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer given by my right hon. Friend on 23 March 1994, Official Report, Column 237, to my hon. Friend the Member for Ayr (Mr Gallie). An announcement will be made in due course in relation to 1995–96 following the conclusion of the current public expenditure round.

  Next Steps Agencies
  Mr. Kaufman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list the salary and other emoluments of the civil servant who did the work of, or work comparable to that of, the chief executive of each next steps agency established by his Department before the agency was established.

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: Eight agencies have been established by my Department. In seven of them, civil servants previously doing comparable work were paid on the same pay bands as current chief executives. In the remaining case, there was no one single individual doing the job that the chief executive now has.

  Non-domestic Rates
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the total payment by his Department in respect of reduction of Scottish non-domestic rates in respect of each year since 1990–91; and from which budget the said payments were drawn.

  Mr. Stewart
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: The total amounts spent each year on the Government's unified business rates policy are as follows:

  £ million

  1990–91

  80

  1991–92

  100

  1992–93

  100

  1993–94

  100

  1994–95

  60

  Total

  440

  Local authorities have been asked to contribute a total of £59 million towards the above sum by means of efficiency savings. The remainder of the sum was allocated by increasing the level of revenue support grant to offset the reduction in no-domestic rate income within the total of aggregate external finance payable to local authorities in the years in question. The Scottish Office contribution to this shift in the balance between RSG and NDR1 was funded from the Scottish block.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Terms of Protection Directive
  Sir Thomas Arnold
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade in what manner he proposes to implement the EC terms of protection directive; and if he will make a statement.
  435
  Mr. Needham
  It is intended to lay regulations implementing the EC directive on unfair terms in consumer contracts before Parliament before the end of the year.

  Copier Contracts
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) if he will make a statement on deceptive copier contracts;

  (2) if he will enact the Office of Fair Trading recommendation in its report on unfair copier contract terms that a new proposal form should make clear all the information buyers need to evaluate quotations.

  Mr. Ian Taylor
  The Director General of Fair Trading published a report on photocopier selling practices in March of this year. He announced that he would undertake a further review early in 1995, and we will consider in the light of the recommendations of this review whether further action by Government is necessary.

  In the meantime, the Director General is continuing to monitor business practices in the photocopier sector closely.

  Dual-use Goods
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what progress has been made on the introduction of an EU-wide regulation covering export controls on certain dual-use goods and technologies.

  Mr. Ian Taylor
  In June 1994, member states agreed a text of a European regulation setting up a Community regime for the control of exports of dual-use goods. An associated inter-governmental decision in the form of a joint action under the common foreign and security policy provisions in the treaty on European Unity was also agreed. The decision covers a number of operational annexes listing controlled goods, destinations and guidelines to be taken into account by the authorities of all member states when considering export licence applications. The regulation and decision are due to apply on 1 January 1995.

  In the period since June, member states have been finalising the contents of the annexes, and discussing practical aspects of the regulation with a view to ensuring uniform application throughout the Community.

  The annexe to the decision listing controlled goods which will require a licence for export from the Community is lengthy and technical. The task of translating it into all Community languages is being undertaken primarily by the Commission's translation service in Brussels. A combination of last-minute changes to the contents of that annexe and difficulties in scheduling the translation has meant that the task is still unfinished. As a result, the formal adoption of the regulation and decision has been postponed from October.

  The Commission has assured member states that all is being done to complete the translation work by the end of November, so that adoption can take place in early December, with implementation on 1 January 1995 as planned. We shall therefore know shortly if that timetable can be kept or whether implementation will have to be put back a little further in 1995.

  European Funding
  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what is the total amount of money from(a) the European regional development fund and (b) the European social fund which has been paid in each financial year between 1988–89 and 1993–94 to (i) all agencies receiving those funds in the United Kingdom, (ii) all local authorities with the United Kingdom (iii) all urban development corporations within the United Kingdom and (iv) all training and enterprise councils with the United Kingdom.

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

  Post Office
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many responses he has received to his consultation document on the Post Office; and how many were in favour of full or partial privatisation.

  Mr. Eggar
  Some 15,400 responses were received on the Green Paper, including some 2,000 received after the close of the consultation period. The majority took the form of standard form letters and postcards issued by organisations campaigning against the Government's proposals. About 60 responses in total were positively in favour of full or partial privatisation, although a wide variety of views were expressed and not all letters could easily be categorised.

  Marketing Your Business
  Mr. Wilson
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will give the cost to his Department of producing the booklet "Marketing Your Business" in respect of(a) payments to consultants (b) printing costs and (c) other costs; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Ian Taylor
  The business skills seminar workbook entitled "Marketing Your Business" was originally written on behalf of the Training Agency. The printing, publishing and sale of business skills seminar workbooks is licensed by Her Majesty's Stationery Office to Vector Business Development and involves no cost to my Department.

  Overseas Investment
  Ms Quin
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will provide figures for(a) the value of overseas investment, (b) the number of projects created and (c) the number of jobs created by standard planning region, in each year since 1985.

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: The table sets out the number of inward investment decisions notified to my Department's Invest in Britain Bureau and the number of total jobs these investments are expected to create and safeguard. These figures are based on information provided by companies at the time of the decision to invest and take no account of subsequent developments and are collected on a financial year basis. Figures for the value of this investment are not available since firms are not obliged to reveal this information.
  437

  Inward investment projects by year and region as notified to Invest in Britain Bureau 1985–1994

  Year

  Region

  Number of projects

  Total new jobs

  Total number of jobs safeguarded

  1985–86

  East Midlands

  23

  1,114

  20

  North East

  26

  2,223

  2,263

  Northern Ireland

  22

  813

  1,265

  North West

  39

  2,500

  1,800

  Scotland

  52

  4,905

  5,517

  South East

  94

  4,253

  5,692

  South West

  19

  2,077

  —

  Wales

  47

  2,862

  1,277

  West Midlands

  83

  6,369

  1,862

  Yorkshire/Humberside

  15

  2,270

  2,995

  Total for year

  420

  29,386

  22,771

  1986–87

  East Midlands

  10

  382

  —

  North East

  38

  2,553

  2,040

  Northern Ireland

  21

  799

  2,629

  North West

  24

  1,172

  1,403

  Scotland

  35

  2,267

  341

  South East

  66

  2,359

  1,154

  South West

  11

  445

  528

  Wales

  64

  3,807

  2,752

  West Midlands

  67

  5,278

  2,256

  Yorkshire/Humberside

  20

  368

  418

  Total for year

  356

  19,430

  13,521

  1987–88

  East Anglia

  2

  28

  23

  East Midlands

  12

  489

  418

  North East

  22

  3,514

  491

  Northern Ireland

  16

  1,050

  1,662

  North West

  33

  1,955

  6,235

  Scotland

  56

  5,514

  4,378

  South East

  59

  10,057

  6,502

  South West

  11

  908

  250

  Wales

  61

  4,837

  2,137

  West Midlands

  64

  3,538

  7,161

  Yorkshire/Humberside

  27

  1,948

  965

  Total for year

  363

  33,838

  30,222

  1988–89

  East Anglia

  1

  18

  32

  East Midlands

  22

  1,422

  1,838

  North East

  37

  2,786

  503

  Northern Ireland

  23

  2,808

  1,449

  North West

  40

  2,079

  4,289

  Scotland

  43

  4,849

  726

  South East

  34

  2,504

  840

  South West

  6

  393

  120

  Wales

  45

  4,995

  1,234

  West Midlands

  74

  3,898

  4,894

  Yorks/Humberside

  23

  1,810

  146

  Total for year

  348

  27,562

  16.071

  1989–90

  East Anglia

  3

  300

  20

  East Midlands

  14

  6,305

  4,775

  North East

  39

  4,021

  1,386

  Northern Ireland

  23

  1,956

  9,459

  North West

  60

  3,076

  10,016

  Scotland

  35

  7,828

  569

  South East

  15

  780

  550

  South West

  6

  1,498

  40

  Wales

  66

  3,978

  5,299

  West Midlands

  95

  7,237

  8,541

  Yorkshire/Humberside

  19

  2,018

  1,340

  Total for year

  375

  38,997

  41,995

  1990–91

  East Anglia

  6

  445

  743

  East Midlands

  12

  1,689

  372

  438 439

  Inward investment projects by year and region as notified to Invest in Britain Bureau 1985–1994

