Sitting of 25 May 1995

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

  ACCOMMOMDATION LEVEL CROSSINGS BILL [Lords] (By Order)
  Order for Third Reading read.
  To be read the Third time on Thursday 8 June.

  LONDON LOCAL AUTHORITIES (No. 2) BILL [Lords] (By Order)
  Orders for consideration, as amended, read.
  To be considered on Thursday 8 June.

Oral Answers to Questions
  NORTHERN IRELAND

    Peace Process
    Mr. Winnick: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the latest developments in the peace process. [24620]
    Mr. Canavan: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what recent meetings he has had about the peace process; and if he will make a statement. [24630]
    The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Mr. Michael Ancram): Since I last answered questions in the House, there has been one further meeting of exploratory dialogue with the loyalist parties and there have been two with Sinn Fein. On each of those occasions, I have led the Government team. My right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State also had an informal meeting with Mr. Adams of Sinn Fein in Washington yesterday. On each of those occasions, we emphasised our commitment to the peace process and the key importance to that process of a substantial decommissioning of illegally held weapons together with progress on a range of other issues.
    Mr. Winnick: I am grateful for that answer. Does the Minister agree that the White House conference on investment in Northern Ireland is a very good idea and that, indeed, the White House should be congratulated on holding that conference, which the Secretary of State and my hon. Friend the Member for Redcar (Ms Mowlam) are attending? Was not the meeting yesterday between the Secretary of State and the president of Sinn Fein inevitable at some stage, now that terrorism has,
    922
    fortunately, ended in Northern Ireland? Will not such talks be on an on-going basis, bearing in mind the qualification made by the Minister?
    Mr. Ancram: First, I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the White House has acted very constructively in holding a conference, which follows the investment conference held by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in Belfast in December. It is being held to try to bring jobs and investment to Northern Ireland, which is indeed a very important purpose. It is quite clear also that that purpose will best be achieved by the establishment of a permanent peace. In the context of the conference in Washington, it was proper that my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State met Mr. Adams to make clear the relationship between peace, economic investment and jobs and to make it clear that the only way in which peace can be founded soundly is by seeing the decommissioning of illegally held arms taking place.
    Mr. Wilkinson: Can my hon. Friend and Her Majesty's Government do everything in their power to ensure that in their objective of appeasing or seeking the acquiescence of the minority of the minority community, they do not alienate the law-abiding majority on whose support the long-term political future of democratic institutions and stability in the Province depend?
    Mr. Ancram: I can assure my hon. Friend that I am not in the business either of alienating or of appeasing. I am seeking to build on a situation in which there is a cessation of violence to try to ensure, through exploratory dialogue, that we can see the beginning of a genuine decommissioning of illegally held arms. There is not a Member of the House who would not agree that, at the end of day, peace must be established on the basis of illegally held arms being taken out of the Northern Ireland equation. We have made it quite clear to those to whom we are speaking in Sinn Fein and the loyalist parties that if they wish to proceed to substantive political dialogue in Northern Ireland, substantial decommissioning of arms would have to take place.
    Rev. Martin Smyth: Is the Minister concerned with the changing stance of Dick Spring from that in December 1993 and June 1994, when he talked not only about a cessation of violence but about a handing over of weapons, along with the statement of Albert Reynolds, who is calling for the decommissioning of legally held firearms by servants of the state? Why did the Minister suggest pulling out of talks with representatives of a loyalist paramilitary faction because they were threatening to shoot drug dealers, while continuing to talk with representatives of those who had shot a drug dealer just two weeks ago?
    Mr. Ancram: I have made it clear all along that the basis of exploratory dialogue is that it is carried out with parties that do not condone or support the use of violence. When there has been any such suggestion, I have challenged the parties about it. Indeed, earlier this week, when there were suggestions that intimidatory action might be being taken in one quarter, I made it clear that I would not speak to parties that in any way appeared to condone it. Certainly, one of the parties and, I suspect, both, have since said that they do not condone such violence. It is right that we make it clear that, in a civilised society, there is no justification for anyone taking the law into his own hands at any time.

    923
    On the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question, it is the agreed position of both Governments that, if we are to achieve a settlement and arrive at inclusive talks—including parties such as Sinn Fein—there has to be a substantial decommissioning of weapons. The Taoiseach said in the Dail on 25 April:
    "It is a very important principle of parity of esteem in democratic dialogue that everybody should approach discussion on the same basis, solely on that of their electoral mandate and not by reference to any implied pressure they can exert because of the existence of arms in the hands of associated organisations. In order to achieve parity of esteem and position those arms must be taken out of commission."
    I do not believe that the Irish Government could have made their position clearer than that.
    Mr. Bellingham: Does my hon. Friend agree that, although there has been a welcome abatement of terrorism, it is ridiculous for the hon. Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) to talk about an end to terrorism, because the IRA clearly still has a massive arsenal and could easily redeploy it in a matter of hours? Does my hon. Friend accept that it is essential that, before the IRA is admitted to round table talks, the decommissioning process should be well under way?
    Mr. Ancram: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for reminding the House that any steps taken since the cessation of violence have been taken as a direct response to the lowering of the security risk in Northern Ireland. None of them is irreversible, and that is an important part of the response that has been made.
    As for the talks, we have made it clear that to move from exploratory dialogue to substantive bilateral dialogue will require a tangible beginning to the process of decommissioning and that to move to inclusive talks around the table will require substantial decommissioning. The reason is not one of doctrine but the fact that others will not sit around the table with a party that still has associations with a fully armed and operational organisation of the sort that the IRA is.
    Mr. Worthington: May I present the apologies of my hon. Friend the Member for Redcar (Ms Mowlam), who is attending the investment conference in Washington?
    Of course, we completely concur with the Government on the importance of decommissioning of arms, but what other matters have been discussed in the talks between the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and the leader of Sinn Fein and in the Minister's talks with other members of Sinn Fein? Can the Minister update us on those talks? For example, have any assurances been given by Sinn Fein that it is using all its influence to eliminate punishment beatings or to take other steps to improve the quality of the peace being developed in Northern Ireland?
    The Minister will have noticed the optimistic annual report of the Chief Constable of the RUC who expresses the belief that both sides of the paramilitary are set to go down a "peaceful road" but that, at the same time, the
    "military machines are up, they are cohesive. If they decide … to go again they could do so".
    What promises have been given that those machines will be stood down?
    Mr. Ancram: At the moment, we are in an exploratory dialogue, the purpose of which is to explore such questions. The two sessions that I have had with Sinn Fein have concentrated largely not only on how
    924
    decommissioning might take place but on the reason for it and why it is an essential part of the peace process. As the hon. Gentleman knows, those talks are not on a single-issue agenda; other topics can be, and have been, raised. I have told Sinn Fein and the loyalists that there are other topics that I believe they will wish to raise with me, and exploratory dialogue will continue in the future.
    On punishment beatings, on a number of occasions I have made it clear that the Government are not prepared to accept any form of taking the law into one's own hands. We have explained to Sinn Fein that participation in normal political life implies responsibilities as well as rights, and that a party that is fully committed to constitutional means and objectives does not intimidate and threaten the population, does not encourage people to take the law into their own hands and does not condone breaking people's bones with iron bars. We shall continue to make that clear at every possible opportunity.

    Economy
    Mr. Mackinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what are his plans for expanding the economy of Northern Ireland during the next 12 months. [24621]
    The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Sir John Wheeler): Government's role is to provide the right conditions and the right support for the private sector to create economic growth. In Northern Ireland, we are helping companies to become more competitive, building up management and work force skills, supporting innovation, developing an enterprise culture and encouraging inward investment and tourism.
    Mr. Mackinlay: How very interesting. Why is the Minister not prepared to proclaim these plans for inward investment and enterprise culture on behalf of the Conservative candidate in the North Down by-election? Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us which Minister from the Northern Ireland team is going to support the Conservative candidate in that by-election on those and other policies? Is it not a fact that Conservative candidates now choose what party policies they support à la carte and Tory Ministers now choose which Conservative candidates to support à la carte?
    Sir John Wheeler: I am grateful that the hon. Gentleman finds the Government's economic achievements in Northern Ireland interesting. They are, indeed, interesting. Northern Ireland's economy has outpaced the rest of the United Kingdom during the past five years, and the Department of Economic Development envisages even greater achievements in ensuing years. I believe that the hon. Gentleman has chosen to refer to some remarks in a gossip column in a newspaper. I have not been consulted about that gossip column. I certainly have no comment to make on it, and I have no comment to make now, either.
    Rev. Ian Paisley: What decisions have been made so far about the European Union special fund, and to what projects will that money go? What percentage of the money will be allocated to each programme? Will the money that is allocated internally to Northern Ireland be spent in Northern Ireland on projects decided by the people of Northern Ireland, or will Dublin's voice be

    925
    heeded? Will Dublin have a say in how that money is spent, although it has its own percentage of money for its own internal affairs?
    Sir John Wheeler: I am unable to give the hon. Gentleman the precise information that he seeks because not all the matters have yet been decided. It will be welcome if there is additional funding available for the people of Northern Ireland and the island of Ireland as a whole, and in particular the cross-border areas which have important commercial interactions with the Northern Ireland economy. In due course, my Department will make known the precise details of the funding arrangements, but I can say to the hon. Gentleman that that part of the funding which relates to Northern Ireland will be decided by the proper authorities in Northern Ireland.
    Mr. John D. Taylor: Since the MacBride principles involve positive discrimination and are also contrary to fair employment legislation in Northern Ireland, and since the Government have always campaigned against the MacBride principles, can the Minister assure the people of Northern Ireland that the Government and their agencies, such as the Industrial Development Board, will give no grants whatsoever to any American firm that operates the MacBride principles against the existing legislation in Northern Ireland?
    Sir John Wheeler: I can understand why the hon. Gentleman couches his question in such a way. Even as we discuss these matters this afternoon, my right hon. and learned Friend is at work in Washington at the investment conference, putting forward the case for investment in Northern Ireland and emphasising the fairness of our employment practices and the opportunities for employing a well-educated and proficient work force in Northern Ireland. We shall adhere to our previously published policies and objectives about the MacBride principles. I am sure that my noble Friend will take into account his own strictures on the matter.
    Mr. John Marshall: Does my right hon. Friend agree that, although the peace process should encourage substantial inward investment in Northern Ireland, we could handicap that if we adopted restrictions on industry, such as a national minimum wage or the social chapter, as suggested by the Labour party?
    Sir John Wheeler: My hon. Friend is absolutely right that such practices would greatly discourage investment in the United Kingdom and in Northern Ireland in particular and would lose us jobs, which the people of Northern Ireland seek. He is right once again to draw the attention of the House to such a disastrous policy.

    Teaching
    Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what guidance he gives teachers on methods of teaching; and if he will make a statement. [24622]
    Mr. Ancram: It is the responsibility of the education and library boards to provide the necessary support for
    926
    schools and in-service training for teachers to enable them to delivery the school curriculum. The Government give no direct guidance.
    Mr. Greenway: Is my right hon. Friend aware of the pressure over the years from socialist education idealogues for mixed ability teaching and of its damaging results? I certainly never practised it here and would not do so anywhere else. Will he advise teachers in Northern Ireland and everywhere else that such teaching methods would be disastrous and that sound learning comes only from sound discipline, which must be achieved?
    Mr. Ancram: I hear what my hon. Friend says and have some sympathy with his comments. I do not have his professional background, so I would not presume to comment in a more professional way. We give no direct guidance to teachers as such.
    The Northern Ireland education system, which is particular and unique to Northern Ireland, as my hon. Friend knows, produces very good results. School pupils in Northern Ireland continue to perform better than their English counterparts. In 1992–93, 85 per cent. of A-level pupils in Northern Ireland achieved two or more A-levels compared to 74 per cent. in England, while the proportion of year 12 pupils with no GCSEs was 6 per cent. compared to 7 per cent. in England; so we can take some satisfaction from the fact that the Northern Ireland education system is working, and working well.
    Ms Hoey: As a product of the Northern Ireland education system, I have to agree. On teaching methods in integrated schools, which are obviously excellent, can the Minister give the House any news on further progress in making the special unit on Rathlin island an integrated school?
    Mr. Ancram: I can only repeat what I have told the hon. Lady on another occasion. Any proposal for integrated education is considered by my Department according to strict criteria, to ensure that such schools have a chance of being viable and of succeeding. The criteria are carefully laid out and proposals are made to me. When the criteria are met, unless there are specific reasons, we normally support the proposals. When they are not met, I have had, on occasion, to turn them down.

    Inward Investment
    Mr. Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what level of inward investment has been attracted to Northern Ireland for the latest year for which figures are available. [24623]
    Mr. Ancram: During 1994–95, the Industrial Development Board secured 10 inward investment projects, with an employment potential of nearly 2,000 jobs and planned investments of £130 million.
    Mr. Evans: I welcome the Washington conference on investment in Northern Ireland. Will my hon. Friend confirm that we have some particularly good news—between April and August last year 39 potential investors visited Northern Ireland, whereas 96 such investors visited Northern Ireland between September and January this year? Will my hon. Friend confirm that those figures would be further enhanced if we could get the

    927
    decommissioning of arms by the IRA, and that the message to Sinn Fein, the IRA and the people of Northern Ireland is simple—it is a case of guns out and jobs in?
    Mr. Ancram: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. That was the message that came through very clearly from my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State last night in Washington. It is a point that we must continue to make because, although the figures to which my hon. Friend rightly alluded are very encouraging, there is no doubt that investment and prosperity in Northern Ireland will depend not only on a cessation of violence but on the confidence that peace will last and, indeed, on the political settlement which I hope will create political stability following on that.
    I totally support what my hon. Friend said, but the figures are now rather better than those that he gave. There were 163 visits by potential investors in 1994–95 compared with 146 in the preceding year. Investment inquiries, which are a very good indicator, were up as well, at 743 in the six months to 31 March 1995 compared to only 189 in the corresponding period in the previous year. These are, indeed, encouraging signs.
    Mr. Clifford Forsythe: The Minister will be aware of my strong support for overseas firms coming into my constituency, although I am very concerned at the extra financial burden placed on those firms by the fair employment legislation. Would the Minister join me to help investigate the unofficial embargo that has been placed by a Government department on a certain product produced in a factory in my constituency?
    Mr. Ancram: As the hon. Member knows, that is not one of the departments for which I have responsibility in Northern Ireland, although I answer for it in the House. If the hon. Gentleman writes to me giving details, I shall pass them on to my noble Friend Lady Denton and she will reply to him in due course. I know that the hon. Gentleman works very hard in his constituency to ensure that inward investment is forthcoming and that, in the past three years, there has been some significant inward investment.
    Mr. Worthington: While in the United States, will the Secretary of State see Senator Jesse Helms, the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who is against all US aid, including aid for the International Fund for Ireland, to persuade him that this would be exactly the wrong moment to withdraw assistance to Ireland? If we can get money for the International Fund for Ireland, will the Secretary of State ensure that a good proportion of it goes into community-based initiatives so that the people of Northern Ireland can get a sense of ownership of the economy in the Province?
    Mr. Ancram: My right hon. and learned Friend is in Washington to promote investment into Northern Ireland because that is the purpose of the conference. Certainly, he and my noble Friend Lady Denton and the Under-Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, North-East (Mr. Moss), will spend their time making sure that that message comes across clearly and strongly to all those at that conference. The purpose of the conference is, however, to attract investment. The reason for attracting private investment is that it can create
    928
    jobs, which are, at the end of the day, the best underpinned of prosperity and of the standard and quality of life in Northern Ireland.
    Mr. Sykes: Does not my hon. Friend find it strange that the hon. Member for Thurrock (Mr. Mackinlay) seems to be more interested in gossip than in facts? Perhaps he is in a hurry to get back to the Chelsea flower show. Will my hon. Friend explain to Opposition Members that it is the social chapter, the minimum wage and state control that affect inward investment and that the reason why British firms have been so successful in attracting inward investment is exactly the absence of those things?
    Mr. Ancram: I fully agree with my hon. Friend. That is why the Government have taken a firm view on the social chapter. However, in Northern Ireland there has been, as my hon. Friend knows, a particular disadvantage, and that has been the troubled situation that has existed for 25 years. We are now trying to establish peace not only in the short term but in the long term because that will bring even more badly needed jobs to Northern Ireland. As for gossip and the hon. Member for Thurrock (Mr. Mackinlay), one of the occupations of the House in the 20 years in which I have been here, on and off, has always been to indulge, in certain respects, in gossip.