  Year

  Region

  Number of projects

  Total new jobs

  Total number of jobs safeguarded

  North East

  40

  2,164

  647

  Northern Ireland

  20

  923

  1,820

  North West

  67

  2,279

  9,258

  Scotland

  40

  5,701

  928

  South East

  17

  805

  24,422

  South West

  3

  580

  —

  Wales

  62

  3,356

  5,065

  West Midlands

  71

  4,618

  7,514

  Yorkshire/Humberside

  26

  1,260

  10,131

  Total for year

  364

  23,820

  60,900

  1991–92

  UK-wide

  1

  70

  —

  East Anglia

  11

  591

  4,210

  East Midlands

  5

  314

  110

  North East

  39

  3,700

  2,466

  Northern Ireland

  11

  364

  732

  North West

  75

  1,501

  8,481

  Scotland

  38

  3,884

  891

  South East

  29

  1,166

  2,227

  South West

  9

  2190

  790

  Wales

  71

  5,195

  5,634

  West Midlands

  46

  1,872

  3,676

  Yorkshire/Humberside

  17

  1,656

  1,806

  Total for year

  352

  22,503

  31,023

  1992–93

  East Anglia

  8

  363

  10,632

  East Midlands

  7

  183

  405

  North East

  35

  2,312

  3,210

  Northern Ireland

  12

  2,742

  1,357

  North West

  27

  992

  2,783

  Scotland

  61

  4,497

  4,198

  South East

  20

  1,212

  6,128

  South West

  7

  285

  995

  Wales

  65

  2,382

  4,489

  West Midlands

  43

  1,568

  2,669

  Yorkshire/Humberside

  44

  1,286

  5,529

  Total for year

  329

  17,822

  42,395

  1993–94

  East Anglia

  13

  462

  1,231

  East Midlands

  22

  3,218

  210

  North East

  38

  2,256

  3,981

  Northern Ireland

  16

  2,475

  601

  North West

  30

  2,112

  1,517

  Scotland

  88

  7,645

  4,654

  South East

  19

  896

  5,950

  South West

  12

  1,172

  1,008

  Wales

  64

  3,913

  2,651

  West Midlands

  84

  3,370

  43,069

  Yorkshire/Humberside

  40

  2,329

  3,998

  Total for year

  426

  29,848

  68,870

  Licensed Premises
  Mr. Tyler
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has to propose legislation to ensure that leases for licensed premises are consistent with the treaty of Rome; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  [holding answer 24 November 1944]: I assume that the hon. Member has in mind articles 85 and 86 of the treaty of Rome. These provisions are directly applicable in the United Kingdom and are enforceable by national courts. Legislation would therefore not be appropriate.

  Next Steps Agencies
  Mr. Kaufamn
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list the salary and other emoluments of the civil servant who did the work of, or work comparable to that of, the chief executive of each next steps agency established by his Department before the agency was established.

  Mr. Heseltine
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: The jobs are not the same and therefore comparisons are impossible.

  Mineworkers Pension Scheme
  Mr. Hain
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what assessment he has made of reports that licensed mine owners are defaulting on pension contributions in order to deprive their employees of protected pension status in transferring to the industry-wide mineworkers pension scheme; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: Participating employers in the mineworkers' pension scheme are bound by the provisions of the scheme to pay over to British Coal all contributions by, or in respect of, their employees who are members of the MPS, for as long as they remain participating employers. It is for British Coal to collect such contributions and for the trustees of the MPS to establish whether a company has, for the purposes of the scheme, withdrawn as a participating employer.

  Mr. Hain
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will monitor the procedure for licensed miners to transfer to the industry-wide mineworkers pension scheme; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: My Department has written to all participating employers in the mineworkers' pension scheme individually about the establishment of the new industry-wide mineworkers' pension scheme. Mine licensees participating in the MPS will owe a statutory duty to allow their employees who are participants in the MPS when the IWS-MPS is established to join the new scheme. My Department will be sending "Deeds of Adherence" to participating employers in the MPS shortly for their signature in order that they may become participating employers in the IWS-MPS.

  Electricity Consumption
  Mrs. Ewing
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will calculate average figures for the level of consumption of electricity required for heating for(a) the United Kingdom, (b) England, (c) Scotland, (d) Wales, (e) Northern Ireland and (f) the English regions.

  Mr. Charles Wardle
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: Information on domestic electricity consumption for the main end uses—space heating, water heating, lights and appliances, and cooking—has been estimated by the Building Research Establishment for the housing stock of Great Britain, using the BRE housing model for energy statistics. The most recent estimates relate to 1991 and show the following distribution.

  Petajoules

  Space heating

  84.5

  Water heating

  41.4

  Lights and appliances

  190.8

  Cooking

  25.3

  Total

  342.0

  Estimates of electricity use for heating by region are not available.

  Lobbying Companies
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list the guidelines issued by his Department to regulate relationships with lobbying companies.
  442
  Mr. Ian Taylor
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: My Department has conditions of service for staff which incorporate the general principles of conduct that require civil servants not to misuse information which they acquire in the course of their duties, not to make use of their official position to further their private interests or those of others, and not to receive gifts, hospitality or benefits of any kind from a third party which might be seen to compromise their personal judgment or integrity.

  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list and date those occasions over the last two years, when Ministers or officials in his Department have met lobbying companies, prior to a decision being made on the subject of the meeting with the lobbying company.

  Mr. Heseltine
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: This information is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Identification Cards
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary for the Home Department (1) if he will list those European countries that currently have a system of compulsory identification cards; and which of these countries also have a written constitution;

  (2) which European countries currently have a system of voluntary identification cards; and which of these countries also have a written constitution;

  (3) which European countries do not have a system of voluntary or compulsory identification cards.

  Mr. Maclean
  Within the European Union, Belgium, Germany, Greece, Luxembourg and Spain have compulsory identity cards. France, Italy and the Netherlands have voluntary schemes. Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom do not have identity card schemes. All except the United Kingdom have written constitutions.

  Information about countries outside the European Union is not readily available.

  Police (Best Practice)
  Dr. Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what measures he is taking to ensure that all police forces operate best practice;

  (2) what are the total estimated efficiency savings for the next five years from police operating best practice.

  Mr. Maclean
  The operation of good practice throughout the police service is encouraged by a variety of mechanisms which include regular publications, helpdesks and conferences. Other organisations, such as Her Majesty's inspectorate of constabulary, the Audit Commission and the Association of Chief Police Officers have a valuable role to play in this process.

  The process itself is both continuous and varied. It is, therefore, not possible to identify what efficiency savings might result in the next five years.

  Criminal Records
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he has made a decision to award the
  443
  contract for the back-record conversion of criminal records for input to the Phoenix system; if the successful contractor could carry out some of the work in a third-world country; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Maclean
  I announced the award of the contract for Phoenix back record conversion on 8 July Official Report, Column 330–31. None of the work will be carried out overseas. The project is now underway and is expected to be finished in 18 months.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to introduce legislation which permits embassies to access criminal records held on the police national computer; when he expects to announce his policy with respect to the wider access to criminal records; and if he will summarise the drawbacks of the practice of enforced subject access.

  Mr. Maclean
  While legislation would not be necessary to permit embassies to access criminal records held on the police national computer, there are no plans to do so. I hope to announce the results of our review of access to criminal records for employment vetting purposes in spring 1995.

  Enforced subject access is widely criticised as an abuse of a right conferred by the Data Protection Act 1984 on individuals for other purposes.

  Cumbria and Lancashire Constabularies
  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if it is his intention to promote the amalgamation of the Cumbria and Lancashire constabularies.

  Mr. Maclean
  No.

  Intelligence Service
  Mr. Spellar
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will publish the report into the National Criminal Intelligence Service by Her Majesty's inspector Geoffrey Dear.

  Mr. Maclean
  Her Majesty's inspectorate of constabulary's report on the national criminal intelligence service was sent to chief officers of police, heads of regional crime squads and members of the NCIS standing committee on 9 November. To give the report a wider circulation would risk placing in the public domain information which could be of use to the criminal world.

  Wheelclamping
  Mr. Waller
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what are his current plans to bring forward proposals to control the off-street clamping of vehicles.

  Mr. Maclean
  Following the consultation process completed last year, the Government are considering what action it would be appropriate to take in respect of wheelclamping on private land. We will make an announcement as soon as possible.