    Peace Process
    Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what progress he has made in taking the peace process forward in his talks with representatives of Sinn Fein. [24624]
    Mr. Ancram: I met representatives of Sinn Fein at meetings in exploratory dialogue on 10 May and yesterday. At the first meeting, we explored the decommissioning of illegally held weapons and we agreed to discuss it at a future meeting on the basis of a detailed paper tabled by the Government at that time.
    Yesterday, we explored in depth the relevance of decommissioning to the peace process and our differences of approach to this. My right hon. and learned Friend held an informal meeting with Mr. Adams of Sinn Fein in Washington last night when the relevance of peace to economic prospects in Northern Ireland was underlined.
    Mr. Prentice: Now that the Minister has met representatives of Sinn Fein, does he believe that Gerry Adams and the Sinn Fein leadership have the authority and the influence to insist that all IRA brigades decommission their arms and explosives? If not, does he believe that the Government are pressing Sinn Fein to do something on which it cannot necessarily deliver?
    Mr. Ancram: Sinn Fein has agreed that it was its influence that created the situation that led to the cessation of violence on 31 August last year. I understand, in talking to Sinn Fein, that it has admitted that it has an influence over the question of decommissioning as well. What I am doing—it is absolutely clear—is making it abundantly clear to Sinn Fein that, if it wishes to move from exploratory dialogue to substantive dialogue, not just words but actions in terms of decommissioning will be required. I know that Sinn Fein has taken careful note of what I have said and I am sure that we shall return to the matter again at future meetings.
    Mr. Molyneaux: Given that the IRA has halted only one aspect of terrorism, that it has actually increased other

    929
    criminal activities, including murder, recently and that it has continued the very worrying feature of targeting police families and public figures, do Ministers not now realise that they have the backing of the entire community for demanding that the IRA ends its terrorism and that it sets about deactivating its hideous terrorist apparatus for good?
    Mr. Ancram: I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for what he says because it is important that we realise what our objectives are. Our objectives are to take violence, intimidation and terrorism out of the situation in Northern Ireland. What we are doing is making it clear to those who say to us that they wish to become part of the political process that it is no part of a democratic party to condone the use of violence for political purposes. It is no part of a democratic party to condone the use of violence for intimidatory purposes and it is no part of a democratic party to have associations with fully armed and potentially terrorist organisations. We have made it clear that, if this process is to move forward with the participation of Sinn Fein and, indeed, of the loyalist paramilitary representatives, we have to see those problems resolved.
    Mr. Peter Bottomley: Does my hon. Friend accept that there will be widespread support throughout the House both for what the right hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Mr. Molyneaux) said and for what he said in reply? Will he confirm that, for years, the House has expected elected councillors from constitutional parties to sit in the same chamber as Sinn Fein and that the key point that needs to be made to Sinn Fein is that, whereas talking with Ministers is not frightfully complicated, the most important issue is creating the conditions in which other parties are willing to sit down with Sinn Fein to discuss the future of Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom?
    Mr. Ancram: I agree with my hon. Friend. That is why the basis for exploratory dialogue was threefold from the start. One part of it was the consequences of the cessation of violence, which included aspects such as the decommissioning of arms. Another was the bringing of Sinn Fein back into the full democratic process within Northern Ireland, in terms not just of electing councillors but of the work that those councillors do. The third was finding the basis for Sinn Fein to become involved in the political discussions and the constitutional discussions on the future of Northern Ireland. My hon. Friend is right to say that if Sinn Fein wishes to achieve that status, it must do so on the basis that all other parties do, which is that they are armed with their electoral mandates and with nothing else.

    Tourism, Banbridge
    Mr. Trimble: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what proposals he has to facilitate tourism in the Banbridge district. [24626]
    Sir John Wheeler: The Northern Ireland tourist board is taking action in conjunction with the local industry on a number of fronts, particularly marketing, quality and accommodation, to facilitate the development of tourism across all parts of Northern Ireland, including Banbridge.
    Mr. Trimble: Does the Minister accept that the provision of bed-and-breakfast accommodation in rural areas, by conversion or new build, is a desirable objective
    930
    but that it is being frustrated by an over-rigid approach by planning authorities? Does he accept that the people of Banbridge would be delighted if there were major hotel development in the town but that they will be extremely angry with the Government if it turns out that the true reason for the mooted closure of Banbridge hospital is to sell it off for such development?
    Sir John Wheeler: I know that the hon. Gentleman takes an informed and dedicated interest in the commercial interests of his constituents, not least in the promotion and development of tourism. The provision of quality accommodation has been identified by the Northern Ireland tourist board as an important development for Northern Ireland and the board may be able to provide some form of assistance. I have no knowledge of what the hon. Gentleman suggests in respect of the national health service but if my hon. Friend who is responsible for health knows about that point I am sure that he will communicate with the hon. Gentleman. Planning permission for bed-and-breakfast accommodation is a matter for the divisional planning officer, but I should hope that such decisions would be based on the economic needs as well as the environmental interests of the locality.

    Terrorist Prisoners
    Mr. Mike O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many prisoners in Northern Ireland gaols are classified as members of (a) nationalist terrorist organisations and in each case which one and (b) loyalist terrorist organizations and in each case which one. [24627]
    Sir John Wheeler: The terrorist affiliation of prisoners is recorded for prison management purposes, not for classification. Approximately 35 per cent. of sentenced prisoners are republican, 23 per cent. are loyalist, and 42 per cent. are not affiliated or are untraced.
    Mr. O'Brien: Has the Minister had an opportunity to read the report by the Northern Ireland Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders concerning the early release of prisoners? Will it form a topic for discussion during his talks with Northern Irish parties?
    Sir John Wheeler: I welcome the hon. Gentleman's reference to the report and work of NIACRO, which I regard extremely highly. I have regular opportunities to meet representatives of NIACRO and I listen to their points of view and objectives carefully. It is a forward-thinking, highly responsible organization on which I place much credit. Its observations weigh in my mind when I consider those important and complicated matters and in the course of discussion with others, too.
    Mr. Brazier: When are the cases of prisoners Fisher and Wright likely to be reviewed, and when is next month's review of the sentence of Private Lee Clegg likely to be completed?
    Sir John Wheeler: I cannot comment on the cases of the two offenders to whom my hon. Friend referred, other than to say that they are part of the normal process and procedure for the Prison Service in Northern Ireland and will be subject to those procedures in precisely the same

    931
    way as any other prisoners. The life sentence review board will begin to review Private Lee Clegg's case in June and a report will come to my notice in due course.
    Mr. A. Cecil Walker: When will the statement of 16 March be implemented to allow financially assisted visits for low-income families of prisoners?
    Sir John Wheeler: The hon. Gentleman takes a detailed and considered interest in those matters. The Northern Ireland Prison Service is considering a number of proposals to enhance the regime of prisons in Northern Ireland and that is certainly one of them. The Prison Service must take into account the serious cost implications as it balances the different economic needs of the management of prisons.

    Terrorist Disarmament
    Mr. Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the progress he has made to date in bringing about the disarming of republican terrorist organisations. [24628]
    Sir John Wheeler: Substantial progress on decommissioning paramilitary weapons, and on other issues, is needed if Sinn Fein is to enter normal political life in Northern Ireland. We will continue to pursue this matter vigorously during exploratory dialogue. The RUC and Garda will also continue to seek out all illegal terrorist weapons, as recent successes in Northern Ireland and the Republic amply demonstrate.
    Mr. Winterton: Although I fully support the peace initiative, is my right hon. Friend aware that there are Members who deeply regret the meeting that took place between the Secretary of State and Gerry Adams yesterday in Washington, because it gives credibility to Mr. Adams and his cause, which is totally unjustified? Does he accept that if the Government are to retain the confidence of the overwhelming majority of people in Northern Ireland, who support the Union, including the Unionist parties in Northern Ireland, they must make no further concessions to republican terrorism and we must have a substantial decommissioning of IRA weapons?
    Sir John Wheeler: I fully understand why my hon. Friend views with distaste the encounter between my right hon. and learned Friend and the president of Sinn Fein. Perhaps he will be pleased to know that that encounter enabled my right hon. and learned Friend to make clear to the president of Sinn Fein that if Sinn Fein is to be a normal political party, it must understand the importance of the decommissioning process and it must agree, through the exploratory talks mechanism that my hon. Friend the Member for Devizes (Mr. Ancram) is conducting, with the modalities of decommissioning if it is to make progress.
    My hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) urges that the Government should not concede, to use his word, any further leeway to Sinn Fein. I can assure him that the decommissioning principle, which has been so vigorously announced by the Government, will be adhered to.
    Mr. Maginnis: Is it not somewhat peculiar that the right hon. Member for Westminster, North (Sir J. Wheeler) answered that question instead of the hon. Member for Devizes, who has responsibility, apparently,
    932
    for bringing the disarmament process to a conclusion? Has not the hon. Member for Devizes been somewhat coy about his on-going relationship with Sinn Fein-IRA? Is it not a fact that although every demand by Sinn Fein-IRA as to who they will meet and when they will meet them has been met so far, not a single solitary gun has been produced, and nor have we moved to discuss in detail the modalities and methods for disarmament? Is it true that progress on that issue has been made with loyalist paramilitary organisations? Is not the dalliance of the hon. Member for Devizes with Sinn Fein-IRA becoming a sordid little affair?
    Sir John Wheeler: I can assure the hon. Gentleman that there is no difference in any way between my hon. Friend the Member for Devizes and me on the issue of decommissioning. We stand shoulder to shoulder in our determination to see that process carried forward. The hon. Gentleman is quite right to say that the exploratory talks that my hon. Friend has been holding with various organisations, down but a single track, have shown some to be swifter in their journey than others. The fact remains that, even as we talk of such matters, in Washington my right hon. and learned Friend is urging the decommissioning process, because if investors are to invest in Northern Ireland with confidence, they, like other people, cannot look into the minds of terrorists and their political associates, who speak about permanence of peace, until they look to see the evidence of a standing down of terrorist gangs. When that happens, people will know that decommissioning has indeed been achieved.
    Mr. Cyril D. Townsend: What plans have the Government to involve either other countries or other organisations in the process of removing and destroying arms, ammunition and explosives that may be seized in due course?
    Sir John Wheeler: It remains to be seen precisely what procedures are necessary to achieve the successful and actual decommissioning of the substantial amounts of weapons and explosives that are held by the Provisional IRA and others. It is always possible that contributions to the process can be made by other people, although firmly within the control and the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom and the Government of the Republic.

  PRIME MINISTER

    Engagements
    Ms Hoey: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 May. [24650]
    The Prime Minister (Mr. John Major): This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.
    Ms Hoey: Has the Prime Minister any understanding of the deep anger that will be felt in the country at the way in which the directors of the privatised National Grid have used tax avoidance measures to ensure that their

    933
    wives will have hundreds of thousands of bonus shares? What message does that send to pensioners in my constituency who are struggling to make ends meet?
    The Prime Minister: The hon. Lady may not be wholly aware of what has happened. I have made inquiries to clarify the position.
    I understand that the only share options granted by the National Grid have been granted to its own directors and staff; but, having exercised those options and purchased the shares, directors have then given them to their wives. As the hon. Lady may know, it is a fundamental principle that transfers of property between husband and wife are free of tax, as they have been for a long time.
    If the hon. Lady and the deputy leader of the Labour party wish to change the position, are they saying that they want to make transfers of property between husband and wife taxable? Are they saying that the independent taxation of men and women should be abolished? Are they saying that widows should no longer be able to inherit property from their husbands free of tax? [HON MEMBERS: "Answer".] That is the inevitable principle that follows from the point put by the hon. Lady. Once again, Opposition Members are trying to use a particular issue for their own advantage without understanding the implications of what they say.
    Rev. Ian Paisley: I am sure that the Prime Minister has heard of the result of yesterday's meeting in America between his right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland and the leader of IRA-Sinn Fein. I am sure that he has noted what the leader of IRA-Sinn Fein said: that there can be no progress towards decommissioning until there is complete demilitarisation of everyone—that is, the surrender of arms by Army, police and those who have guns to protect themselves—and that all prisoners must be released. Are the Government prepared to negotiate with the leader of Sinn Fein on those terms?
    The Prime Minister: As the hon. Gentleman knows, my right hon. and learned Friend met the leader of Sinn Fein yesterday to make a point that was very important for both the hon. Gentleman's constituents and others in Northern Ireland: that the best contribution that Sinn Fein could make to the conference and to Northern Ireland's prosperity would be to promote peace, and therefore to secure the decommissioning of the IRA's arms and explosives. That remains the Government's position.
    Until, in these exploratory talks, there have been practical movements forward in the decommissioning of arms, it will not be possible for Sinn Fein to move to full-scale political talks either with the Government or, I suspect, the hon. Gentleman's party or any other political party in Northern Ireland. That is the point that we have made repeatedly to Sinn Fein, and it remains our position. As the hon. Gentleman knows, our objective is to move towards taking the gun entirely out of the politics of Northern Ireland. In that, I believe that we have the support of all the mainstream political parties in Northern Ireland and all the people of Northern Ireland.
    Mr. Blair: To return to National Grid, is the Prime Minister aware—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] They wanted us to answer the point and now they do not want us to raise it. Is the Prime Minister aware that the issue is not independent taxation between men and women, but remuneration being paid by way of share options so as to
    934
    avoid income tax? That is what is actually happening in this case. Is the Prime Minister prepared to say that that abuse is wrong and is he prepared to put a stop to it?
    The Prime Minister: Let me say to the right hon. Gentleman that I favour employee share options and I favour executive share options. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman does too, because that is a direct quote from his hon. Friend the shadow Chancellor. There is no dispute between the right hon. Gentleman and I or between the two major parties about the desirability of share options.
    In this instance, the hon. Member for Vauxhall (Ms Hoey) has raised a point that has been the subject of publicity today. Having exercised the share options and purchased shares, a husband passed his own property—the shares—to his wife. The leader of the Labour party seems to be saying that if, having done something of which the leader of the Labour party approves—accepted share options—the husband then does what has been done for many years and passes them to his wife, that should now be taxable. That is quite unlike anything that has happened in the past. If that is Labour's policy, let the Leader of the Opposition please make it clear.
    Mr. Blair: No, that is not the policy. The only reason why the directors transfer shares to their spouses is that the remuneration is paid by way of share options in order to avoid income tax. That is why they do it. That is the issue: it is not whether share options are wrong or right, it is whether they are taxed as income or as capital gains. Is the Prime Minister prepared to say that, where remuneration is effectively given by way of share options to avoid income tax and only pay capital gains tax, he will put a stop to it?
    The Prime Minister: Capital gains are taxed at the marginal rate when the capital gain is realised. The right hon. Gentleman is effectively saying that he does not wish husbands to pass those rights on to their wives. The transfer of property between husbands and wives—be it shares, property or capital—is tax free.
    Although the right hon. Gentleman is now wriggling because his hon. Friend the shadow Chancellor changed his position mid morning because he realised what he had said and what he had done, the truth is revealed yet again by what the right hon. Gentleman has said: Labour hates privatisation and it hates profit. It cannot stand share ownership. Old Labour lurks there as clearly as it ever did. Labour Members cannot stand the fact that some people receive share options and exercise share options as part of their employment remuneration.
    Mr. Blair: Perhaps the Prime Minister does not realise that the National Grid has admitted that it used share options to avoid paying income tax. Why does not the Prime Minister stop defending the greed of a privileged few and stand up for the vast majority of decent British people?
    The Prime Minister: The right hon. Gentleman had better decide whether he is really in favour of share options. The glaring divide between the shadow Chancellor and the leader of the Labour party becomes more apparent day by day. They may sit close together, but clearly they never speak.
    Mr. Lidington: Will my right hon. Friend join me in welcoming today's announcement of further measures to