  Crewe Bridge
  Mrs. Dunwoody
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what consultations have been held with the police authorities before proposed closures of the Crewe bridge area of Nantwich road in the Crewe and Nantwich constituency.
  444
  Mr. Maclean
  The Cheshire Constabulary has been involved in discussions concerning the closure of the Crewe bridge area of Nantwich road at various stages since the initial meeting held on 21 July 1993.

  Haverigg Prison
  Dr. John Cunningham
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for how long Her Majesty's prison Haverigg has been a prison establishment.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

  Letter form Mr. Derek Lewis to Dr. John Cunningham, dated 25 November 1994:
  The Home Secretary has asked me to reply to your recent Question about the length of time Haverigg prison has been a Prison Service establishment.
  The land on which Haverigg prison now stands was purchased in 1939 by the Air Ministry and was used as a wartime aerodrome. In 1966 it passed to the Prison Service who converted the site for use as a category C establishment.
  The first governor was appointed on 3 July 1967 and the first inmates were received into the prison on Wednesday 22 November 1967.

  Police, Cumbria
  Mr. Campbell-Savours
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress has been made on the new funding formula for Cumbria's police budget; and what will be the change in funding.

  Mr. Maclean
  The budget for Cumbria police is a matter for the Cumbria police authority.

  We have listened very carefully to the many concerns which have been expressed about the version of the new funding formula for the police which was exemplified in September. We have substantially revised the formula.

  Funding levels for police forces in 1995–96 will be issued shortly after the Budget statement.

  Offences Against Children
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will introduce legislation to require the notification of education and health authorities throughout the United Kingdom of persons convicted of offence:; against children and young persons and to ensure that all persons seeking employment involving contact with children and young persons are screened through a centrally held register of convicted persons.

  Mr. Maclean
  We are currently reviewing the arrangements in England and Wales for the protection of children and young people through criminal record checks—this review may be followed up by legislation—but checks are, of course, already available throughout the United Kingdom on those seeking to work in many areas of child care. Arrangements are in place for the police to inform employers involved in child care when an employee or volunteer receives a conviction or caution which could affect their suitability to work with children, and lists of individuals considered unsuitable to work with children are held centrally and can be consulted by employers.

  Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority
  Mrs. Roche
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many awards have been made by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority in each of the tariff bands since 1 April;

  (2) how much has been paid by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority to applicants since 1 April relating to applications made (a) before and (b) after 1 April;

  (3) how much money has been spent on (a) administration and (b) awards to applicants by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority since 1 April;

  (4) how many payments have been made or decided upon to applicants to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority for each month since 1 April for applications made (a) before and (b) after 1 April;

  (5) how many claims for compensation the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority has received since 1 April.

  Mr. Maclean
  The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority came into being on 1 April 1994 and is responsible only for applications for compensation received from this date. Applications received before 1 April 1994 are dealt with by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board.

  The legal challenge to the introduction of the tariff scheme, which has not yet been finally resolved, had the practical effect of deferring the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority's consideration of cases lodged since 1 April for some months. Once it became clear that the legal challenge would take some time to resolve, the authority began offering awards on a provisional, without prejudice, basis in accordance with an undertaking given to the court when leave to apply for judicial review was granted. Claimants have three months in which to decide whether to accept the award offered, or whether to appeal against the authority's decision.

  The following information has been provided by CICA and reflects the position as at 21 November 1994.

  Breakdown of awards provisionally offered by tariff band since 1 April 1994

  Band

  Value

  Offered

  1

  £1,000

  120

  2

  £1,250

  19

  3

  £1,500

  87

  4

  £1,750

  8

  5

  £2,000

  46

  6

  £2,500

  13

  7

  £3,000

  71

  8

  £3,500

  11

  9

  £4,000

  9

  10

  £5,000

  11

  11

  £6,000

  5

  12

  £7,500

  26

  13

  £10,000

  2

  14

  £12,500

  —

  15

  £15,000

  1

  16

  £17,500

  5

  17

  £20,000

  2

  18

  £25,000

  —

  19

  £30,000

  —

  20

  £40,000

  —

  21

  £50,000

  —

  22

  £75,000

  —

  23

  £100,000

  —

  24

  £175,000

  —

  25

  £25,000

  1

  446
  The total amount paid by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board since 1 April 1994, in respect of applications lodged prior to that date, is £102,984.288. The amount paid by CICA, in respect of applications lodged on or after that date, is £325,421.

  It is not possible to differentiate precisely as between expenditure on administration incurred by CICB, CICA and the appeals panel since, in the interests of administrative efficiency, economy and effectiveness, many of the same administrative staff serve all three bodies at different times according to need. However, total expenditure on administration in the period 1 April 1994 to 18 November 1994 was £9,631,332. The total value of awards offered to claimants under the tariff scheme is £1,392,750.

  Breakdown of number of payments made by CICB and CICA since 1 April 1994

  Month

  CICB

  CICA

  April

  2,229

  —

  May

  3,214

  —

  June

  6,106

  —

  July

  3,157

  —

  August

  2,140

  —

  September

  4,509

  —

  October

  4,109

  3

  November (lst–18th)

  3,093

  30

  CICA has received 41,259 applications under the tariff scheme.

  Drugs
  Mr. Gareth Wardell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Italian nationals are currently being held in prison in Britain on drugs-related charges; and what plans there are for repatriating them to Italy to complete their sentences or to receive treatment.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

  Letter from Derek Lewis to Mr. Gareth Wardell, dated 25 November 1994:
  The Home Secretary has asked me to reply to your recent Question about the number of prisoners of Italian nationality imprisoned on drugs related charges and the plans that exist for them to be repatriated to Italy to complete their sentence or for them to receive medical treatment.
  On 30 September 1994, there were four Italian nationals in Prison Service establishments in England and Wales under sentence for drugs offences excluding fine defaulters; a further two had no specific offence recorded.
  The Repatriation of Prisoners Act 1984 provides for the transfer of prisoners between the United Kingdom and foreign jurisdictions subject to the existence of an international agreement for this. Both the United Kingdom and Italy have ratified the Council of Europe Convention on the transfer of sentenced persons and this enables prisoners to transfer between the two jurisdictions in order to serve their sentences close to home.

  Prisons (Privatisation)
  Mr. Cox
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will publish the present list of Her Majesty's prisons in England and Wales which are now under consideration for privatisation.
  447
  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

  Letter from Mr. Derek Lewis to Mr. Tom Cox, dated 25 November 1994:
  The Home Secretary has asked me to reply to your recent Question about those prisons that are being considered for market testing.
  We are not considering privatising any prisons. Privatisation means removing an activity from the sphere of the government responsibility with full responsibility and ownership, being transferred to private sector. That is not what we are doing with regard to the management of prisons. Contracts have been awarded to private companies for the management of for prisons: Wolds, Blakenhurst, Doncaster and Buckley Hall. The contracted out prisons remain part of the Prison Service: I am accountable to the Home Secretary four contracted out as well as directly managed prisons and the Home Secretary remains accountable to Parliament for them.
  Six new prisons are to be built in the next few years using private sector finance. Sites have been identified in South Wales and Merseyside for the first two, which are expected to open in 1997–98 and tenders have been issued for contracts for the design, construction, management and finance of these prisons.
  We are also considering twelve existing establishments with a view to selecting one or more of them for market testing. In-house bids will be allowed and therefore market testing may or may not lead to contracting out depending on whether the in-house hid is successful.

  Conviction rates and average sentence length (months) given for the offences of theft and handling stolen goods and all offences in the Barking, Havering and Redbridge Petty Sessional Divisions by age group, 1993

  Theft and handling stolen goods

  All offences

  10–17

  18+

  All ages

  10–17

  18+

  All ages

  Barking PSD

  Conviction rate (Per cent.)

  75

  52

  52

  36

  61

  61

  Average sentence length (months)

  3.0

  2.7

  2.7

  3.0

  3.5

  3.5

  Havering PSD

  Conviction rate (Per cent.)

  75

  66

  67

  60

  77

  77

  Average sentence length (months)

  —

  3.3

  3.3

  3.0

  3.4

  3.4

  Redbridge PSD

  Conviction rate (Per cent.)

  60

  53

  54

  60

  71

  71

  Average sentence length (Months)

  —

  3.0

  3.0

  3.7

  3.6

  3.7

  England and Wales PSDs

  Conviction rate (Per cent.)