    935
    target taxpayers' money on making state schools more effective and improving standards? Will he confirm that the Government's objective is to ensure that all parents are entitled to a good-quality, high-standard state education for their children, not only if they happen to live a couple of boroughs away from a convenient grant-maintained school?
    The Prime Minister: I can certainly confirm that point. I believe that the proposals announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education will be widely welcomed up and down the country.
    Mr. Ashdown: Does the Prime Minister agree that the deadlines in Sarajevo represent a critical moment for the authority of the United Nations and its commanders in Bosnia? Will he ensure that, if our commanders on the ground in Bosnia conclude that decisive action must be taken, they will receive the full and unswerving backing of not only the Government but the United Nations in New York?
    The Prime Minister: I share the right hon. Gentleman's view about the importance of the present situation. I am happy to tell him that we have already given that assurance to our commanders on the ground. We made that clear in New York last night and they are aware of our position. The United Nations has also reiterated its full support—by that I mean our commanders will have support for whatever action they may consider necessary in the light of the events of the past day or so.
    Let me add to that point in view of the present situation. We very much wish the United Nations protection forces to continue performing their role. They have saved many lives delivering aid and containing the fighting. I believe the reason for maintaining a force on the ground remains as compelling today as it has been in the past, but all the parties need to be aware that if they continue ground fighting and accelerate it, they may render it impossible for the United Nations protection forces satisfactorily to carry out the mandate that they have been given. I hope that point is fully understood. At present, General Smith and the United Nations forces are very much in our thoughts. They most assuredly have our total support.

    Official Visits
    Mr. Dunn: To ask the Prime Minister what plans he has to visit Southfleet, Kent. [24651]
    The Prime Minister: I have no current plans to do so.
    Mr. Dunn: What advice would the Prime Minister give the leadership of the trade union, Unison, which may be about to inflict a vicious national strike on the British people? The last time Unison inflicted a strike on the British people—
    Mr. Mackinlay: What has this to do with Kent?
    Mr. Dunn: People are concerned about it in Southfleet.
    The last time Unison inflicted a national strike on British people, hospitals were closed, schools were shut down, operations were cancelled and the dead were left unburied.
    The Prime Minister: I believe that any form of industrial action in the health service would be bound to harm patients. It is difficult to see how it could do
    936
    anything else. My hon. Friend has provided a graphic reminder of what happened on a previous occasion. I am perfectly certain that no professional nurse would wish to pursue such action, and I very much hope that that will be the overwhelming view. I hope that the few people involved will set aside the language of trade union confrontation, look at the fair offer that has been made to them by the vast majority of NHS trusts up and down the country, accept it and put the issue behind us.

    Engagements
    Mr. Illsley: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 May. [24652]
    The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave some moments ago.
    Mr. Illsley: From the Government's overwhelming defeat in the local elections last month, it is clear that the electorate totally rejected their local government policies. In particular, people rejected the Government notion that Labour authorities are high taxing and high spending. Will the Government now abandon plans to cap the expenditure of local authorities this year?
    The Prime Minister: I have very great doubts about whether people have abandoned the notion that Labour means high taxes, both nationally and locally. If one looks band for band at local taxation last year, one finds that in band C, for example—I take the figures from memory, but I think that they are right—Labour councils taxed about £160 more than Conservative councils. That point will be understood increasingly as people examine their tax bills.
    Mr. Robathan: In the course of his busy day, has my right hon. Friend had an opportunity to read the report on Islington's social services? If so, he will have found that the Labour party in Islington put political correctness above the needs of the vulnerable and of the children in its care, and above common sense. Does he agree that, in the same way, the Labour party in general puts women-only shortlists and other forms of positive discrimination and political correctness above the interests of the nation—
    Madam Speaker: Order. What other parties do is not the responsibility of the Prime Minister. I have told the House time and time again that Ministers at the Dispatch Box answer for their policies, not for what other people do. Perhaps the Prime Minister can give some answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question, but I hope that the House will remember in future that Ministers are to be questioned about their responsibilities, not about anything else.
    The Prime Minister: The substantive part of the question followed on nicely from the question asked by the hon. Member for Barnsley, Central (Mr. Illsley) a moment ago. Like everyone in the House—I would hope—I read the reports about what apparently happened in Islington council and found them extremely disturbing. They show what happens when political correctness runs riot. I believe that tolerance, in that environment, becomes excess. It causes untold suffering for those in need of help. This was a sad example of what happens when the Labour party is in power. The hon. Member for Barnsley, Central

    937
    neglected to mention the activities that went on in Islington, so I am grateful to my hon. Friend for bringing them to my attention.
    Ms Quin: To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 May. [24653]
    The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Lady to the answer I gave some moments ago.
    Ms Quin: Does the Prime Minister recall his prediction at the 1991 Conservative party conference that Labour
    938
    would introduce eight new taxes if it took office? How does that claim look now in the light of the 20 new taxes that he and the Government have introduced?
    The Prime Minister: Perhaps the hon. Lady should glance at the list of new taxes to which Opposition Front Benchers have committed themselves if they come to government—[HON. MEMBERS: "Rubbish."] Opposition Members are right: most of the taxes that they propose are rubbish. Labour is now and always has been the party of high taxation at national and local levels, and while the Opposition continue to commit themselves to more spending on every occasion, they always will be the party of high taxation.