  62

  63

  63

  58

  70

  69

  Average sentence length (Months)

  3.9

  3.0

  3.1

  3.8

  3.2

  3.2

  All offences - Indictable, summary non-motoring and summary motoring.

  Percentage based on less than 50 defendants and average sentence length based on less than 50 sentenced to immediate custody.

  Prison Escapes
  Mr. George Howarth
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many(a) escapes and (b) escape attempts from prisons there have been for each of the last 12 months from gaols in England and Wales.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  [holding answer 21 November 1994]: Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.
  448

  The twelve establishments are as follows:

  Aylesbury

  Huntercombe

  Coldingley

  Northallerton

  Erlestoke

  Reading

  Everthorpe

  Rochester

  Feltham

  Shepton Mallet

  Hollesley Bay

  Styal

  Magistrates' Courts
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what are the most up-to-date annual figures for(a) the rate of conviction and (b) the average sentences for cases heard by Barking magistrates court relating to (i) all crimes of theft, (ii) all juvenile crimes and (iii) crimes of theft committed by juveniles;

  (2) what are the most up-to-date figures for (a) the rate of conviction and (b) the average sentence for cases heard by Havering magistrates court in relation to (i) all crimes of theft, (ii) all juvenile crimes and (iii) crimes of theft committed by juveniles;

  (3) what are the most up-to-date annual figures for (a) the rate of conviction and (b) the average sentence for cases heard by Redbridge magistrates court relating to (i) all crimes of theft, (ii) all juvenile crimes and (iii) crimes of theft committed by juveniles.

  Mr. Maclean
  Information for 1993 is given in the table.

  Letter from Mr. Derek Lewis to Mr. George Howarth, dated 25 November 1994:
  The Home Secretary has asked me to reply to your recent Question about escapes and escape attempts from prisons for each of the last 122 months from gaols in England and Wales.
  This information is shown in the following table.

  Escapes

  Attempted Escapes

  November 1993

  21

  24

  December 1993

  27

  36

  January 1994

  5

  12

  February 1994

  10

  18

  449

  Escapes

  Attempted Escapes

  March 1994

  5

  8

  April 1994

  15

  28

  May 1994

  10

  15

  June 1994

  9

  14

  July 1994

  21

  6

  August 1994

  21

  17

  September 1994

  24

  17

  October 1994

  10

  27

  Total

  178

  222

  Crime Victims
  Ms Coffey
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) who will be responsible for informing the victims of violent crime of the proposed home leave of their attackers;

  (2) how the views of victims on the temporary release of their attackers will be taken into account; and on what grounds victims will be able to object;

  (3) what plans he has to inform the offender of a victims successful objection against his temporary release; and what protection will subsequently be given to victims.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  [holding answers 22 November 1994]: Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

  Letter from Mr Derek Lewis to Ms Ann Coffey, dated 25 November 1994:
  The Home Secretary has asked me to reply to your recent Questions about the consultation and notification of victims on application for temporary release and home leave.
  As part of the current risk assessment to be carried out before a prisoner can be granted temporary release and home leave, current Instructions to Governors, CI 43/1992 and IG 70/1994, copies of which are in the House of Commons Library require the concerns and position of known victims and the community to be fully assessed. The Governor may write to the victim or may seek the assistance of the local probation service or the police to ascertain their view, depending on the circumstances of the case. In addition, from the beginning of next month, victims of crime can contact the Prison Service Victim Helpline and register their concerns which will be passed immediately to the prison concerned.
  The views expressed by known victims will be taken fully into consideration by either the temporary release or home leave board set up to consider any initial application made by a prisoner. The recommendation of the Board is then submitted to the Governor who has responsibility for deciding the application.
  Where the victim is at the address to which the prisoner intends being temporarily released and does not wish the prisoner to return there, the wishes of the victim must be respected and the application must be refused. Where the victim lives nearby or in the neighbourhood, the Governor must take full account of the concerns expressed and consider the extent to which any fears could be reduced if the application is granted. This might include making it a condition to the temporary release licence that the prisoner avoid certain areas or individuals.
  Where the Governor decides to refuse an application for temporary release or home leave in the light of the concerns expressed by a victim, this is not disclosed to the prisoner.
  The outcome of any application for temporary release in which a victim made representations would normally be made known to the victim either directly by the prison or by the probation service or police, depending on the circumstances of the case.

  Police Cells
  Mr. Bennett
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made of the number of remand and convicted prisoners expected to be in police cells in Greater Manchester over Christmas.

  Mr. Michael Forsyth
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

  Letter from Mr. Derek Lewis to Mr. Andrew F. Bennett, dated 25 November 1994:
  The Home Secretary has asked me to reply to your recent Question about the estimated number of remand and convicted prisoners expected to be in police cells in Greater Manchester over Christmas.
  On 21 November this year there were 105 remand and 11 convicted prisoners in police cells in Greater Manchester. The number of prisoners held in police cells in Greater Manchester over Christmas will depend on how many prisoners are remanded or convicted by the courts during the preceding weeks. It is not possible to make a reliable forecast of this number.

DEFENCE

  Royal Marines School of Music
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his estimate of the cost of running over complement at units to which military personnel would be reassigned if the Royal Marines school of music were to be relocated to Portsmouth in each year from 1996–97 to 1999–2000.

  Mr. Soames
  There would be no extra costs involved, since there would be no over-complementing at other sites as a result of the relocation. All the band service personnel at Deal would be reassigned within the new overall ceiling for the service of 358. The 79 service posts at Deal involved in administration and security would be lost on closure. There would, however, be no over-complementing elsewhere as the reductions would be managed by natural wastage within the Royal Marines.

  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his estimate of the costs that would arise in each year from 1994–95 to 1996–97 if the Royal Marines school of music were to be relocated from Deal to Portsmouth, in respect of(a) planning and the proposed relocation, (b) relocation and installation of furniture, fittings and other equipment and (c) personnel.

  Mr. Soames
  Planning of the proposed move would be undertaken by existing staff at no extra cost. The physical costs of such a move would be approximately £35,000, incurred in financial year 1995–96. No extra service personnel costs would be incurred as a result of the move, since such transfers are anyway a part of the normal cycle of service life and are as applicable at Deal as they would be at Portsmouth.

  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what other options exist for utilising the Royal Naval detention quarters if the Royal Marines school of music does not relocate to Portsmouth; and what assessment he has made of the benefits of those other options.

  Mr. Soames
  No other options for using the Royal Naval detention quarters have been identified.
  451
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether a fully costed requirement has been developed for building works which would be necessary at the Royal Naval detention quarters at Portsmouth if the Royal Marines school of music were to relocate there from Deal.

  Mr. Soames
  We would not expect the cost of building works to exceed the figure of £450,000 quoted in the consultative document.

  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his estimate of the costs associated with efficiency losses that would be incurred as the Royal Marines school of music adapted to a new location if the proposed relocation to Portsmouth takes place.

  Mr. Soames
  It is not possible to cost the short-term disruption which would inevitably occur. Pre-planning will, however, keep this disruption to a minimum. The investment appraisal supporting our proposals does, however, demonstrate the large savings over the next five years of relocating the Royal Marines school of music from Deal.

  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the secretary of State for Defence what is his estimate of the property management costs to be incurred at Portsmouth, of transferring the Royal Marines school of music from Deal in each year from 1995–96 to 1999–2000, with particular reference to the refurbishment of accommodation and the percentage of total current costs at Portsmouth that these figures represent.

  Mr. Soames
  In financial year 1995–96, £450,000 has been allowed for initial refurbishment costs. Thereafter, £47,000 per annum is allowed for continuing property management purposes. This represents 0.8 per cent. of the total current property management budget for HMS Nelson Portsmouth.

  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his estimate of the running costs of buildings other than the Royal Naval detention quarters which would be incurred at Portsmouth in each year from 1995–96 to 1999–2000 if the Royal Marines school of music is moved from Deal; and what percentage of total costs at Portsmouth these costs represent.

  Mr. Soames
  For financial year 1995–96 costs are nil. From 1996–97 onwards, additional annual running costs at HMS Nelson attributable to the presence of Royal Marines school of music facilities in buildings other than the Royal Naval detention quarters amount to just over £40,000. This represents 0.1 per cent. of the total estimated running costs of HMS Nelson.