Business of the House
3.31 pm
Mrs. Ann Taylor: Will the Leader of the House give us the details of future business?
The Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mr. Tony Newton): The business for the first week back after the spring Adjournment will be as follows:
TUESDAY 6 JUNE—Second Reading of the Crown Agents Bill [Lords].
WEDNESDAY 7 JUNE—Until 2.30 pm, there will be debates on the motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Remaining stages of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill [Lords].
THURSDAY 8 JUNE—Motion in the name of the hon. Member for Wantage relating to disclosure of specified Select Committee papers.
Motions on the European Communities (Definition of Treaties) (Partnership and co-operation agreement between the European communities and their member states and the Russian Federation) order and the European Communities (Definition of Treaties) (Partnership and co-operation agreement between the European communities and their member states, and Ukraine) order.
FRIDAY 9 JUNE—Debate on the White Paper entitled "Tackling Drugs Together"—A Strategy for England 1995–98" on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
The House will also wish to know that European Standing Committee B will meet at 10.30 am on Wednesday 7 June to consider European Community Document 4069/95, relating to Consumer Protection: Unit Pricing.
MONDAY 12 JUNE—Motion on the Northern Ireland (Emergency and Prevention of Terrorism provisions) (Continuance) order.
Remaining stages of the Medical (Professional Performance) Bill.
I expect to provide for Opposition time on either Tuesday 13 June or Wednesday 14 June, and to take Government business during the first part of Thursday 15 June. Friday 16 June is a non-sitting Friday.
Mrs. Ann Taylor: I thank the Leader of the House for that information. Will he confirm that he will be tabling a motion today to enable a Select Committee to work to clarify and implement the recommendations of the Nolan committee on the rules and procedures of the House? I hope that the House will welcome that development, as I am sure those outside it will. I hope especially that a welcome will be given to the movement by the Government over the past seven days on the Nolan report, which I believe has been in the public interest and the best interests of this Parliament.
Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the motion that he tables today will be before the House next week and that the Select Committee will meet as soon as possible? Will that Committee be required to make an interim report by 7 July for debate before the summer recess?
The Leader of the House has not scheduled an Opposition Supply day for the first week after the forthcoming recess, although he has promised us one during the week after that. I ask him to remind us of the
940
number of Supply days remaining and give us an assurance that the remaining Supply days will be spread evenly throughout the remainder of the Session.
Last week, the Leader of the House promised information about economic debates in Government time as soon as possible. Is he yet able to say when those debates might be, or will the disagreements between the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Governor of the Bank of England determine the time scale of economic debates in the House?
Mr. Newton: The timing of economic debates, details of which I still cannot give the hon. Lady, will be determined by what seems sensible and the convenience of the House.
The hon. Lady will realise that the problem with Opposition days is partly that the Opposition day debate that should have taken place yesterday was cancelled for reasons that we all understand and appreciate. That led to the tributes yesterday which we all heard—admirable tributes, if I may say so—and which slightly complicated matters. My recollection is that that Supply day will be the 13th and that there are eight such days yet to come. I shall do my best to ensure that they are as evenly spread as is consistent with securing the reasonable passage of Government business.
It may be that by now the motion on the Nolan report has been laid. If not, that will happen shortly. It makes provisions—I shall not read the full text of the terms of reference—for how the principal recommendations that relate to the House might be clarified and implemented and recommends specific resolutions for decision by the House. It is also required by the terms of reference that I am tabling that there should be an interim report, not later than Friday 7 July. As the hon. Lady knows, the purpose of setting that date is to provide an opportunity for debate were debate to be occasioned by the interim report.
As for when the resolution will be brought before the House, I expect and intend that that will happen the first week back after the recess. We shall want the Select Committee to meet as soon as it can after its terms of membership and reference have been agreed.
Mr. John Biffen: I appreciate that the business announced covers relations with Russia and the Ukraine but it does not mention Shropshire. May I inquire of my right hon. Friend that one may know soon that the Government have accepted the balanced and wise budgets determined by Shropshire county council and endorsed by the hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mr. Grocott) and my hon. Friend the Member for Ludlow (Mr. Gill) and myself, or is it still their intention to pursue confrontationally their original budget?
Mr. Newton: I had better say to my right hon. Friend that I would like to bring his question to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment.
Mr. A. J. Beith: When may we have a debate on the Green Paper proposals on identity cards, so that those of us who think that they are an unwelcome addition to the powers of the state over the individual and that they are wide open to fraud and error can make that view clear? When we get that debate, will those members of the Cabinet who agree with my view of this matter be allowed to speak?
Mr. Newton: I rather doubt whether there is any member of the Cabinet who would put any point in quite the same way as the right hon. Gentleman, but, in any event, I will certainly bear in mind the request for a debate on the identity card Green Paper.
Sir Terence Higgins: Should not my right hon. Friend point out to the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) that we abolished Supply days some years ago and that we have Opposition days nowadays? Could we have some time for debates on Select Committee reports, as there are a number of reports now outstanding which deserve time to be debated on the Floor of the House?
Mr. Newton: As always, I shall bear in mind my right hon. Friend's courteously put requests. I would just make the point that I acted extremely promptly in response to a request from one Select Committee Chairman, and others recently, to provide time for the debate that took place on the affairs of the Church Commissioners.
Mr. Alfred Morris: The Leader of the House knows that I speak as chairman of the managing trustees of the parliamentary contributory pension fund. If not in the first week back, when can we now expect to debate the senior salaries review board's recent recommendations on parliamentary pensions?
Mr. Newton: I cannot give a precise date at the moment, but the right hon. Gentleman above all will know that my task is to consult the trustees in advance of that, and that I hope to do fairly soon after the recess.
Mr. Nicholas Winterton: In fully supporting the views just expressed by the right hon. Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe (Mr. Morris), may I also pick up a point raised by the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor)? It would be very helpful indeed if the House could have a full economic debate to enable Conservative Members to display to the House the amazing amount of good news about the United Kingdom economy, and at the same time enable Conservative Members who wish to do so to provide some very positive and helpful suggestions to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Government that will help the Conservatives to win the next general election.
Mr. Newton: I always particularly enjoy my hon. Friend's helpful and positive suggestions.
Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody: Has the Leader of the House seen the statement by GEC Alsthom and ABB, both of which are rolling stock manufacturers, which says that the Government's attitude towards private finance for railway privatisation is a totally pointless exercise? Will he therefore arrange, since hundreds of jobs are at risk in railway rolling stock in this country, for us to have an urgent debate, as soon as the House reassembles, on the total chaos that is being created in the railway industry by the utterly unwarranted nonsense of privatisation?
Mr. Newton: I do not accept either half of the hon. Lady's propositions about the effects of rail privatisation, or, indeed, its interrelationship with the private finance initiative, but I will of course draw her remarks to the attention of my right hon. Friend.
Mr. Jacques Arnold: When we return, may we have a teach-in on share options, because there
942
seems to be considerable ignorance in the House on the mechanics and working of share options, which was particularly well displayed by the Leader of the Opposition, who knows about the proceeds of share options because they financed his leadership campaign?
Mr. Newton: There seemed to be a good deal of misunderstanding, but my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister more than adequately corrected it.
Mr. Dennis Skinner: As the business for the week after the holiday is not exactly fizzing with ideas, would it not be a good opportunity to have a debate about nurses' pay, especially taking into account the fact that the Prime Minister, within five minutes, was justifying share options of more than £250,000 while attacking nurses who are struggling to get 3 per cent? It is high time that we were able to declare to the people out there that nurses do not want to go on strike, they just want justice. If a minimum rate of pay is good enough for Members of Parliament, it should be good enough for nurses up and down the country.
Mr. Newton: The notion that my right hon. Friend was in any way attacking nurses is totally inconsistent with anything that he said this afternoon or on any other occasion. I remind the hon. Gentleman that it was the present Government who gave the nurses the independent pay review body that they had always wished to have.
Mr. Andrew Rowe: My right hon. Friend will be aware that in the debates that have followed the Nolan committee report it has become clear that the interaction between some of the recommendations and the possible composition of this place is close. In the possible debate on the subject, will my right hon. Friend allow us to discuss the nature of the House of Commons that is required in the 21st century and to make some suggestions as to what Nolan might look at next, such as the undisclosed financial interests of a number of journalists?
Mr. Newton: I am sure that the Nolan committee will note my hon. Friend's latter suggestion. It would be for the Chair to judge what might or might not be in order in such a debate, but I suspect that my hon. Friend would find his own ingenious way into it.
Mr. Tony Banks: Will the Leader of the House arrange for the Minister responsible to make a statement to the House following the meeting of the International Whaling Commission in Dublin between 29 May and 2 June? When he relays that request, will he also ask whether there is any truth in the rumour that a deal has been done between the British whaling commissioner and the Faroese over not raising in the plenary session the issue of pilot whale slaughter? Those Faroese who are slaughtering the pilot whales are murdering scum. If any deal has been done between the British commissioner and the Faroese there will be an awful lot of anger in Britain.
Mr. Newton: I am sure that my right hon. Friend responsible for those matters will note the hon. Gentleman's comments and, of course, attribute to them the weight that his serious interest in these matters over a long period of time would rightly merit. I cannot make any promises about a statement, but I shall certainly bring the request to my right hon. Friend's attention.
Mrs. Teresa Gorman: Will my right hon. Friend find time for us to debate early-day motion 1175 on the shocking report about child abuse in Islington?
[That this House deplores the behaviour of the honourable Member for Barking in seeking to shuffle the blame onto others for the findings of the independent White Report; condemns Islington Borough Council which, during the period when the honourable Member for Barking was its leader, betrayed the children in its care, exposing them to severe abuse in council-run homes, failed to investigate such abuses and allowed those responsible to escape unpunished; believes that the stain of political correctness and corruption ingrained in Labour-run local authorities like Islington led to this scandal; and calls upon the honourable Member to accept her share of the responsibility and to apologise without reservation to the victims.]
Such a debate would enable us to establish whether the matter should be brought before the appropriate Select Committee so that those involved can be closely questioned, including the hon. Member for Barking (Ms Hodge), who was leader of the council at the time and dismissed the report when it was brought to her as simply sensationalist journalism.
Mr. Newton: The question of what a Select Committee should consider is for the Select Committee itself, in this case the Select Committee on Health, and I have no doubt that that suggestion will be noted. My hon. Friend will have heard what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said a few moments ago about the fact that the reports of what has occurred obviously cause considerable concern. I hope that Islington borough council will act swiftly on the recommendation in the White report that the council should review its equal opportunities policy in its application to child care.
Mr. Harry Cohen: Will the Leader of the House give consideration to how it is proposed to enact the European Community data protection directive, which goes way beyond the Data Protection Act 1984 passed by the House? If the Government are to enact it, should not it be via primary legislation rather than piecemeal reserve powers?
Mr. Newton: As always, I shall give consideration to a point that the hon. Gentleman raises, but I am not in a position to speculate on that consideration at the moment.
Mr. Piers Merchant: In view of the tragic bus accident on the M4 earlier this week in which, sadly, 10 people lost their lives, will my right hon. Friend find an early opportunity for a debate on coach safety and, in particular, the fitting of safety belts on Britain's coach fleet and whether the present maximum speed limits are satisfactory for coaches?
Mr. Newton: My hon. Friend will know that, as I said in the House yesterday morning, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport has asked for an urgent report on the accident and it is being looked into by the Vehicle Inspectorate. Any question of a debate might sensibly await the outcome of those investigations.
Mrs. Alice Mahon: Will the Leader of the House make time for a debate on the national lottery? He will be aware that a national lottery was justified by the fact that it would provide money for good causes. Would
944
not it be good if we could debate the fact that £13 million has gone into the back pocket of a Tory Member of Parliament and huge profits are now going into private pockets? It is not time that we had a look at where that money is going?
Mr. Newton: It may be appropriate in due course to debate the early experience of the lottery, but we are talking about very early experience. It is clear from further distributions this week, for example, among the arts, especially at regional level, that many of the causes in which I am sure that the hon. Lady is interested are benefiting.
Mr. Edward Garnier: Will my right hon. Friend arrange an early debate on local authority market rights? Is he aware that Labour-controlled Leicester city council, owing to the six and one third mile rule, has prevented citizens in Oadby and Wigston in my constituency from holding a market to celebrate the 350th anniversary of the civil war in Leicestershire? Does he not agree that it is wholly undemocratic that socialists in the city of Leicester can control the rights of people who cannot even vote for them?
Mr. Newton: I had better confess that I was not fully informed about the precise circumstances in Leicestershire that my hon. Friend has described, but I shall ensure that the matter is drawn to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment and others.
Mr. Roy Thomason: Does my right hon. Friend think it appropriate to have an early debate on the future of capping of local authority expenditure, with a view to reviewing whether caps should continue, while retaining some system of control to ensure that there is not excessive expenditure and demands made by profligate Labour local authorities?
Mr. Newton: The whole way in which Labour authorities use money, to which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister adverted at Prime Minister's Question Time, may merit debate, but I regret that I cannot propose such a debate next week.
Mr. Max Madden: Will the Leader of the House confirm that the terms of reference of the committee set up to consider the Nolan recommendations will be debatable? Will he give an undertaking that there will be a specific allocation of time for such a debate? In referring to the terms of reference, the right hon. Gentleman mentioned resolutions. If resolutions are introduced, will he ensure that the Committee is invited to consider what would happen to Members who consistently defy such resolutions? As he will know, some hon. Members consistently refuse to observe resolutions relating to Members' interests—as have some former hon. Members—and nothing is ever done about it. Will he ensure that next time we are advised on what would happen if hon. Members refused to observe such resolutions?
Mr. Newton: The question of a debate would normally be discussed through the usual channels, of which I would expect to take account. The particular aspects of the Nolan recommendations to which the hon. Gentleman referred are for the Committee to consider, along with all the other Nolan recommendations in relation to the House.
Mr. Paddy Tipping: May we have an early opportunity to discuss the problems of endangered species? The Leader of the House will understand the urgency of that request since today's opinion poll shows that the popularity of the Conservatives is at a record low?
Mr. Newton: The hon. Gentleman will have, no doubt, made such a point on a number of earlier occasions. As I have said several times in the House, that point was pretty frequently made two years before the last election and look what happened then.
Mr. Patrick Thompson: Bearing in mind the welcome given by many of my constituents and others in the country for the consultation paper on identity cards, may I support the request of the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) for an early debate on the subject? Will not such a debate provide an opportunity to rebut some of the phoney arguments against the cards' introduction?
Mr. Newton: I am almost being invited to take every side in the debate before we even have it, but I note that further request for such a debate.
Mr. Andrew Mackinlay: Will the Leader of the House consider having a debate on the problems of thousands of householders caused by negative equity? Does he realise that negative equity is causing great anxiety to many families, including those in Braintree, Macclesfield, Thurrock and elsewhere? The Government and the Opposition have to deal with the problem because it is jeopardising our economy and blighting the lives of many thousands of families.
Mr. Newton: The most effective contribution that the Government can make over a period is to ensure that the present economic recovery is sustained. That is what we are doing and will continue to do.
Mr. David Shaw: Will my right hon. Friend arrange for a debate on the abilities of those who make decisions in the Ministry of Defence? Will he explain how anyone with any ability can close the Royal Marines school of music when independent accountants said that the Ministry of Defence's figures are wrong, when independent chartered surveyors acting as valuers said they are wrong and when some 300 jobs are likely to be lost from the largest employer in Deal? Surely it is about time that we had proper financial decision-making in Government and not that undertaken by the Ministry of Defence.
Mr. Newton: My hon. Friend has rightly, honourably and properly made his point about the Royal Marines music school at Deal for a long time. I know, and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence will know, how disappointing the decision is to the people of Deal, and I am sure that my right hon. Friend will consider what my hon. Friend has said.
Mr. Mike O'Brien: May we have an early debate on the Government's policy of removing surplus places from schools? Is he aware that one of the biggest schemes has been in Warwickshire which has been thrown into chaos and where the plug may have to be pulled on part of the reorganisation because of delays by the Government and the Department for Education in making decisions? They got their procedures wrong and have had to be hauled before the courts to be
946
told that they have not only shortchanged the children of Warwickshire in terms of school funding but messed up the administration of the whole reorganisation scheme.
Mr. Newton: I cannot make a quick, off-the-cuff comment on what the hon. Gentleman says, but I shall, of course, bring it to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education.
Mr. Iain Duncan Smith: Will my right hon. Friend find time for a debate on Britain's nuclear deterrent? Although they are clear about our policy, a number of my constituents are concerned that there seems to be a difference of opinion in the Labour party. Labour Back Benchers think that we should get rid of our nuclear deterrent whereas members of Labour's Front Bench want to hang on to it but never use it. Is there not a need for a debate so that Labour Front Benchers may have the opportunity to explain to the Great British public why they intend to waste money on what they will not use while we see the necessity for a deterrent?
Mr. Newton: If the time existed in the parliamentary timetable, I would be tempted to have as a match for every Opposition day a Government day when we could debate what the Opposition do not want to talk about, and that would be one of the topics.
Mr. Harry Barnes: Today, probably at this very moment, the House of Lords is discussing electoral registration and the fact that the electoral register is in an utter mess because between 3 million and 4 million are missing from it. If the unelected House can discuss this key issue, why cannot this House do the same, given that we are directly elected?
Mr. Newton: Despite the hon. Gentleman's rather aggressive style from time to time, I always consider what he says, but my positive and constructive suggestion to him, as to my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton), is that he might consider raising the issue on a Wednesday morning.
Mr. Harry Greenway: Will my right hon. Friend provide time for a debate on inheritance tax immediately after the recess so that we can investigate what the effect on nurses and others would be of the Labour party's proposals apparently to tax the passing of gifts from one spouse to another? Should not the House consider what Labour is proposing?
Mr. Newton: My hon. Friend echoes a point that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made, and he presents a further attractive possibility for a debate.
Mr. Andrew Miller: Will the Leader of the House ask the Secretary of State for Education to come to the House to make a statement about education expenditure? Will he specifically ask her to clarify the contradiction which exists between her Department's position and that of Cheshire county council—which is Conservative and Liberal-controlled—over SSA expenditure on education? Either one party or the other is right, but both parties involved are the Conservative party. Only one approach can be right—which is it?
Mr. Newton: I always seek to provide clarification where I can, and I note the hon. Gentleman's request in this case.
Mr. John Wilkinson: May I reiterate to my right hon. Friend my previous pleas for an early debate on the European aspects of civil air transport policy? Will he find time on our first Thursday back—in addition to the debates on Russia and Ukraine—to discuss the proposed European flight time limitations, about which the British Air Line Pilots Association has severe reservations?
Mr. Newton: I note my hon. Friend's reservation and while I cannot make promises, I shall keep it in mind.
Mr. Paul Flynn: While it is right that we should debate the awful tragedy on the M4 this week in which 10 people died, should not we also debate the 60 deaths a week which occur on the roads of this country? The people killed include Anne Carrinton, who was killed on 1 February in Fleet, Hampshire, and Susan Gardiner, who was killed on 12 February in Brentwood, both of whose families asked me to bring those deaths to the attention of the House because they believe that they were caused in collisions with slow-moving vehicles carrying bull bars. Is not it right that we consider what opportunities there are for us to reduce the terrible number of 60 deaths a week by practical methods, such as daylight saving, compulsory seat belts and banning bull bars?
Mr. Newton: Either the hon. Gentleman or someone else—I apologise for my memory not being clearer—has put this point to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. [Interruption.] It was the hon. Gentleman. In that case, he will recall that my right hon. Friend undertook to look into the matter. No doubt he is doing so, and he will respond to the hon. Gentleman in due course.
Lady Olga Maitland: Will my right hon. Friend consider having a debate on equal opportunities for both men and women? I raise the matter because serious concerns have arisen that women are being offered positive discrimination in the selection of Labour candidates for parliamentary seats. That is demeaning, insulting and undemocratic.
Mr. Newton: My hon. Friend's view about the matter is widely shared, not least by many other women.
Mr. Rhodri Morgan: Will the Leader of the House arrange for an early debate on the extraordinary admission tucked away discreetly in Monday's written questions that the Government have had to approve retrospectively and on an extra-statutory basis £165 million worth of managerial expenses paid unlawfully by the Government between 1 April 1991, when the new NHS internal market reforms came in, and 1 April 1995? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that a totally unprecedented breakdown of public expenditure control has occurred? Should not any Government who take pride in looking after the public finances and the rule of law as governed by the House recognise that something terribly serious has gone wrong? Has not the matter been given a fig leaf of parliamentary respectability by the extra-statutory payments authorisation? Does not the matter require a debate as to whether the original law was
948
defective or deliberately deceptive because the Government wished to hide the rampant growth in managerialism following the new legislation?
Mr. Newton: I cannot judge whether the matter requires a debate at the moment, but there are various ways of looking at such matters. In any event, I would first want to draw the hon. Gentleman's question to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health.
Mr. Bernard Jenkin: Does my right hon. Friend recall that, when we used to have the Budget in March, there used to be a separate public expenditure White Paper in the autumn and a series of debates devoted to that topic? Echoing the request of the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor), would not it be useful to have a debate about public expenditure, so that the Government could demonstrate how Conservatives are manfully striving to control it, whereas every policy statement by the Opposition shows that they are determined to increase it whatever they may be pretending?
Mr. Newton: That appears to be another good candidate for the putative Government days to which I referred and I will bear it in mind. It also adds to the strength of the case for the economic day for which the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mrs. Taylor) asked.
Mr. Gordon Prentice: May we have an early debate on the unfolding scandal of the Churchill papers? May I draw the attention of the Leader of the House to column 647 in yesterday's Hansard where, in reply to questions that I tabled, the Heritage Secretary confirmed that the £12.5 million valuation was conjured out of the air by an antiquarian bookseller and that the collection has not even been fully catalogued? Is not that a grotesque scandal and a waste of money?
Mr. Newton: I am sure that the board in question took the best possible advice before coming to its conclusion and I do not think that anything that the hon. Gentleman has said in the past few moments calls that into question.
Mr. James Clappison: May I support the request of my hon. Friend the Member for Colchester, North (Mr. Jenkin) for a debate on spending, which the Opposition ought to welcome? Is my right hon. Friend aware that, earlier this week, the Leader of the Opposition promised a long and gruelling slog to control public expenditure while, in the past three weeks alone, Opposition Front-Bench spokesmen on health, transport and industry have made commitments at the Dispatch Box to increase spending? Could we have a debate to clear up any misunderstanding about that and to find out who is going on the gruelling slog, or whether the Leader of the Opposition will be going off on a frolic of his own and the rest of the Labour party have dropped out already?
Mr. Newton: If I can combine the debate that my hon. Friend the Member for Colchester, North (Mr. Jenkin) wanted with the more closely targeted debate that my hon. Friend has just advocated, I would be happy to find time for it and will bear it very much in mind.
Mr. Nigel Evans: May I support the call by the hon. Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mrs. Dunwoody) for a debate on rail privatisation? It was a great shame that, in the debate the other day, only five of

949
her comrades turned up—all sponsored by one transport union or the other. Such a debate would give us an opportunity to concentrate on the statement by Jimmy Knapp that, if his members do not get a 6 per cent. pay rise, they will embark on another damaging strike. Perhaps this time we can get across the message that, if they do so, the only people whom it will damage will be the people they are there to serve—their customers.
Mr. Newton: I very much agree with my hon. Friend and I hope that his words will be borne in mind by those at whom they were directed.
Mr. John Marshall: As one of the sponsors, may I echo the plea for an early debate on early-day motion 1175? Does my right hon. Friend agree that that is one of the biggest scandals in local government in London? Will he congratulate the Evening Standard on its persistent and responsible campaign which unmasked this scandal, and will he condemn the indifference of the Labour party to that scandal in the home of new Labour—Islington?
Mr. Newton: From what I have seen, I would certainly want to join my hon. Friend in congratulating the Evening Standard on bringing that matter to the public's attention. I have already made some observations about what I hope those concerned with the affairs of Islington borough council will do about it.