  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his estimate of the manpower cost at Portsmouth of transferring the Royal Marines school of music from Deal in terms of(a) general administration, (b) supplies, (c) property management and maintenance, (d) catering and accommodation and (e) transport etc., in each year from 1995–96 to 1999–2000; and what percentage of total costs at Portsmouth in each year these figures represent.
  452
  Mr. Soames
  HMS Nelson currently administers some 3,000 service personnel. The 34 service posts transferring with the school and the 27 civilian posts will carry out tasks specifically related to the school's training activities. Because of the very considerable size of the existing and projected Naval infrastructure in Portsmouth, no further posts under the headings set out in the question are envisaged as a result of the arrival of this comparatively very small music school organisation.

  Royal Navy Detention Quarters
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the floor area of the Royal Naval detention quarters at Portsmouth.

  Mr. Soames
  The floor area of the Royal Naval detention quarters is 3102 sq. m.

  RNAD Coulport
  Mr. Simpson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) whether any handling, practice in handling or training exercises have been conducted with live or dummy Trident nuclear warheads in the explosives handling jetty at Royal Navy armaments depot Coulport; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) what progress has been made in obtaining a full and complete nuclear safety case for the explosives handling jetty at RNAD Coulport;

  (3) whether clearance for handling live nuclear warheads at the explosives handling jetty at RNAD Coulport has been obtained; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  All safety clearances for the explosives handling jetty at RNAD Coulport which are necessary to support HMS Vanguard's forthcoming deployment, including clearance to handle nuclear warheads, have been obtained. Comprehensive handling and training exercises using inert warheads have been undertaken in the jetty.

  David Hart
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what work Mr. David Hart is now doing in his Department.

  Mr. Freeman
  I refer the hon. Member to the Answer that I gave the hon. Member for South Shields (Dr. Clark) on 23 November 1994,Official Report, column 148.

  Retirement and Redundancies
  Mr. Spellar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what have been the numbers of(a) early retirements and (b) redundancies of civilian staff in his Department in each of the last five years; and what has been the total cost of the retirement and redundancy packages, including pension enhancements.

  Mr. Freeman
  Information on redundancy and early retirement numbers by year is set out below. The total cost of the redundancy package from 1989 to the end of 1993–94 financial year is some £78 million.
  453

  1989–90

  1990–91

  1991–92

  1992–93

  1993–94

  Early Retirement

  153

  146

  381

  585

  399

  Redundancy

  886

  1,522

  1,853

  2,421

  2,639

  Health Centre, Cambridge
  Mr. Critchley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will consider the release of Army land near the Cambridge military hospital, Aldershot, for the establishment of a new health centre.

  Mr. Soames
  My Department would be happy to consider the release of suitable land for this purpose, although any disposal must of course take place on the open market.

  Prohibited Air Space
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many reports have been received since 1990 of infringements by aircraft of the Coulport-Faslane prohibited airspace.

  Mr. Soames
  Since 1990 three alleged infringements of the Coulport-Faslane prohibited airspace have been reported: two by military aircraft and one by a civil aircraft. In neither case of alleged infringement by military aircraft was a breach found to have taken place. The incident involving a civil aircraft occurred in June 1994 and is still being investigated by the Civil Aviation Authority.

  Garelochhead Training Area
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the types of weapons which are authorised for(a) live firing and (b) inert firing in the Garelochhead training area; and if he will list the expenditure rates of each weapon type in the Garelochhead training area since 1990.

  Mr. Soames
  The weapons which are authorised for live and inert firing in the Garelochhead training area are as follows:

  Weapon

  Live

  Inert

  7.62 and 5.56mm Rifle

  Yes

  Yes

  GPMG/LSW

  Yes

  Yes

  Pistol

  Yes

  No

  SMG

  Yes

  No

  Shot guns

  Yes

  No

  6mm LAW

  Yes

  No

  94mm LAW

  Yes

  Sub-calibre mm round

  Grenade

  Yes

  No

  Explosive on demolitions range up to ½lb charges only

  Yes

  No

  Thuderflashes

  Yes

  No

  Statistics are only available on expenditure rates from 1992 for live firing only and are as follows:

  Expenditure rates per year since 1992

  Weapon

  Rate

  1992

  7.62 mm

  219,270

  454

  Expenditure rates per year since 1992

  Weapon

  Rate

  5.56 mm

  308,490

  9 mm

  16,125

  94 mm LAW

  93

  66 mm LAW

  67

  Grenade L2

  943

  Shotgun

  3000 (Estimate)

  Explosives in ½ lb charges

  130 lbs (Estimate)

  Thunderflashes

  1000 (Estimate)

  1993

  7.62 mm

  76,400

  5.56 mm

  116,220

  9 mm

  414

  94 mm LAW

  79

  66 mm LAW

  274

  Grenade L2

  744

  Shotgun

  3000 (Estimate)

  Explosives

  130 lbs (Estimate)

  Thunderflashes

  1000 (Estimate)

  1994

  7.62 mm

  134,600

  5.62 mm

  85,490

  9 mm

  NIL

  94 mm LAW

  10

  66 mm LAW

  NIL

  Grenade L2

  207

  Shotgun

  3000 (Estimate)

  Explosives

  130 lbs (Estimate)

  Thunderflashes

  1000 (Estimate)

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has for(a) expansion of the boundaries of the Garelochhead training area and (b) changes to the types of training authorised on the Garelochhead training area.

  Mr. Soames
  My Department has no plans at present to expand the boundaries of the Garelochhead training area, or to change the type of training carried out there.

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many reports have been received since 1990 of infringements by aircraft of the danger area over the Garelochhead training area.

  Mr. Soames
  None.

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many training man-days have been conducted on the Garelochhead training area in each year since 1988; and what is the capacity, in terms of annual training man-days of the training area.

  Mr. Soames
  The following training man-days have been conducted on the Garelochhead training area each year since 1988:

  Year

  1988–89

  71,967

  1989–90

  95,875

  1990–91

  71,929

  1991–92

  82,345

  1992–93

  102,866

  1993–94

  63,289

  1994–95

  158,289

  1 To date the potential capacity in annual training man days of the training area is approximately 130,000, although this depends on the type of training, availability of personnel and weather conditions.

  NATO Armaments Depot
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the peak tonnage of armaments stored at the NATO armaments depot, Glen Douglas(a) in 1990 and (b) in 1994.

  Mr. Soames
  The peak tonnage of armaments stored at the NATO armaments depot—Glen Douglas was approximately 21,500 tonnes in 1990 and 27,400 tonnes in 1994.

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many(a) United Kingdom civilians, (b) non-United Kingdom civilians, (c) United Kingdom military and (d) non-United Kingdom military personnel were employed at the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation armaments depot, Glen Douglas, in 1990; what are the equivalent figures for 1994; and what are the planned employment levels for 1995.

  Mr. Soames
  The complemented posts for each year are shown in the table. The figures for 1995 do not allow for any changes which may be implemented as a result of defence costs study decisions.

  1990

  1994

  1995

  United Kingdom civilians

  97

  117

  117

  Non-United

  Kingdom civilians

  —

  —

  —

  United Kingdom military

  —

  2

  2

  Non-United

  Kingdom military

  19

  —

  —

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what tonnage of armaments is being transferred to the NATO armaments depot, Glen Douglas, from other military establishments as a result of base closures and realignments; when he expects the transfers to be completed; and if he will list those categories of armaments for which Glen Douglas is now responsible.

  Mr. Soames
  Approximately 8,800 tonnes of armaments have been transferred into NATO armaments depot, Glen Douglas from RAF Chilmark, the final load arrived on 3 November 1994. Additionally, some 680 tonnes were transferred from RNAD Trecwn; that task is also complete. Consideration is being given to the transfer of a small amount of conventional ammunition from RNAD Beith to Glen Douglas as part of defence costs study proposals announced on 14 July, but final decisions have not yet been taken. NATO armaments depot, Glen Douglas holds a range of conventional armament stores, the main categories of which are shells, pyrotechnics, cartridges, bombs and rockets.

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the total expenditure on capital projects at the NATO armaments depot, Glen Douglas, in each year since 1985; and what proportion of these sums have been financed by NATO.

  Mr. Soames
  Figures for the past three financial years are as listed. Details for earlier years are no longer held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. The figures include works costs, fees and VAT. All expenditure shown was recoverable from NATO with the exception of VAT, which is a national responsibility.
  456

  FY 1991–92

  FY 1992–93

  FY 1993–94

  £

  £

  £

  1,265,000

  645,000

  1,434,000

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the total tonnage of armaments delivered into and out of the NATO armaments depot, Glen Douglas, in each year since 1990; and what proportion was transported by(a) road, (b) sea and (c) rail.

  Mr. Soames
  Approximate information is given in tonnes in the table. Overall, 3 per cent. was transported by road, 88 per cent. by sea and 9 per cent. by rail.

  Year

  In

  Out

  Total

  1990

  4,726

  7,008

  11,734

  1991

  1,809

  10,988

  12,797

  1992

  5,528

  8,011

  13,539

  1993

  2,516

  5,458

  7,974

  19941

  11,238

  4,208

  15,446

  1 to the end of October

  Goose Bay
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the amount paid to the Canadian Government in the financial year 1993–94 for Royal Air Force use of Canadian forces base Goose bay; what is the estimated amount payable for the financial year 1994–95; and if he will make a statement on the discrepancy between the figures for the period 1987–88 to 1992–93 provided to the hon. Member for Dumbarton on 25 October 1993,Official Report, column 489, and those provided to the hon. Member for Don Valley (Mr. Redmond) on 21 January, Official Report, column 934.

  Mr. Soames
  The amount paid in the financial year 1993–94 was £14,300,000 and it is estimated that £12,300,000 will be payable in 1994–95.

  The figures provided to the hon. Member for Dumbarton reflected the actual payments made each year to the Canadian Government. The table of figures provided to the hon. Member for Don Valley (Mr. Redmond) was, however, based on the actual costs incurred in each financial year, as it would not otherwise have been possible to provide the information in the format requested. Payments to the Canadian Government are based on estimated costs, with the subsequent adjustments being made to reflect the actual costs involved. These adjustments sometimes have to be made after the financial year to which they relate, and it is this that primarily accounts for the difference between the two sets of figures provided.

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the Royal Air Force's future requirement for practice firing of forward-firing ordnance by aircraft deployed to Canadian forces base, Goose bay for training.

  Mr. Soames
  The Royal Air force has no plans at present to undertake such training at Goose bay, Labrador.

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what proposals have been submitted to the Canadian authorities for training using portable surface-to-air defence systems in the training areas at Goose bay, Labrador.
  457
  Mr. Soames
  The possibility of RAF regiment Rapier units being deployed to the practice training area was discussed at a Goose bay users' meeting in 1993; consideration of this has, however, been deferred until after the completion of the Canadian federal environmental assessment review process.

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many training sorties were flown by Royal Air Force aircraft from Canadian forces base Goose bay in 1994; and by which types of aircraft.

  Mr. Soames
  RAF aircraft have flown 1,299 training sorties during the 1994 flying season at Goose bay—1,277 by Tornado GR1s and 22 by Hercules aircraft.

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library a copy of the national statement of requirements for facilities at Goose bay which was submitted to the Canadian authorities in 1991; and if he will list any changes made to the stated requirements since then.

  Mr. Soames
  It is not our practice to release internal planning documents of this kind.

  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the Royal Air Force's requirements for ground-controlled interception training for aircrew deployed to Canadian forces base Goose bay.

  Mr. Soames
  The Royal Air Force has at present no plans to conduct ground-controlled interception training at Goose bay.

  Clyde Submarine Base
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many(a) civil and (b) military personnel were employed at the Clyde submarine base in each year since 1990; and how many of the civil employees were engaged on construction work.

  Mr. Soames
  Estimated number of MOD civilians and shore-based military staff employed at the Clyde submarine base, Faslane, in each year since 1990 are as follows. The construction of the Trident facilities was carried out by contractors. There was only limited involvement of MOD civilian staff in this work, details of which are not held centrally.

  Year

  Civilian personnel

  Military personnel

  1990

  2,183

  1,581

  1991

  2,310

  1,551

  1992

  2,224

  1,486

  1993

  2,362

  1,418

  1994

  2,460

  1,357

  Gulf War Veterans
  Mr. Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will seek to obtain from his American counterpart the evidence presented to the United States Department of Defence by Gulf war veterans of statistically significant rates of increased morbidity in children born to Gulf war veterans and of genetic deformations in offspring born to Gulf war veterans; and if he will institute an inquiry into the mortality and morbidity statistics of children born to British Gulf war veterans since they returned from service in the Gulf.
  458
  Mr. Soames
  My Department remains in close contact with the United States authorities over all aspects relating to the alleged Gulf war illnesses. We are aware of claims of increased birth defects and childhood illnesses among the families of certain United States armed forces units and understand that these have been investigated by the appropriate authorities and shown to be unfounded. Wider statistics relating to birth defects reported by United States Gulf veterans indicate that the incidence of such defects is no higher than among the general population. In the United Kingdom, similarly, there is currently no evidence to suggest that the incidence of genetic defects and mortality among the children of Gulf veterans' families is any higher than the national average. We do, however, urge those who are concerned to come forward for assessment to allow us to increase the statistical and clinical database available to us.

  Quangos
  Mr. Sykes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many quangos his Department was responsible for(a) in 1979 and (b) in the latest year for which a number is available;

  (2) which quangos his Department has abolished since 1979.

  Mr. Soames
  A full list of non-departmental public bodies, in existence for each year since 1979, is available in the following publications: "Report on Non-Departmental Public Bodies", Pliatzky Report, Cm 7797, January 1980, "Non-Departmental Public Bodies: Facts and Figures 1980", and "Public Bodies", published annually from 1982. Copies of these publications are available in the Library of the House.

  For each year since 1986, lists have been prepared centrally of public bodies which have been created and abolished. Copies will be sent to the Libraries of both Houses. Such summary data for the years 1979 to 1985 were not prepared and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Medical Officers
  Ms Corston
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence in what circumstances it would be possible for a civilian junior hospital doctor with full medical registration to take up a post in a Royal Air Force medical centre as a Royal Air Force medical officer without attending the courses at RAF Cranwell, RAF Halton and RAF Farnborough.

  Mr. Soames
  None. Before a civilian junior hospital doctor with full medical registration can take up a post in a RAF medical centre as an RAF medical officer, he or she must attend a specialist entrant and re-entrant commissioning course at RAF Cranwell, followed by medical officer training at RAF Halton and RAF Farnborough.

  Personal Weapons Test
  Sir Nicholas Bonsor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what proportion of all infantry personnel completed their annual personal weapons test in 1993–94; and what was the pass rate achieved by infantry soldiers.

  Mr. Soames
  In 1993–94, 93 per cent. of all infantry personnel completed the annual personal weapons test; the pass rate achieved by infantry soldiers was 91 per cent.

  Fuses
  Ms Janet Anderson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the orders, and their value, which have been placed by his Department for the L56 105mm fuse and the LS8 120 mm fuse, or their equivalents, since 1984.

  Mr. Freeman
  We have assumed that the question relates to the L56 and L58 fuse. No orders for these fuses, or any equivalent fuse, have been placed by my Department since 1984.

  Western European Union
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his Department's policy towards the Western European Union following the Noordwijk Council of Ministers meeting.

  Mr. Soames
  We remain committed to developing the Western European Union as the means to strengthen the European pillar of the alliance and as the defence component of the European Union. We shall continue to contribute to the development of its operational planning, and to other aspects of its work.

  Future Large Aircraft
  Dr. David Clarke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his French counterpart concerning the future large aircraft.

  Mr. Freeman
  My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence met Mr. Leotard at Chartres on 18 November 1994, when they had a wide-ranging discussion on topics of mutual interest, including the future large aircraft.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the names of the senior British experts who are to study possible British participation in the future large aircraft; what will be their terms of reference; when they will start their study; and what time scale they will have before reporting their findings.

  Mr. Freeman
  The chief of defence procurement, Dr. Malcolm McIntosh, will be the senior British representative. The first meeting is expected to be early next month and the terms of reference for the study will be decided then. A date for the study report has yet to be decided.

  Management Consultants
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which firms are currently hired by his Department to carry out management consultancy work.

  Mr. Freeman
  A central list of companies providing management consultancy work to my Department does not exist and could be drawn up only at disproportionate cost.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the total cost to date of management consultants hired to analyse the privatisation of the royal dockyards; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  Payments made or outstanding specifically for management consultancy advice given on the proposed privatisation of the royal dockyards between 18 October 1993, when my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence announced our policy on tile future management of the dockyards—Official
  460
  Report, 18 October 1993, columns 39–4 —and 31 October 1994 total some £2.2 million.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his Department's policy towards the use of management consultants; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  Responsibility and accountability for the employment of external management consultants have been largely delegated in my Department to budget holders at all levels. These budget holders take fully into account their obligations for the proper and economical use of their resources, including the use of competition, when considering in what circumstances and to what extent they should call on such services.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the total cost of management consultants hired by his Department in each of the past five years.