Coal Industry
4.8 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Industry and Energy (Mr. Richard Page): I beg to move,
That the draft Coal Industry (Restructuring Grants) Order 1995, which was laid before this House on 1st May, be approved.
This will be the ninth annual order under section 3 of the Coal Industry Act 1987, and it has two purposes. First, it specifies the kind of restructuring expenditure incurred by British Coal in the present financial year for which grant may be paid. Those are: redundancy and early retirement; retraining through the job and career exchange scheme; and, new employment. The latter includes the costs incurred by British Coal Enterprise in promoting new job opportunities in areas affected by pit closures.
Those are the same categories of expenditure as was specified in last year's order, except for transfer allowances, which are not included in this year's order, since British Coal will not be incurring any expenditure in that area this year.
Secondly, the order sets at 90 per cent.—as last year—the maximum percentage of restructuring costs which can be met by restructuring grant in the current financial year.
Restructuring grant has proved to be an essential part of the Government's assistance to British Coal. It has helped the industry to adapt to changing circumstances, by supporting generous redundancy terms for miners and staff who are losing jobs as a result of closures and efficiency improvements. British Coal Enterprise estimates that it has created over 120,000 job opportunities, and retrained and resettled, mostly in alternative employment, some 57,000 people since 1984.
The order will allow the Government to continue to support the industry for a further year. The main expenditures this year will be related to retraining and new employment.
I commend the order to the House.
4.10 pm
Mr. Stuart Bell: I am grateful for the opportunity of responding to the Minister on this matter.
It is perhaps fitting that you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, are in the Chair. I should like briefly to refer to the death yesterday of Harold Wilson, because I have here a book that he wrote in 1945, entitled "A Plan for Coal". This book was sent by him to Will Lawther, who was president of the National Union of Mineworkers and who was kind enough to pass it on to me.
With your mining background, Mr. Deputy Speaker, you will appreciate that Harold Wilson was a great friend of the industry and the miners. He regularly attended the big meeting days, and made major speeches before them. I remember how in 1965, when he came to the Durham miners' gala, it poured down all day, and the crowds could not assemble. He nevertheless passed out his speech to the press as if he had read it, and enjoyed the festivities as best he could.
It is fitting that, in discussing this mining industry order, he should be remembered today as he was yesterday, and that the work that he carried out half a century ago in "A Plan for Coal" is remembered and placed on the record.

951
I am grateful to the Minister for taking us through the order. It may be the last day before the recess, and the day of a by-election, and it may be eighth or ninth order which the Minister and Government have brought to the House, but nevertheless it would have been helpful if the Minister had taken a little longer to go through it. We on this side of the House will seek to rectify that for him.
As the Minister said in his brief introduction, under section 3 of the Coal Industry Act 1987, the Secretary of State can, and does, make grants to British Coal to cover some of the costs incurred as a result of the restructuring of the coal industry. In October 1992, the Government announced what they described as a substantial and wide-ranging package of new measures to assist the coalfield communities. They included extra help for inward investment, promotion and additional activity in British Coal Enterprise.
We fully recognise the role that BCE has played in helping to create over 120,000 job opportunities in coalfield areas across the country—a role which covers business funding, the workplace and outplacement. We also recognise that the £93 million that BCE has committed to job creation projects has attracted from other funders a further £670 million of inward investment into the coalfields. The future existence of BCE, however, remains uncertain, notwithstanding the commitments in the Government's White Paper.
I am glad to see that I am in very good company today, with my hon. Friends the Members for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), for Barnsley, West and Penistone (Mr. Clapham), for Barnsley, Central (Mr. Illsley), for Midlothian (Mr. Clarke), for Sunderland, North (Mr. Etherington), for Sherwood (Mr. Tipping), for Wentworth (Mr. Hardy) and for Wansbeck (Mr. Thompson), to name but a few.
We want to debate the order and to consider the future of British Coal Enterprise and its work force, who did not know, for example, until February of this year that the grants given for 1995–96 by this statutory instrument would be forthcoming. Consultation is never a high priority in the Government's mind. To this day, the staff of British Coal Enterprise do not know whether they will be in a job this time next year.
The staff of British Coal Enterprise are not alone in the uncertainty they feel about their jobs. Many of us meet constituents who tell us that they are on short-term contracts. We meet constituents who are casual workers and whose jobs do not provide holiday pay or sickness benefit. Those people cannot feel the so-called feel-good factor, because they do not know whether they will be in a job in a year's time, and they do not know whether they will have a roof over their heads. Low morale afflicts the country, so it is not surprising that morale at British Coal Enterprise is extremely low.
Low morale can affect not only the individual concerned, but the services that that individual renders. From all the information we are getting, it is clear that many ex-mining staff still need long-term assistance. A report produced by the Coalfield Communities Campaign, after surveying almost 900 ex-miners from five pits that ceased production in October 1992—the figures are supported by an independent CBI survey and by a survey conducted by Derbyshire county council—showed that
952
only 44 per cent. were in employment. Some 46 per cent. were unemployed, and 9 per cent. were in training or education.
Of those who were unemployed, 80 per cent. had had no work since leaving the industry. Those who were in employment earned much less than they had as miners. On average, they earned £70 a week less than they had in the mining industry. Overall, 89 per cent. were worse off at the time of the survey than they had been when they worked in the pits.
We submit to the House that there is much hidden unemployment among ex-miners. Some 30 per cent. were claiming sickness benefit which did not show up on the unemployment register. That is a higher proportion than one would expect, as a result of the unhealthy effects of working down a pit, especially as the average age of those surveyed was 38. Those surveyed were in the prime of their working lives.
The survey shows that morale is low among redundant miners, and that low morale can lead to illness. It shows that the hope of getting a job is so small that it is not surprising that morale is low. With low morale and so few job prospects, as in all such circumstances, it is the small, niggling things in life which attain greater importance.
If we take an overview of the economy based on the survey and assume similar levels of unemployment and low pay throughout mining areas, we can see that spending power of more than £300 million a year has been lost to coalfield communities as a result of the job losses since October 1992.
As my hon. Friends know, I come from a mining area. I have written a book about colliery life, which is not as famous as other books that I have written in my time. My father spent 51 years in the pits, and I began my working life in the colliery office.
I can testify to the House that there is a keen sense of community spirit in the mining areas, as you know well, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The former pitmen have a great desire to be independent and to pay their own way through life. With that background, that desire, a sense of independence and a sense of community spirit, how fertile is the prospect for regeneration. Even under this Government, it would not take a great deal, if they brought all the assistance together, for the former miners to be able to help themselves.
We shall not let the Government forget their 1992 White Paper, in which they declared that they would increase the amount available for regeneration measures up to £200 million. It announced that the funds would allow important new major projects to go ahead, which would promote new employment opportunities.
The Opposition are entitled to ask where the money has gone. It has gone into training and enterprise councils, and industrial estates. We have seen, somewhat tardily, two enterprise zones, and a third has only just opened. But that is not new money, and it is not conditional. How often have we sat in the House and heard the President of the Board of Trade tell us that he is putting new money into the economy? It turns out to be the same money as he announced in last year's White Paper, and the same money that the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced in the Budget.
The £200 million which the Government talked about was already allocated to training and enterprise councils, English Estates and even the Welsh Development

953
Agency. Among the Government's other great attributes, they are able to launder money. They have used the same money time and again, but they say in their White Papers that it is new money.
Apart from laundering money, what else have the Government been doing in terms of energy policy? What other nefarious activities have they been up to? As Opposition Members know, and as the mining communities know better than anyone, the Government have no energy policy other than a dash for gas. They have set miners and mining communities aside, as tools to be disposed of at will. The Government's higgledy-piggledy approach to energy created those circumstances in the first place. Miners who have not found work and who are on the dole must look askance at the so-called "fat cats" in the energy industry, who line not only their own pockets with monumental fees and share options but the pockets of their wives.
Those of us who watched the extraordinary exchange between the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition will have noticed that the one thing which the Prime Minister has not learnt is Lord Healey's adage: "When you are in a hole, you should stop digging." The Prime Minister kept digging throughout the exchanges. He talked about independent taxation and gifts inter vivos. Obviously, that was over the heads of all those who listened and watched it on television.
I remember as a child learning a poem about the mining industry, which told of how the pitman was wakened in the early morning and made his way to the coalface.
Mr. Eric Illsley: Tell it to us.
Mr. Bell: As my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley, Central (Mr. Illsley) will know, he was wakened by the coaler's knock on the window. He went to the coalface to batter at the grimy rock, and he thought of all those pampered ones sleeping in what he described as the "midnight sable gloom". And he thought of all those who were above sleeping, and how they could safely bloom.
What does a former miner who is unemployed see as he looks around him at those who run the energy industry—and even at their wives? Not only are they taking home lavish pay packets and enjoying wonderful share option schemes, but their wives are dipping in, too. What we saw was not a dash for gas but a dash for greed—[HON. MEMBERS: "A dash for cash."] It is cash for questions, cash for gas, but no cash for unemployed miners.
We acknowledge and accept the considerable help from the European Union's RECHAR fund to help coalfields across the European Union. The first phase brought £135 million of European Union funding to the United Kingdom, and the second phase was recently agreed. However, that will only begin to deal with the scale of the effort needed to regenerate coalfield economies. If the Government were to allow British Coal Enterprise to go, and if they fail to honour their commitments in the 1992 White Paper, the United Kingdom would be the only coal producer in Europe without a regeneration programme in the coalfields.
In helping coalfields regenerate, we are a poor second to France and Belgium. In the Flemish coalfield, closures were phased over 10 years, to allow a proper transition within the local economy. In this country, the coal
954
industry has had the best vocational training and education schemes. The old National Coal Board was among the best in that respect.
One personnel director began as an apprentice electrician in the industry at the age of 15. He worked his way to the metaphorical top because of a training scheme. Another man, who became director of the north-east area of British Coal, also began working in the industry at the age of 15.
Miners have shown a willingness to undertake training, to learn new skills, to develop new enterprises and to be part of the changing economic scene. They need help over and above that offered by the order. They do not need any rhetoric, although we certainly did not get any from the Minister. They need assistance; they do not need promises. They need certainty; they do not need doubt and confusion.
Since the original pit closures were announced on 13 October 1992, the Government and British Coal have closed 34 of the 50 deep-mine pits then in operation. That led to the loss of 40,000 jobs directly—half the number of those at Wembley stadium watching the cup final on Saturday. Tens of thousands of other ancillary and support jobs were also lost. Before that announcement, 150,000 jobs had been lost from the industry in the previous 10 years. Wembley stadium could be filled twice over with unemployed miners.
The industry now has to cope with the uncertainty about British Coal Enterprise. If the Government had a heart and the will, they would stir themselves within the Department of Trade and Industry. If they cared, they would bring together various strands of policy aimed at regeneration. If they cared, they would create a coherent regional development policy that drew upon the strengths of the coalfields. If they cared, they would replace pessimism with hope, and offer a fair deal to former miners to help themselves.
Although the Opposition welcome the order, as we have welcomed other orders introduced in the past few years, the Government, might, just might, give the impression to the coalfield communities that they care.
4.26 pm
Mr. Peter Hardy: I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough (Mr. Bell) that, since the order is providing some resources for the mining industry and mining communities, it would be illogical for the Opposition to vote against it. That does not mean that we should allow the debate to pass without drawing attention to the grievous scale of need that exists in the coalfield communities.
As my hon. Friend has said, we have seen an enormous contraction in the industry. Coal is not being mined in my constituency, for the first time in more than three and a half centuries. When I entered the House there were 12 collieries in my constituency, and other related industries; now we have none. We are now witnessing the consequences of the destruction of jobs on a scale not seen at any other time in our industrial history. That loss emphasises the need to which my hon. Friend has referred and is why I endorse what he said about the importance of maintaining British Coal Enterprise.
We were fortunate, I suppose, to receive recycled, or laundered, money to finance the Dearne valley city grant, which was one of the first such schemes to be established.

955
It has been relatively successful, but it is not far from the end of its projected lifespan. If our local authorities continue to be subject to existing capping procedures, they will be unable to fund that project and carry on the work that the Government exhorted us to undertake.
British Coal Enterprise is one agency that could assist in guaranteeing that work. I have considerable respect for Mr. Philip Andrew, the leader of that undertaking. I believe that security of tenure should be offered to Mr. Andrew and his organisation, because that would at least enable those of us who represent constituencies covered by city grant schemes to be certain that mechanisms will be created to allow the substantial investments that have already been made to be brought to fruition.
It has cost thousands of pounds per acre to reclaim some of the land used in such schemes. The Government would surely be idiotic if they allowed such investment to be made but did not fund the agencies that would ensure that it bore fruit.
That is particularly true in the Dearne valley, which has benefited from one of the first city grant schemes—now coming to an end—and one of the two enterprise zones to which my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough (Mr. Bell) referred. We were promised that enterprise zone a long time ago, but it has only just been authorised. The loss of the agencies or any organisation that could help to develop the enterprise zones would constitute a betrayal of areas in enormous need.
I remind the Minister that, in the 1960s, when some of us wanted economic diversification in our area because our eggs were all in the baskets of coal and steel, public bodies such as the regional civil service told us that ours must be the major coal reservoir in the British Isles. They specifically discouraged economic diversification. Following the decision to inflict rapid contraction on our industry, there must be a national obligation of some kind.
If that constitutes wisdom, the obligation is even greater. The miners may have received redundancy pay, but the jobs have disappeared. The outlook for the younger generation in areas such as ours is very bleak. Ministers should understand that they have an obligation to serve the whole country, even areas that have rejected the Government decisively.
As I have said, in our Dearne valley enterprise zone, substantial amounts of public money have been spent on reclaiming land and preparing it for the economic development that we so desperately need. Immediately south of the enterprise zone and the Dearne valley reclamation area is a portion of green belt. It is green belt because the local authority has taken cognisance of the local community, and because it needs to be green belt: it is attractive, although it is adjacent to hundreds of acres of dereliction. British Coal, however, refuses to fulfil its promise to sell that farm land to the farmer, as many of us expected it would, because it is going to try to sell it as development land.
I ask the Minister to comment on the sanity of spending public money to reclaim devastated, derelict industrial land at enormous expense when British Coal wants to take neighbouring green belt land out of the green belt and sell it for development—thus negating the investment in the reclamation just a few yards away, and making a particularly pleasant farm unviable by reducing the acreage to below the minimum required.
956
I wrote to British Coal about the matter, and was told, "British Coal believes that it should be development land"—although the local authority and the local community believe that the land should remain in the green belt. We have little enough attractive green belt land as it is; I see no point in taking any away when 1,200 or 1,400 acres of land are being reclaimed under the city grant scheme.
I then wrote to the Minister, pointing out that the decision appeared to constitute a broken promise and an example of irresponsibility that disdained the public investment that—
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Geoffrey Lofthouse): Order. Has the hon. Gentleman's letter to the Minister anything to do with the order? I hope that he will return to that subject.
Mr. Hardy: Let me explain, Mr. Deputy Speaker. British Coal seeks not only to obtain the money that the order makes available, but to obtain more than it should from the sale of green belt land. That is perfectly logical—but let me take your advice, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and say that I hope the Minister will ensure that the Government are not so parsimonious that British Coal must go around selling green belt land to make money when it ought to sell it for the much lesser sum that would be available if the tenant farmer were given the opportunity he should enjoy.
Finally, let me remind the Minister of a point I made earlier. A few months ago, the Church of England Children's Society brought some young people to the House to see me. They were ordinary boys and girls of about 15 years of age who were not the sorts of kids who would go into higher education. I do not suggest that they were below average ability, but they were the sorts of boys and girls who would become skilled and semi-skilled workers—the backbone of our society. In the previous two centuries, they would have been employed in the coal and steel industries. But those jobs have now gone.
The worst moment of my 25 years' service in the House of Commons came when I talked to those ordinary kids of 15 about their outlook, prospects and hopes for the future. The Minister should understand that they have no hope, and they see few prospects or opportunities. Therefore, we are not begging the Minister to provide crumbs for the coal areas and the coalfield communities; we are telling the Minister that a wise Government will ensure that the hope that has been blighted in the past 20 years is somehow restored. This measure will provide a little of the assistance that those people need.
4.35 pm
Mr. Dennis Skinner: The draft Coal Industry (Restructuring Grants) Order is set against the very bleak background to which my hon. Friends the Members for Wentworth (Mr. Hardy) and for Middlesbrough (Mr. Bell) have referred. It is probably the bleakest period in all of my years in this place.
We have talked about the possibility of mass unemployment, and I suppose that on many occasions we have made what some would consider to be idle threats about it. The truth is that mass unemployment has now reached devastating proportions, and that it affects every constituency. The scale of the problem is almost unbelievable. Unless this or a future Government address