  Mr. Freeman
  Individual budget holders in my Department have delegated powers to employ external assistance as they think fit within the limit of their resources. No central figure for the costs of this assistance is available and one could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Trident
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the announcement by the United States' Deputy Defence Secretary, on 16 August, regarding United Kingdom plans to buy Trident D5 missiles.

  Mr. Freeman
  The statement attributed to the United States Defence Secretary concerned United States plans for its 1996 budget and referred to current United Kingdom planning assumptions. Final decisions have yet to be taken on further missile purchases.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his Department's latest estimate of the cost of the total D5 missile purchases.

  Mr. Freeman
  The current total estimated cost of Trident D5 missile purchases is £1,275 million at 1993–94 prices.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much money has been committed to the purchase of Trident D5 missiles from the United States to date.

  Mr. Freeman
  At the end of August 1994, some £718 million at outturn prices had been committed on the purchase of Trident D5 missiles from the United States.

  Procurement
  Dr. David Clark
  to ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his Department's policy concerning European procurement co-operation; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Freeman
  My Department's policy concerning European procurement co-operation is set out in paragraphs 433 and 434 of the "statement on the Defence Estimates 1994," Cm 2550.

  Gulf War Syndrome
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if members of the armed forces serving in the Gulf war were made aware of the medical implications
  461
  and side effects of taking nerve agent pre-treatment set tablets.

  Mr. Soames
  All United Kingdom military personnel routinely take part in nuclear, biological and chemical defence training. This training includes instruction on the purpose and proper administration of nerve agent pre-treatment set—NAPS—tablets. Specific reference to side- effects was not made during Operation Granby, since, when taken at the stated dose, side-effects occur only in a minority of individuals, are minor in nature and cease when the tablets are no longer taken. Instructions on the NAPS packet make clear that the stated dose should not be exceeded and this point is emphasised in training.

  Nerve Agents
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if the nerve agent pre-treatment set tablets administered to members of the British armed forces in the Gulf war had been put through the normal medical trials; and if he will make a statement;

  (2) What tests were carried out at the Chemical and Biological Weapons Establishment at Porton Down to analyse the effects of prolonged use of nerve agent pre-treatment set tablets.

  Mr. Soames
  These are matters for the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment, Porton Down, under its framework document. I have asked its chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from Dr. Graham Pearson to Dr. David Clark, dated 25 November 1994:
  QUESTION 25, ORDER PAPER DATED 22 NOVEMBER 1994

  1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking what tests were carried out at the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment at Porton Down to analyse the effects of prolonged use of nerve agent pretreatment set tablets has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.

  2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them. As such it is necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of medical countermeasures.

  3. A number of studies were carried out using Service volunteers to evaluate the acceptability of using pyridostigmine bromide and whether such use had adverse side effects or was affected by the nature of the duties of the Service personnel. These studies which lasted for up to eight weeks included the assessment of the effects of NAPS on volunteers undergoing strenuous exercise and of a thermally stressful environment. No significant differences were found between subjects who had received a placebo and those who had received pyridostigmine bromide.

  4. These studies concluded that pyridostigmine bromide in NAPS gives considerable protection against all organophosphorus nerve agents with no significant adverse effects. These results formed part of the Ministry of Defence's license application to the Medicines Control Agency which resulted in pyridostigmine bromide in NAPS being licenses under Product License Number 4537/0003.

  QUESTION 24, ORDER PAPER DATED 22 NOVEMBER 1994

  1. Your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking if the nerve agent pre-treatment set tablets administered to members of the British Armed Forces in the Gulf War had been put through the normal medical trials, and if he
  462
  will make a statement has been passed to me to answer as Chief Executive of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment.

  2. The role of the Chemical and Biological Defence Establishment is to ensure that the United Kingdom Armed Forces have effective protective measures against the threat that chemical or biological weapons may be used against them. As such it is necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of medical countermeasures.

  3. One of the current in-service medical countermeasures to nerve agents is the Nerve Agent Pretreatment Set (NAPS) which contains pyridostigmine bromide. This has been put through the normal medical trials and is a licensed drug. This only entered service after careful and considered evaluation. Following a series of animal studies pyridostigmine bromide was chosen for evaluation as an oral pre-treatment in man as it was a British Pharmacopoeial drug which appeared to combine efficacy and duration of action within an acceptable safety ratio.

  4. Volunteer studies were carried out at CBDE to identify the effective oral dose regimen which in conjunction with therapy would provide protection against nerve agent poisoning whilst producing minimal or nil side effects under a range of conditions. The conclusion was that 8 hourly dosing with 30 mg of pyridostigmine bromide was acceptable.

  5. Pyridostigmine bromide is listed in the British Pharmacopoeia and has been licensed in the United Kingdom since 1955 by Roche Products Limited as a treatment for myasthenia gravis, paralytic ileus and post-operative urinary retention. In adults with myasthenia gravis the usual daily dose is in the range 300–1200 mg, often over a period of many years or for life. The NAPS daily dose is 90 mg.

  6. Pyridostigmine bromide is licensed to the Ministry of Defence by the Medicines Control Agency under Product License Number 4537/0003 for use in the pre-treatment of Service personnel at risk from poisoning from organophosphorus nerve agent.

TREASURY

  Income Tax
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will estimate the net revenue forgone as a result of the reduction in personal income tax for higher rate taxpayers introduced by the Finance Act 1988; and what has been the total number of beneficiaries in each year, by region.

  Sir George Young
  Cutting tax rates has improved incentives at all levels and has encouraged entrepreneurial initiative upon which the nation depends. The figures in the table take no account of any behavioural changes resulting from the changes in the higher rates of tax. We believe that if the former higher rates of tax had continued fewer people would now have achieved incomes on which the higher rates would be payable.

  Information for 1992–93 is given in the table. Figures for earlier years were given in the reply to the hon. Member on 17 December 1993, Official Report, column 970. The table shows the direct revenue costs for a full year, compared with re-introduced tax rates of 45,50,55 and 60 per cent. The band widths for the tax rate schedule have been calculated by uprating the corresponding parts of the 1987–88 regime by movements in the retail prices index as in the statutory indexation formula. The estimates have been calculated to reflect only the changes in the higher rates of tax and exclude any effects of the introduction of independent taxation in 1990–91 and the restriction of mortgage interest relief to the basic rate from 1991–92. Some regional estimates are based on small samples and all amounts are given to the nearest £50 million.
  463

  Number of taxpayers benefiting and change in tax revenue resulting form abolition of rates in excess of 40 per cent.

  Region of residence

  Numbers thousands

  Amount £ million

  North

  40

  100

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  70

  200

  North west

  90

  200

  East Midlands

  70

  200

  West Midlands

  90

  200

  East Anglia

  40

  100

  South east

  620

  2,300

  South west

  90

  250

  Wales

  30

  50

  Scotland

  80

  200

  Northern Ireland

  20

  50

  United Kingdom1

  1,240

  3,900

  1 includes members of the forces and merchant navy and a small number of civil servants serving overseas who are not all allocated to regions.