957
their task properly and provide adequate restructuring grants, they will be unable to deal with the difficult social climate and the devastated social fabric of coalfield communities. That is a terrifying prospect.
Whatever little money will result from the grants for retraining, retirement packages and new industries or from the puny efforts of British Coal Enterprise Ltd.—which I am afraid I cannot laud to the skies; we must emphasise that job opportunities are not jobs—it will be infinitesimal compared with the job in hand.
There are no pits left in my constituency or in the whole of north Derbyshire, and the prospects of attracting new industry on any reasonable scale pale into insignificance when compared with the 1960s, which my hon. Friend the Member for Wentworth mentioned. I saw pits close in my local authority area. It was possible for most of those miners—or a good proportion of them—to find work in other pits, because there were other pits to go to.
However, there are no pits to go to now. Probably only 10 per cent. of miners are able to find work in the few pits that remain. A survey conducted by the county council—we can see it also from a head count of local people—found that more than 50 per cent. of miners and all the inhabitants of some pit villages are unemployed. The situation is not improving. Whatever the feel-good factor may be in the rest of Britain, those people are not feeling it. They are becoming more disillusioned with every week that passes.
We have some responsibility to try to find a way out of that predicament. Assuming that the Government are not interested—apart from passing today's relatively minor order—we must have a plan ready on this side of the House to try to combat that mass unemployment. My hon. Friend the Member for Wentworth referred to what happened in the 1960s. I was a part of that. Some 700 miners and 700 other staff used to work in a big factory in Pit lane. We thought we were great, and we were. Industry was on the move in the 1960s.
It was possible to attract industry by establishing special enterprise areas. Our claim to fame was that we attracted industry that would otherwise have gone to the continent, by getting an industrial development certificate. However, those certificates would not amount to a great deal today—first, because industry is not on the move; and, secondly, as a result of technology, there are no jobs, anyway. If five sheds on a big industrial estate have about 30 people working in them, they have done exceptionally well. We have to turn our attention to the background of the restructuring grants in an attempt to get round the problem.
We must be careful about opencast. In many cases, if opencast is agreed to in the pit environs, the prospect of introducing anything else is held back for another decade. Apart from the environmental shambles that it creates, opencast in all the coalfields will prevent the operations to which my hon. Friend the Member for Wentworth referred.
Unless we examine the prospects for what we can do, we all have to acknowledge that, even if we had 10 per cent. of the manufacturing increase that occurred in the 1960s when pits closed, we would be doing exceptionally well. We have to consider where the rest of the jobs are to come from. Assuming that we are returned to office, the Labour party has to get back to the idea of sharing work, and everyone working shorter hours to make more work available.
958
In all our constituencies, thousands of what would have been young miners receive neither training nor retraining. They do not even have the chance to go to the old Coal Board workshops or anywhere.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough said, notwithstanding the restructuring grants, the amount of money circulating in the economy has reduced dramatically. The chances of creating more jobs as a result of people spending what bit of money they have are not very good. I should say in passing that now we have a wage freeze for the miners but a 23 per cent. increase for Richard Budge, the man running the English pits. That will also reduce the money available.
The grants do not address the real issues. We read every day, and it has been said in the House, that the grants should be applied to the problem of the water that is pouring out without control in every coalfield. There should be no more pumping. None of the money will be used for that. Land slicks are occurring in almost every coalfield; methane is pouring out of some of the old pits, and nobody gives two hoots. The grants should be applied to that in future, and there should be many more of them. That is the bleak picture, and we all know about it in our communities.
Of course we shall vote for the grants today, but they do not add up to a row of beans compared with the problems we face. They are set against the background that we forecast two or three years ago, when it was proposed to close the 31 pits—never mind the others. The world price of coal was already likely to rise, and it has already started to move.
What a crazy economic policy that was. We all know that it was the revenge of the Tory Government, and it has accelerated and accentuated the problems in our constituencies. We shall have to turn our attention to it in a year or two, and we had better ensure those on our Front Bench get some decent plans ready, because mass unemployment brings all kinds of problems in its wake.
4.43 pm
Mr. Paddy Tipping: The Minister says that we are discussing the ninth such order. We do not know whether it will be the last, but it is important and significant as it votes money to British Coal Enterprise. The Minister will need no reminding that during the passage of the Coal Industry Act 1994 the Government gave a commitment that British Coal Enterprise would survive the privatisation of British Coal and continue for some time after that. I am dismayed by the ad hoc arrangements that appear to have been made for British Coal Enterprise.
The order votes money for British Coal Enterprise in the current year, but I am well aware that there has been a protracted struggle to agree its future. It is important as it is the only economic development agency that focuses primarily and principally on the coalfield. It brings venture capital to companies in coalfield areas, it attracts new business and £78.6 million has been invested in business in coalfield areas. It has brought workshops to the areas. We needed the £40 million that enabled us to create 1.3 million sq ft of factory space on 47 sites. Most importantly, it is a partner for economic development. It can work with others such as the local authorities, to bring new jobs, new investment and a new future to coalfield communities.
That partnership has been blighted, however, by the lack of clarity about the long-term future of British Coal

959
Enterprise. One does not take a partner that could die at the end of the current financial year, and that is a real possibility for British Coal Enterprise.
I remind the Minister of the report that British Coal and the Department of Trade and Industry commissioned on the future of British Coal Enterprise entitled,
"Market Opportunities and Structural Options",
that was produced in November 1994. I am disappointed that the report was never published. It sets out four options for the future of British Coal Enterprise, but as yet there is no clear way forward.
It is important that we agree a timetable. It is important that all of us who are actors in the coalfield and want to create a new future know what the platforms will be and who the actors are because there is still a need in coalfield areas. In 1980, there were 40,000 miners in Nottinghamshire; today there are fewer than 3,000. To put it another way, in 15 years, more than nine out of 10 mining jobs have gone.
Unemployment is reaching dangerously high peaks. The gap between unemployment in the United Kingdom and that in the coalfield communities is constantly increasing. Inequalities are being created. In April 1991, the gap between United Kingdom unemployment and the employment in the Mansfield travel-to-work area, which covers a large part of the Nottinghamshire coalfield was 2.1 per cent. By April 1995, that gap had grown to 6 per cent.
There is a clear divergence. Unemployment is worsening in pockets of the coalfield communities while nationally it is reducing. We have to take action on that and ensure that a clear timetable spelling out the future of British Coal Enterprise is discussed and agreed quickly. I understand that the Department and British Coal have Samuel Montagu and Co. Ltd. working on the issue now, but it is important that they come clean and that early decisions are made. People can live with decisions, but they cannot live with uncertainty.
Some former miners have found jobs. My hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough talked about the work of the Coalfield Communities Campaign, which found that half the miners have found work, but are paid one third less than when they worked for British Coal. This year, Derbyshire county council produced a report with similar findings, showing that miners earn half what they earned down the pit, so there are real and continuing problems.
There is a severe loss of income into the local economy. One has only to walk around coalfield communities to see the number of shops that have shut to see how difficult things are.
Some miners have been more fortunate. I have with me the minutes of a meeting held on 11 January 1993. It was agreed at the meeting that the former miner concerned was to receive good redundancy terms and excellent pension arrangements from British Coal, together with a car and a new house. He has gone on to be appointed by the Government to work on industrial tribunals at £80 a day, and has been appointed to the Coal Authority at £5,500 a year. He is also employed by the Prince's Youth Business Trust as a business advisor at £20,000 a year. That post is funded by British Coal Enterprises. As well as his redundancy package, this gentleman is now receiving nearly £30,000: he has been well looked after.
960
The man in question, Roy Lynk, is the former president of the Union of Democratic Mineworkers. I find it astonishing that he should get his pension and a house and a car and yet be paid nearly £30,000 from Government funds. There are people in the coal industry who say that he is being well looked after. I wish that the Government were looking after the other miners who have lost their jobs and who feel betrayed as well as they look after Mr. Roy Lynk.
I hope that the Minister will reflect on this and give another group of people a fair chance for the future. He will perhaps know that the British Association of Colliery Management is holding its annual conference at the moment. He has received letters from the president of the BACM about a small group of people who are members of what is known as the triple-S scheme—the staff superannuation scheme. They worked for British Coal right to the end of its life and were then transferred to new employers. They, like their colleagues, can get their pensions at 50 if they leave their jobs in, or are made redundant by, the successor company. But if they move from the successor company to another firm and then lose their jobs, they cannot take their pensions at 50.
Fewer than 3,000 people make up this small group. I hope that the Minister will treat them with equity and examine ways of enabling them to take their pensions at 50, like their colleagues do. The money is already there—it is in the pension fund. I hope that the Minister will therefore consider my suggestion, and take this opportunity to respond to an invitation from the BACM and the pension fund trustees to discuss the issue. I am dismayed to learn that he has so far not met them. The conference meets tomorrow. I hope that the Minister will take a step forward and announce that he is prepared to discuss the future with the conference.
Tonight we are discussing that future. There is a strong feeling in the coalfield communities that the Government have buried the deep coal industry deep and then tried to walk away from it. We in the coalfield communities are pragmatic and hardworking. We want more for our children than we have had. We need to invest in jobs and infrastructure to create a better future for them.
4.53 pm
Mr. Kevin Hughes: After one false start we finally get to the blocks, as it were.
I welcome the opportunity to discuss this order, which will permit funding to be released for the costs of retirements, redundancies, retraining and new employment following the changes in the coal industry resulting from the privatisation of British Coal. The full cost of that privatisation in terms of jobs has been immense. Before privatisation the Government spent years encouraging the industry to run itself down to a small rump in preparation for the goal of selling it off. The Government's closure programme finished off the last two pits in my constituency—Bentley and Hatfield—and they had already closed down the Askern and Brodsworth collieries a couple of years before.
Taken together, the closures were nothing short of industrial vandalism on a massive scale. Closing profitable pits such as Bentley was economic madness. The jobs lost at Hatfield numbered 700, and 600 were lost at Bentley. That was a further blow to Doncaster's already

961
damaged economy which, in the 1970s, relied on 10 pits and 18,000 mining jobs, not to mention all the other industries that worked in and about the mining industry.
Now the town is having to rebuild. I suppose that the little money from these orders will go towards helping it to do so. Incidentally, the Hatfield pit has reopened under a private management buy-out scheme, and is doing quite well selling coal that the Government said could not be mined or sold economically. The team at the colliery is doing well. I wish its members well and I hope that they will build on their success.
There has thus been some relief in the way of jobs, but not much. Only 200 people work at the pit, but every job is encouraging. Still, the unemployment rate remains well above the national average. What towns like Doncaster need is Government support to make up for the difficulties of the closures. We need more retraining and the creation of new jobs by attracting firms to Doncaster. The local authority has done a great deal in this respect. The town's amenities have been improved; it has good road links in the form of the M1, the M18, the M62 and the A1. The east coast main line runs through Doncaster, and we are developing a railport so that we can key into European railfreight.
Mr. Jack Thompson: My constituency is slightly further north than my hon. Friend's but I regularly travel through Doncaster on the main line. Indeed, my hon. Friend and I often travel north together on the train from King's Cross. Has he noticed, as I have, the huge industrial and commercial developments around Peterborough and Grantham? I think that, with the right sort of support from the Government, they could have been located in Doncaster, Wansbeck or other parts north. There is no particular reason why they should have ended up in the home counties. Under the old industrial development certificate arrangements such industries did come to areas such as ours.
Mr. Hughes: My hon. Friend's point is perfectly valid. Each time I travel on the east coast main line—I look forward to doing so again later today—I notice those developments at Peterborough. We need Government help for such projects in Doncaster and Wansbeck.
To the east, west, north and south Doncaster has good road and rail links which will prove a key feature of the council's attempts to rebuild—
Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. I hesitate to interrupt, but the hon. Gentleman has strayed rather wide of the order. Will he now come back to it? I am sure that he is well aware of what it contains.
Mr. Hughes: I am grateful for your guidance, Mr. Deputy Speaker. My point is that the money granted in these orders could and should have been used in the areas that I have described to replace the jobs that have been lost in mining. Certainly, the Government have put some of the money into Doncaster, but at the same time they have cut spending on the town, which makes life difficult for the local authority. The local authority, however, is working with the private sector. There are successful partnerships that will be able properly to use the funding that will flow from the order, as well as funding from other sources.
If the Government want to help Doncaster, they could support its attempts to secure RAF Finningley as a commercial airport after the RAF pulls out next year. That
962
could help them to solve the problems surrounding the fifth terminal at Heathrow. After all, Doncaster is only one and a half hours away from London by train. It takes almost that time to travel from this place to Heathrow. Another consideration is that Manchester is only a short drive from Doncaster across the M62.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: That may well be, but the hon. Member must direct his remarks to the order.
Mr. Hughes: I am grateful to you, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I am talking about the order in terms of training and helping to reskill the work force in Doncaster in assisting it to find new jobs.
Doncaster has been lucky to have the benefit of British Coal Enterprise Ltd., which is mentioned in the order. The House will know that BCE has worked alongside the industry to help it reskill and to place former mining employees in new work with new opportunities.
I am concerned about BCE's future, which is still in the balance. The Government have not decided specifically what they intend to do with BCE in the long term. If the Minister is able to do so, he should tell the House of his intentions.
The Government made an allocation of £3 million for retraining when the Bentley and Hatfield collieries closed. The moneys were allocated to the Barnsley and Doncaster training and enterprise council. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the TEC spent the money in a different area of Doncaster. The areas most directly affected by the closures, which should have received the money that the Government brought forward and which should receive the money that will be made available by the order, did not receive their fair share.
The TEC is well aware of my concerns because I have talked about them to its representatives on many occasions. My latest information is that the area covered by the constituency of Doncaster, North received only a third of the £3 million that was made available.
I have corresponded with Ministers about the designation of other moneys that have been allocated to try to ease the difficulties caused by pit closures, including the economic difficulties that have been faced by Doncaster generally. Of the £8 million allocated to English Partnerships, most of the funding has been directed to projects on the other side of Doncaster from my constituency. The areas in which pits have closed, which should be receiving moneys from the order, as well as from other sources, have seen funding go elsewhere. A derelict land grant has been made available to clean up the Askern site, but the majority of the funding has been spent elsewhere. Some of the money should have been used to help areas north of Doncaster in my constituency where mines have closed and where unemployment is especially bad.
April figures show that in one ward in my constituency there is almost 18 per cent. Unemployment. Other wards have unemployment of 13 and 14 per cent. Within these wards are pockets where unemployment is as high as 20 per cent. and over. The moneys that will be made available by the order should be used to help unemployed people reskill and retrain for other work that the council is trying to bring into the town.
Against that background, the Government have cut the training-for-work budget by over £100 million for the next financial year. That is difficult to understand. By