  Stamp duty

  1992–93

  1992–93

  Numbers of transactions processed

  Property

  Securities

  Other

  Total

  Property

  Securities

  Other

  Total

  Belfast

  49,884

  5,257

  17,692

  72,833

  52,952

  4,664

  15,122

  72,738

  Birmingham

  173,015

  98,661

  3,455

  275,131

  102,441

  118,326

  14,816

  235,583

  Bristol

  130,074

  65,894

  26,770

  225,738

  88,157

  53,311

  22,441

  163,909

  Cardiff

  90,266

  36,470

  26,702

  156,438

  65,189

  30,942

  21,462

  117,593

  Edinburgh

  90,209

  163,736

  28,375

  282,320

  50,245

  118,728

  18,929

  187,902

  Leeds1

  159,708

  34,936

  34,533

  234,177

  96,113

  30,332

  39,144

  167,589

  Liverpool

  139,092

  93,060

  23,630

  255,782

  87,096

  86,886

  12,765

  186,747

  London

  194,132

  727,416

  315,803

  1,237,351

  179,489

  771,319

  136,761

  1,087,569

  Manchester

  165,125

  50,524

  15,627

  231,276

  97,533

  37,438

  15,198

  150,169

  Newcastle

  101,786

  31,095

  19,479

  152,360

  59,745

  29,367

  13,799

  102,811

  Nottingham1

  159,751

  15,897

  25,897

  201,545

  88,300

  14,211

  31,843

  134,354

  Total

  1,458,042

  1,322,946

  542,963

  3,324,951

  969,280

  1,295,524

  342,280

  2,607,064

  1 Offices closed March 1993.

  Stamp duty

  1993–94

  1994–95 (Up to September)

  Numbers of transactions processed

  Property

  Securities

  Other

  Total

  Property

  Securities

  Other

  Total

  Belfast

  56,371

  5,539

  17,460

  78,370

  47,132

  3,784

  233

  51,149

  Birmingham

  141,908

  98,631

  10,706

  251,245

  63,717

  65,342

  6,954

  136,013

  Bristol

  120,311

  76,119

  31,446

  227,876

  72,518

  49,739

  12,098

  134,355

  Cardiff

  86,702

  35,304

  26,233

  148,239

  55,436

  16,632

  3,463

  75,531

  Edinburgh

  45,161

  128,678

  17,810

  191,648

  20,085

  90,048

  8,441

  123,524

  Leeds*

  6,522

  2,539

  1,416

  10,477

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Liverpool

  132,649

  93,854

  19,497

  24,600

  82,147

  60,638

  4,619

  147,404

  London

  245,867

  383,667

  116,125

  1,200,659

  132,924

  517,286

  35,686

  685,896

  Manchester

  158,115

  68,153

  26,779

  253,047

  83,097

  42,785

  10.368

  136,190

  Newcastle

  89,197

  38,284

  16,796

  144,277

  63,066

  18,005

  3,671

  84,762

  Nottingham1

  5,730

  1,101

  2,733

  9,584

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Total

  1,087,533

  1,386,869

  287,001

  2,761,403

  625,032

  864,259

  85,533

  1,574,924

  1 Offices closed March 1993

  Counter customers

  1991–92

  1992–93

  1993–94

  1994–95 (To September)

  Belfast

  13,084

  13,818

  5,605

  Birmingham

  10,389

  11,171

  5,979

  Bristol

  5,925

  6,034

  3,066

  Cardiff

  2,091

  2,160

  1,137

  Edinburgh

  10,884

  10,625

  5,705

  Leeds1

  4,164

  329

  —

  Stamp Duty
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many(a) share transactions and (b) property transactions are recorded on which stamp duty was paid in the catchment area of each stamp duty office for the last three full years and in the first half of the current year.

  Mr. Nelson
  The following tables show the total number of transactions processed by local stamp office and, so far as figures are available, the number of callers using the public counter services.
  465

  Counter customers

  1991–92

  1992–93

  1993–94

  1994–95 (To September)

  Liverpool

  5,610

  6,406

  3,509

  London

  70,940

  70,220

  35,882

  Manchester

  9,390

  9,787

  5,108

  Newcastle

  3,927

  4,159

  2,063

  Nottingham1

  3,444

  249

  —

  Total

  —

  140,848

  134,958

  68,094

  1 Offices closed March 1993

  Quangos
  Mr. Sykes
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer which quangos his Department has abolished since 1979.

  Mr. Nelson
  The Treasury has abolished the following non-departmental public bodies since 1979:

  Body

  Year abolished

  The Property Advisory Panel

  1980

  Committee to Review the Functioning of Financial Institutions (The Wilson Committee)

  1980

  National Economic Development Council and Office

  1992

  Mr. Sykes
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many quangos his Department was responsible for(a) in 1979 and (b) in the latest year for which a number is available.

  Mr. Nelson
  In each of the years requested my Department was responsible for the following number of non-departmental public bodies:

  (a) 10 in 1978–79, as listed in the "Report on Non-Departmental Public Bodies" (Pliatzky Report Cm 7797, January 1980); and

  (b) 9 in 1993, as shown in Public Bodies 1993 (including the Royal Mint Advisory Committee). In addition to those bodies shown in Public Bodies 1993, I also have some responsibility for making or approving appointments to a further 12 non-departmental public bodies.

  Tobacco and Alcohol
  Mr. Spellar
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimates his Department has made of the effect of tobacco duty on the family budgets of top, middle and lower-income families.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  Data from the 1993 family expenditure survey suggest that top-income families spend around 1 to 2 per cent. of their total expenditure on tobacco, middle-income families spend around 2 to 3 per cent. and lower-income families around 3½ per cent. Duty is only part of the price of tobacco.

  Inheritance Tax
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list all the new reliefs from, offers against, and exclusion from inheritance tax that he has announced since April 1992; and in each case what is the expected number of beneficiaries in a full year and the cost of the relief.
  466
  Sir George Young
  The following changes to inheritance tax have been announced since April 1992:

  Announced March 1993:
  Extension from three years to four years of the qualifying period after death during which land and buildings may be sold and the sale price substituted for the value at death.
  Where an estate contains investments with quotations that have been suspended within a year after death, the investment, if unsold, may be valued for inheritance tax purposes at the value one year after death.

  Announced November 1993:
  Extension from one year to three years of the period during which business and agricultural property gift in lifetime may be sold and replaced by the donee with similar qualifying property without loss of relief.

  Announced January 1994:
  Provisions relating to settlements without interest in possession not to apply to assets held by corporate Lloyd's underwriters in premiums trust funds or ancillary trust funds.
  Each of those four measures has a negligible cost and the total cost is estimated at less than £5 million in a full year. About 200 estates benefit from the extended qualifying period for the sale of land and buildings. The remaining changes have very few beneficiaries. The has been no change to the inheritance tax threshold, which has remained at £150,000 since March 1992.

  Third-World Debts
  Miss Lestor
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much has been granted in tax relief to the United Kingdom banks against possible default on third-world debts in each of the last 10 years.

  Sir George Young
  Provisions by banks operating in the United Kingdom for doubtful sovereign debt—mostly of third-world countries but which may include relatively small amounts for other countries—are estimated to have reduced corporation tax receipts in the last eight years by the following amounts:

  £ million

  1986–87

  70

  1987–88

  190

  1988–89

  530

  1989–90

  510

  1990–91

  780

  1991–92

  120

  1992–93

  120

  1993–941

  120

  Estimates for earlier years are zero or small.

  1 Provisional.

  Inflation
  Mr. Bowden
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what percentage of the increase in inflation for the year to September 1994 was due to changes in the price of(a) food, (b) housing and (c) other factors.
  467
  Mr. Nelson
  Contributions to changes in all items RPI over the 12 months to September 1994 are given in table 3 of the publication "Retail Prices Index September 1994", CSO Business Monitor MM23, a copy of which is available in the Library.

  Airports (Customs Officers)
  Mr. McAllion
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list those United Kingdom airports receiving scheduled flights from abroad which do not have full-time customs staff stationed at the airport.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  The United Kingdom airports which receive scheduled flights but do not have full-time customs staff stationed at the airport are as follows:

  Blackpool

  Cardiff Wales

  Dundee

  Humberside

  Leeds/Bradford

  Manston

  EEC Budget
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give the net gain or loss to Britain arising from EEC membership in(a) 1972–76, (b) 1977–81, (c) 1982–86, (d) 1987–91 and (e) 1992–93 in respect
  468
  of budget contributions, additional food prices, manufactured trade with the EEC, total trade with the EEC and jobs.

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  No. I have nothing to add to the replies that the Economic Secretary gave to the hon. Member on 17 March,Official Report, column 822 and 30 June Official Report, column 680 and the reply that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister gave on 18 May, Official Report, column 470 in answer to very similar questions from the hon. Member.

  Executive Agencies
  Mr. McAllion
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list all those executive agencies regarded by Her Majesty's Government as unsuitable for privatisation.

  Sir George Young
  Privatisation is one of the options considered before agency status is agreed. The possibility of privatisation is reconsidered in all cases when an agency is reviewed, now normally every five years.

  Lobbying Companies
  Mr. Fatchett
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list and date those occasions over the last two years, when Ministers or officials in his Department have met lobbying companies, prior to a decision being made on the subject of the meeting with the lobbying company.

  Mr. Nelson
  [holding answer 24 November 1994]: This information is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.