963
1997, the budget will have been cut by as much as 12 per cent. That is madness when 11 per cent. of firms nationally are reporting that it is difficult to fill job vacancies. I understand that in Doncaster we have already lost 1,200 places. Indeed, more are likely to be lost. Without training, how are towns such as Doncaster expected to make the best use of the human resources that are available to them?
The Government admit that the cost to the economy of keeping someone unemployed is £9,000 a year. In Doncaster, North alone, that means that £50.5 million will be spent on subsistence for the unemployed this year. It is criminal to spend thousands of millions of pounds each year to keep people unemployed while at the same time reducing the opportunities for them to earn money for themselves in employment. The Government's approach creates a huge burden for the taxpayer instead of using Government money to encourage success. The Government should not be financing economic failure. We should be giving people a hand up, not a hand out. That is what they want and that is what they need if they are to equip themselves with the skills that they require to ensure that they get back into work.
5.7 pm
Mr. Michael Clapham: The order gives the Department of Trade and Industry authority to fund 90 per cent. of British Coal's redundancy costs for 1995–96 and to meet the operating losses of British Coal Enterprise Ltd. for that year.
The first aim of meeting British Coal's redundancy, retraining and relocation costs that have been caused by closures is relatively unimportant because the corporation has already disposed of all its mining operations and the majority of its non-mining activities. It is welcome, however, that the order will provide for redundancy arrangements for the staff who are left with British Coal to dispose of the residual holdings.
The second aim of the order is much more important because it concerns the future of BCE. My hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough (Mr. Bell) was right to concentrate on the need for secure funding for BCE as well as on a coherent approach to regional policy. We require a fair deal for the coalfields to ensure regeneration of the areas. It is clear that the coalfield areas have not had a fair deal when we set the order in the context of the 1993 DTI White Paper, "The Prospects for Coal", which set out the measures that would be taken in coalfield areas.
We were told, for example, that Barnsley and Doncaster, as well as Mansfield, would have assisted area status. The White Paper informed us that there would be assistance from the Economic Union. We were told that there would be a concentration on infrastructure aid from English Estates. It was said that there would be assistance from the jobs service and the training and enterprise councils. It appeared that there would be set up a coalfield areas fund of £244 million. We were to have new enterprise zones, extra help for inward investment and additional assistance for BCE.
The Government's record leaves much to be desired. Despite a substantial programme since 1985, they have yet to devise a framework for coalfield regeneration. When we talk about that closure programme, it must be
964
borne in mind that we are talking about the closure of 140 collieries, with 160,000 men being made redundant. That has had an enormous impact.
The Government's approach contrasts starkly with that of our European partners. For example, Belgium, France and Germany have a strategy for phased closure of surplus coal capacity that is linked to a regeneration framework that empowers local communities. The French Government are contemplating the closure of the Lorraine coalfield and have set a date of 2005 for doing so. Since 1993, the French national Government, in partnership with the local region, departments and communities, have worked on a framework that will help to regenerate the community, so that as the coal mines are closed other jobs will be available.
That has not happened in any of our coalfields, and the Government introduced a package in 1993 only after a public outcry over colliery closures. One could question whether it could be described as a coherent approach. It certainly does not have the coherence that one would expect in the light of the enormous colliery closure programme since 1985.
Let us look at what we were promised, and it does relate to the grant, which is important, as it provides a little extra help. We were promised, for example, assisted area status. That has been granted, but it would have been granted to any area with unemployment that was created by the closures, so it is not as though it is extra help.
What about European Union assistance? The RECHAR programme, which has been of enormous help, was promoted not by the Government but by local authorities. Indeed, as we have seen many times, the programme has been obstructed by the Government, and only after arguments have they accepted additionality.
What about English Estates? It has made some improvement in the provision of business sites, the effect of which has been limited by the lack of a coherent strategy. The same is true of jobs and services from training and enterprise councils.
The record of the programmes supported by the coalfield fund, mainly through TECs and English Enterprise, does not support the argument that the fund was used to provide additional services. Those additional services have not been forthcoming. Perhaps the Minister will tell us what further assistance is likely to be available through the coalfield fund.
Enterprise zones were offered to the coalfields but they are still hot fully operational—they certainly were not at the beginning of this year. I understand that the enterprise zone for the Dearne valley in south Yorkshire still has not been designated, but perhaps the Minister will be able to enlighten us on that.
It is important to consider three main aspects in relation to British Coal Enterprise. The provision of start-up finance is important for coalfield communities, because if we are to create jobs we shall do so in small and medium-sized enterprises. We must therefore concentrate on that sector.
Secondly, we must consider the provision of workspace units. Jobs will be created in smaller, growing industries within coalfield communities, so we must concentrate on them. Thirdly, we must consider the outplacing and retraining of redundant coal staff.
Those three aspects are the major part of the second aim of the grant. It is important that the Minister realises that BCE has helped in creating jobs in coalfield

965
communities, although there is some anxiety that it may not continue to do so. Is funding for BCE likely to continue after the order expires in 10 months' time? We do not know whether the grant will continue and, therefore, whether BCE will be able to continue.
Let us consider the situation that former mining communities face every day. My hon. Friends have already made the point that there are pockets of unemployment. In areas such as Worsbrough or Grimethorpe, as many as 40 per cent. of the male population of working age are unemployed. Poor infrastructure has resulted from a concentration on mining, with little diversification. The engineering industry that grew up around mining was very much allied to the mining industry. Consequently, as mines closed, the engineering industry also closed. Two city challenge bids have already been made to try to reverse that situation in the Dearne valley.
We need an appropriate skills base. There is a lower level of skills among some of our young people and we need to be able to lift that, which means concentrating on the appropriate skills to attract the industry that we require into coalfield communities. If we are able to offer the skills that our young people need, perhaps some of them will be able to move to work in areas such as Sheffield, Leeds and Manchester. It is important that we concentrate on the skills that are required for the future.
Environmental degradation has resulted from coal mining. The enormous problem that we face from mine water pollution has been mentioned. If I may, I shall refer to the Minister—within the context of the grant, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Not so long ago, he visited the Koyo factory at Dodworth in my constituency. If he had taken the time to travel one and a half miles beyond that, or if his schedule had allowed him to do so, he would have been in Silkstone, where, as he crossed the Silkstone beck, he would have noted just how polluted it is. The beck is orange. The local garden centre can no longer use the water from the beck for irrigation. Four rivers in my constituency are badly polluted—
Mr. Deputy Speaker: This is all very interesting and no doubt correct, but I am having difficulty understanding what it has to do with the order. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will enlighten me.
Mr. Clapham: The point that I am making is that we require more grant to tackle some of the problems in our mining communities. We need more money for training, for business finance, to deal with contamination from polluted mine water and to develop the infrastructure.
Although Opposition Members have some reservations about the extent of the order, because of the limitation on the finance that is to be available, we shall not vote against it. We would, however, like the Minister to assure us that finance will continue after the order expires, which would allow BCE to continue.
5.19 pm
Mr. Page: This has been an interesting debate although, I confess, it has been a little short on the substance of the order and fairly long on constituency problems. However, I see no harm in that. Part of the skill of any interested Member of Parliament is, wherever possible, to raise constituency problems. It is a matter of a battle of wits with the occupant of the Chair to see whether one can float in and out of order to convey one's message.
966
I had a most enjoyable visit to the Koyo bearing factory in the constituency of the hon. Member for Barnsley, West and Penistone (Mr. Clapham). I was most impressed by it. It is a classic and shining example of the Government's inward investment scheme, which has brought several hundred jobs to the hon. Gentleman's constituency. No doubt he will thank the Government for that significant move in the right direction.
As I said in my opening remarks, the purpose of the order is to allow the Government to continue supporting the coal industry for a further year in order to help it to adapt to changed circumstances. The main restructuring expenditures to be charged against British Coal's accounts this year will be in respect of retraining and the job creation activities of British Coal Enterprise.
I admired the way in which the hon. Member for Wentworth (Mr. Hardy) raised a constituency problem. I shall not respond to it, but I shall make some inquiries and come back to him on his particular difficulty.
Nor shall I respond to the unwarranted and, I thought, unjustifiable attack by the hon. Member for Sherwood (Mr. Tipping) on Mr. Lynk, who is carrying out valuable and important work for the coal communities. The hon. Gentleman seemed to be upset by the fact that Mr. Lynk is getting less money than a Member of Parliament. We all have our ways of approaching these matters.
I come now to the eulogy of the hon. Member for Middlesbrough (Mr. Bell) in respect of BCE, which was echoed by other Members of Parliament. I commend its valuable work. It might be churlish of me to remind hon. Members that when BCE was first created Opposition Members were rather hostile to it. However, I am quite prepared to be churlish when the occasion demands. [HON MEMBERS: "No."] Yes, hon. Members were.
Mr. Hardy: I was not.
Mr. Page: I accept that the hon. Gentleman has a way of ploughing his own furrow with distinction. However, there was not the uniform enthusiasm when BCE was first created that was apparent in the House today.
It is well to remember that, since its inception in 1984, overall net financial assistance for BCE has totalled some £167 million—roughly £100 million for economic regeneration and some £65 million for resettlement of former British Coal employees. I reassure the House, particularly the hon. Member for Wentworth, that the Government are conscious of the need to ensure best value for money from the substantial investments that BCE has already made.
Options for the future have been raised by several hon. Members. It is important to ensure access to funding to allow the activities of BCE to continue. Access to European funding will be of prime importance. However, the availability of European regional development fund grant for coal areas is not dependent on the role of BCE. Applications from those areas can come from other sources such as local authorities and a range of other regeneration bodies.
In addition to the structural funds in eligible areas, the Government secured the highest allocation of any member state from the RECHAR II initiative. That money will make an important contribution to the economic regeneration of the coalfield communities.
Contrary to the impression that the hon. Member for Middlesbrough may wish to give the House and the nation, the Government have recognised, and do

967
recognise, that during the past decade BCE has made a valuable contribution in assisting the regeneration of areas affected by coal closures. The Government and British Coal continue to explore the future options for BCE. I recognise the need expressed by the hon. Member for Sherwood for an early decision and, despite the detour around terminal 5, I recognise the point made by the hon. Member for Doncaster, North (Mr. Hughes).
Mr. Kevin Hughes: Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Page: No, I am running out of time and I want to put these last few points on to the record.
No final decision has been made but the Government have agreed to continue to provide funding for all BCE's activities, including the workspace and business funding activities in order to allow them to continue during the current financial year.
That course of action, recommended by Mr. Neil Clarke, chairman of British Coal, will allow time for British Coal and its advisers to identify future strategies and make recommendations for meeting the needs of the coalfield communities during the longer term. Consideration is being given to the full range of options, including forms of partnership with other regeneration bodies at national and local level. All options require careful consideration before any firm decision is made, as I am sure all hon. Members will agree.
I can assure the House that I am acutely aware of the difficulties faced by many in the coalfield areas and I shall take careful account of all the points raised in coming to a decision on this important issue.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That the draft Coal Industry (Restructuring Grants) Order 1995, which was laid before this House on 1st May, be approved.

Pneumoconiosis
5.25 pm
The Minister of State, Department of Employment (Miss Ann Widdecombe): I beg to move,
That the draft Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers' Compensation) (Payment of Claims) (Amendment) Regulations 1995, which were laid before this House on 1st May, be approved.
The regulations will be made under the Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers' Compensation) Act 1979. The purpose of the regulations is to increase by 2.2 per cent. the amounts of compensation paid under the Act to those who first satisfy all the conditions of entitlement on or after 1 July 1995.
Mr. Elfyn Llwyd: Bearing in mind the fact that inflation is running at 3.3 per cent and that there was no review last year, does the Minister consider that that is an appropriate payment?
Miss Widdecombe: I consider it a very appropriate payment because, during the lifetime of the Act from 1980, the cumulative increase in the level of payments had reached 138.3 per cent., but the cumulative interest in the retail prices index during that time has reached 134.7 per cent. Therefore, there has been a real-terms increase. It is precisely because it was running so far ahead that there was no increase last year.
I briefly remind the House of the purpose of the Act. People suffering from industrial diseases have the right to sue the employer concerned for damages, but certain dust-related diseases take a long time to develop, and may not be diagnosed until 20 to 40 years or more after exposure. Because of that, sufferers and their dependants can experience considerable difficulty in obtaining compensation. By the time the disease is diagnosed, the employer responsible may no longer exist.
The 1979 Act set up a scheme to provide a measure of compensation to those who cannot claim it in the usual way through the courts. It provides lump sum payments to sufferers from certain dust-related diseases, or, when the sufferers have died, to their dependants. But it has never been the intention of the Act to provide an alternative to taking civil action in the courts.
Three basic conditions of entitlement must be satisfied before a payment can be made: that there is no relevant employer who can be sued; that no court action has been brought nor compensation received in respect of the disease; and that industrial injuries disablement benefit has been awarded.
My Department does all it can to administer the Act in a sympathetic way. It is necessary to ensure that payment conditions are met, but it is also recognised that each case is an individual disaster, and the Department is therefore as generous as the legislation allows.
Since the Act came into force in 1980, more than 7,800 applicants have made a claim, and 75 per cent. of those have received payment. The total cost to date has been some £39 million. Payments under the Act are additional to any industrial injuries disablement benefit awarded.
The Government have given an undertaking to Parliament to review the amounts payable regularly in order to maintain their value, and the regulations aim to fulfil that commitment.
I feel sure that the House would agree that the circumstances leading to payments are very much to be regretted. They reflect the conditions under which some

969
people worked many years ago. Action taken by the Government to control the use of asbestos and other hazardous substances should prevent such suffering for present and future generations of workers. Nevertheless, I very much welcome the opportunity provided by the regulations to maintain the value of the compensation.
All of us will recognise that no amount of money will ever compensate individuals and families for their loss, but at least the regulations allow us to give some practical and some material help. I therefore commend the uprating of the payment scales to the House, and ask its approval to implement them.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Geoffrey Lofthouse): I should like to make a brief point before I call the hon. Member for Makerfield (Mr. McCartney).
I think that I have shown that my patience on some occasions knows no bounds. The draft regulations before us, as the House will appreciate, further amend the Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers' Compensation) (Payment of Claims) Regulations 1988 by increasing the amount of payments to persons disabled by a disease, to which the parent Act applies, by 2.2 per cent., rounded up or down to the nearest £1 as appropriate. The debate must address that particular item.
5.30 pm
Mr. Ian McCartney (Makerfield): I am sure that your point, Mr. Deputy Speaker, was a general piece of advice, and not aimed in particular at my speech.
My hon. Friends and I want to relate the motion to a series of interrelated issues with a common approach and purpose, which underlines the need to recognise the terrible tragedies at work and to bring in a far wider regime of compensation and prevention. During my short speech, I shall deal with those issues and how they relate to the regulations.
For the Minister to give an impression that the proposed payments are anything other than paltry is a disgrace—indeed, it is disingenuous. The Government do not intend an annual uprating of this benefit. If the benefit were uprated in line with inflation, the Government would have proposed an uprating of around 5.75 per cent. They are, of course, offering an uprating of 2.2 per cent. In real terms, that represents not an increase but a decrease over the past few years. The Minister has no justification for such a mean-fisted approach.
My hon. Friends and I will also refer to the Government's hostility in a range of areas toward injured workers—
Miss Widdecombe rose—
Mr. McCartney: I shall give way to the hon. Lady in a moment. I enjoy having a discussion with her. I would like to ask the Minister a number of questions which—perhaps—she can answer when she intervenes.
The coal industry scheme is not directly affected by the amendment; however, there are a number of issues with which the Minister could assist in the context of the draft regulations.
When was the last uprating of the coal miners' pneumoconiosis scheme? When will the Government bring forward regulations to uprate it, even if it is in line with the uprating of the regulations before us? The coal industry pneumoconiosis regulations allow for the
970
opportunity for reassessment, ensuring that, if there is a deterioration as a direct result of the prescribed illness, levels of compensation may be adjusted accordingly. As I understand the regulations, however, no such facility exists for non-coal mining employees.
Under the amended pneumoconiosis regulations before the House, a 50-year-old who is assessed as 10 per cent. disabled is entitled to £10,888 as a full and final settlement. If the pneumoconiosis is diagnosed three years on, however, by which time the sufferer may be 50 per cent. disabled—that is a reasonable assumption, given the cohort of cases about which we already know—his disability will entitle him to £30,006. That is a hypothetical example, but such cases occur all the time.
Entitlement for a disabled person and his or her dependants could vary by as much as £19,118 or even more, simply because of the timing of the diagnosis. That is ridiculous and inequitable. Will the Minister bring forward proposals to allow for reassessment when we next discuss the regulations?
Miss Widdecombe: I am intervening on the hon. Gentleman on the point that he was making when I tried initially to intervene. He said—I heard him quite distinctly—that we have not maintained the value of the compensation over the past three years. Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that, in April 1991, the increase in the compensation was 9 per cent. against a retail prices index of 8.2 per cent., that the following year it was increased by 5 per cent. against an RPI of 4 per cent., and that the following year it rose by 2.5 per cent. in comparison to an RPI of 1.7 percent.?
That is why there was no increase last year. This increase therefore maintains the value of the compensation against inflation. Over the three years that he quoted, we have increased compensation above the rate of inflation.
Mr. McCartney: The hon. Lady is being disingenuous, and I shall explain why. Dust-related diseases, by their very nature, do not always become apparent straight away. Many cases, therefore, under the regulations, are new cases or potential new cases. For the people affected, the regulations do not represent an uprating, which is why I presented the proposed uprating in the context of the past three years. Many people whose illnesses relate to 1979 or 1980 have since died. We are trying to calculate a benefit not for the deceased, but for the living. In that respect, the hon. Lady is wrong and we are right.
The overwhelming bulk of benefit recipients under the pneumoconiosis regulations are former asbestos workers. Deaths from asbestos-related cancers are expected to triple over the next 30 years. Despite the strict controls that govern the use of asbestos today, disease rates will continue to rise because of the long incubation period for such cancers.
Asbestos-related diseases already kill more than 3,000 people a year in the United Kingdom. In Clydeside, Merseyside, Tyneside, Wales, the midlands and every region of the country, there is a time bomb of dust-related diseases. The cancers are the most deadly known. There is no possibility of survival in the medium or long term. Asbestosis causes the most appalling deaths. Dust-related diseases are painful and debilitating.
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Clydebank and Milngavie (Mr. Worthington), who, with hon. Members of all Opposition parties, has conducted a

971
campaign on behalf of the sufferers of asbestosis and those who care for them. That campaign has been not only about the recognition of the disease and the necessity to uprate benefits, but about the consequences of the Government's notorious compensation recovery unit.
How can the Minister say dispassionately that the Government are concerned to ensure that the sufferers of asbestos are compensated throughout their lives? This year alone, the Government are taking almost £1 million away from sufferers of asbestosis through the compensation recovery unit. They are the same Government who, in a matter of minutes, are able to give R. J. Budge a £1 million sweetener to take over the British coal industry.
It beggars belief that, having recognised the nature of the disease and the need to provide compensation, the Government claw back through the compensation recovery unit compensation provided by employers. As I said, £1 million has been clawed back this year, and more will follow. Even at the point of death, when settlements are made, the Government attempt to claw back money from the mourning dependants. It is a scandal, and the Government are attacking those who have been injured at work. It is about time that they gave a commitment to end the notorious activities of the compensation recovery unit. In one instance, £84,000 was recovered from a sufferer by the compensation recovery unit, but the Government still say that they are concerned about the economic well-being of asbestosis sufferers.
The same double standards apply to the Government's approach to prevention. The Minister said that the Government were interested in work to prevent others from suffering such terrible diseases, but, under this Government, the number of visits of inspection of relevant companies and activities has dropped. The number of inspections of asbestos removal companies has declined from 2,709 in 1985 to just 805 in 1994. In other words, the number of visits has dropped by two thirds in only a decade, despite the evidence of an increase in asbestosis caused by industrial injury, and years of neglect by Government and industry.
A number of my colleagues want to speak, so I shall move on to an issue that is causing grave concern to mining communities across the country—how the Government effectively operate the regulations. On the one hand, the Government give the impression that the regulations benefit sufferers of pneumoconiosis, chronic bronchitis and emphysema, but, on the other, the application of the regulations means that a substantial number of sufferers of industrial disease have no access to any benefits.
In my constituency, 90 per cent. of miners with chronic bronchitis and emphysema have been denied access to any benefits. It is a matter of urgency that the Government consider why the application of the regulations should lead to such a lack of access to benefits for the most vulnerable disabled people.
If the Government are serious about their responsibilities to tens of thousands of people who, because of their environmental and working conditions, suffer a life of disability, they will take steps to alter the operation of the recovery unit and amend the emphysema and chronic bronchitis regulations. They will also take steps to ensure that pneumoconiosis benefit is genuinely uprated, not as the Minister suggests.
972
I now give the views of three of my constituents who suffer daily because of Government's callous pneumoconiosis regulations. One states:
"I had to take early retirement because of this disease. I spent the majority of my life mining coal underground, and destroyed my health as a result, but the personal cost of my contribution is being denied."
Another told me:
"I've never smoked and don't drink, and just can't comprehend how the agency can distance my illness from my occupation—I feel sickened by the falseness of the Government's 'concern'."
A third said:
"I am severely disabled through my employment, diagnosed long ago as a sufferer of chronic bronchitis. I'm angry that the Government gave the introduction of this benefit such high profile to show the recognition of miners sacrifice, knowing that so few of us would actually qualify for the benefit because of the severity of the criteria. It's all been a sham."
The regulations fail to meet the challenges created by occupational chronic ill-health. The meagre 2.2 per cent. award pales into oblivion when compared with the sums handed by the Tories under privatisation to their friends and supporters in the City. The Minister should be more generous to sufferers of chronic bronchitis, asbestosis and related diseases. If the Government were as generous to them as they are to their friends in the City, we should not have to complain today.
5.43 pm
Mr. Eric Illsley: I shall not detain the House long, but I wish to echo what my hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield (Mr. McCartney) said about staged payments, which do not appear to be part of the scheme. They are included in the coal miners' pneumoconiosis scheme, under which, if a sufferer is reassessed and deemed to have a higher percentage of industrial disability, he is awarded a further payment to compensate for the increase in his disablement.
I am currently dealing with the case of a constituent—a coal miner—who suffered for a number of years, although he was never diagnosed as suffering from pneumoconiosis. Whenever he applied and was X-rayed, he joined the high failure—or refusal—rate referred to by my hon. Friend. When my constituent died, the post mortem revealed that he was suffering from pneumoconiosis. As the Minister knows, pneumoconiosis can be diagnosed definitely only on death, when a biopsy can show the condition of the lung section.
The post mortem found that the chap had been suffering from pneumoconiosis since 1982, but under the terms of the scheme applicable to him—which I understand are to be replicated in this scheme—he qualified only for the rate of compensation applicable at the level of disablement that he suffered in 1982 and for the increased payments from that time as his percentage of disablement increased, based on an estimate made by the pneumoconiosis medical panel.
Although that man had suffered desperately for the final 13 years of his life, he received no compensation. On his death, an artificially low payment was made. It was artificially low because it was based on the initial assessment of a 10 per cent. disability as at 1982 and, sadly, the increased payments are only £200. I believe that, under the coal miners pneumoconiosis scheme, those payments should be increased and included in the scheme

973
to which I have referred. There is a case to be made for the increases in assessments to be reflected in increased compensation.
I referred to the difficulty of diagnosis. In the cases of chronic bronchitis and emphysema, the failure rate is 90 per cent. The rate in respect of pneumoconiosis is also high, but not 90 per cent. The two rates are linked because one of the requirements for claiming compensation for chronic bronchitis is that a coal miner has to have evidence of pneumoconiosis in his X-ray. The X-ray evidence has caused difficulties for years.
We are now reaching the stage at which the Government must consider the X-ray qualification, and either instruct the adjudicating bodies to have soft exposure X-rays, as my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley, West and Penistone (Mr. Clapham) will probably mention, undertaken in all cases of assessment for pneumoconiosis, or relax the qualification rules so that the judgment of the medical practitioner is accepted in place of the arbitrary X-ray and the forced expiratory velocity test of one litre.
We should have a system whereby diagnosis is based on medical opinion, which would probably have avoided some of the suffering inflicted on my constituent, who suffered from pneumoconiosis for 13 years but received no compensation, and whose widow will receive only a very small sum.
The failure rate in diagnosing pneumoconiosis, chronic bronchitis and emphysema makes a mockery of the suggestion that the scheme, the 2.2 per cent. increase now, or the 138 per cent. increase over the past few years are or have been generous. Any percentage increase does not matter very much if people cannot qualify for compensation in the first place.
I sat on the Committee that dealt with the legislation to introduce the compensation recovery unit and increased recovery from 50 per cent. to 100 per cent. of any benefit. It is diabolical to recoup 100 per cent. Beveridge, and the 1947 and 1948 legislation, did not intend that to be the case. It was always taken as 50:50 between the employer and the employee, in view of the national insurance contribution of both sides. The recovery rate should not have been increased.
5.49 pm
Mr. Elfyn Llwyd: First, I welcome the opportunity of having a debate on this important subject today. I have the honour to represent a constituency in north Wales in which there are several working slate quarries, and the subject is of great importance to many hundreds of my constituents. I welcome the opportunity to remind the House that it was continued pressure from my party which brought in the legislation on the matter in 1979. That is a fact of which I am proud.
As at December last year, total expenditure under the Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers' Compensation) Act 1979 amounted to about £38.1 million, with some 5,700 people receiving payments under the Act. Those facts are worthy of acknowledgement, but it must be said that the current system is failing as many people as it is assisting. Perhaps the system itself could best be described as rough justice.
The principle in compensation law is encapsulated in the Latin maxim "restitutio in integrum". One can never put a person suffering from pneumoconiosis, emphysema
974
or chronic bronchitis back to where he should be. That is as plain as a pikestaff. The legislation was introduced to make the lives of sufferers less of a misery than they currently are. I am afraid that the Government are failing in their duty.
In saying that the system is failing those in need, I refer first to the scale that is applied to applicants seeking compensation. The scale is devoid of flexibility, and an assessment of 10 per cent. disability—that is all too common—for a 40-year-old is as little as £8,742. If that person dies at the age of 60, the amount is lowered to £2,107.
When an assessment of 10 per cent. has been made, it remains at that level, despite the fact that a person's health fails with the onset of old age. Should there not be a statutory form of periodical review—say, every five years at the upper limit—so that these poor people are tested automatically? That would be fair, and the present process does not deliver a just result.
That brings me to my second point. Pneumoconiosis is often linked to other diseases, such as emphysema and chronic bronchitis. To a layman like myself, it is matter of inescapable common sense that there is a direct link between slate dust and other respiratory diseases, such as those I have mentioned. Alas, common sense makes little headway with the Government.
In 1992, the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council recommended that chronic bronchitis and emphysema in underground coal miners should be added to the prescribed list of compensatable diseases. The council looked carefully for evidence of a link between pneumoconiosis and the other two diseases, and evidence showed that air-flow limitation in coal miners who had experienced heavy exposure to coal dust was more likely than not to have been caused by their work. That is an obvious point, which we would all accept. On that basis, the council therefore recommended that those two diseases should be prescribed under the scheme and should become compensatory diseases.
I plead on behalf of slate quarrymen that that same qualification should be applied for them. There is no basis in logic or common sense for that not to occur. There is abundant evidence of a causal link, and it only needs collating evidence. It behoves any responsible Government to initiate a full epidemiological survey.
At present, the collection of data is haphazard in the extreme. People may have their cases referred by the odd GP who takes an interest, or even by an employer—although I doubt whether many employers would volunteer the information. People are being let down, and the Government should understand that. I call on the Government to tackle the issue, and to do so without further delay. Delay—as has been said—is very often fatal for people suffering from these debilitating and horrible diseases. The Government must do something about that.
Clearly the uprating is welcome, but only as far as it goes. It has been more than two years since the last uprating, and I have had discussions with the Minister about that. With respect to her, I do not accept what she says. Even if there have been over-generous payments in years gone by, that does not justify making cuts now. We are dealing with people who can hardly move and hardly breathe, and who are in a living hell. The Minister can say that the Government will cut the scheme by 1 or 2 per cent., and that they will not give an extra pound here and there. That is obscene.

975
I do not accept the Government's figures, either. In the past two years, the retail prices index has gone up by 5.75 per cent. while a 2.2 per cent. uprating has been offered. Since April 1989, the upratings have amounted to 37 per cent., while price increases have amounted to 33 per cent. There has been a 4 per cent. differential in the figures since 1989. That does not justify cutting back or offering a less generous settlement. I will not dwell on that point, as I am not going to agree with the Minister on it.
I do not accept the reasoning behind the Minister's statement, and the inescapable conclusion is that these people are being sold short by the Government. I therefore urge the Government to consider a far more generous uprating for next year, and to introduce a detailed study to extend the diseases referred to and have them listed as compensatable diseases.
In conclusion—and constrained by your initial warning, Mr. Deputy Speaker—I should like to mention one brief matter. I draw the attention of the House to an iniquitous situation regarding how the social security regulations cover compensation for coal dust victims.
It is ludicrous, if not obscene, to confine payments to those who have worked for at least 20 years underground and who pass the threshold test of having the use of only one third of one lung. That is an obscenity, but it is the law. I call on the Government to publish the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council review of disablement benefit, and for a speedy rectification of the issue.
The Minister is a reasonable person, and I ask her to consider the matters that I have raised tonight. They are important to many thousands of people in Britain, and many hundreds in my constituency, who are suffering. They are good, hard-working people who have worked all their lives. They deserve better than this.
5.57 pm
Mr. Eric Clarke: I thank the Minister for bringing the matter to the House, although I am disappointed that we are debating it at the very end of term. There are few Members in the House, and it is a reflection on both the people suffering from these diseases and on the mining industry that these two motions have been tagged on at the very end.
I represent many people who suffer from pneumoconiosis, and many others who are applying for benefit as suffering from emphysema or bronchitis. In the job I had before entering the House, I dealt with the problems related to those diseases. I appeal to the Minister to allow such people the dignity, and the financial dignity, of having this benefit. We cannot restore the health of those suffering a tortuous illness. They face a long and lingering illness before they die, and they look at it on a living death.
We are asking for compassion, and I hope that the Minister takes on board some of the comments made by previous speakers, and by me. In the past, people have been dismissed because they did not have sufficient fibrosis of the lung to qualify for benefit as suffering from pneumoconiosis. The argument was that they had chronic bronchitis and emphysema. When those same individuals have applied under the new scheme, they have been turned down. Some had to leave the industry because they were disabled by the combined diseases. An academic
976
medical argument then went on. It is not an exact science. As someone said, the only exact science is when a post mortem takes place, and it is horrendous that, to qualify for a widow's pension, a widow should have to allow a post mortem on her husband. All I am asking is for the cases to be reassessed.
Had I drawn a number in the ballot on first coming to the House, my private Member's Bill would have put emphysema and chronic bronchitis on the agenda immediately. I was over the moon that the Government were going to give us this breakthrough, but in Scotland only 5 per cent. of the people who apply qualify—there are so many disqualifications.
Some of those who were disqualified have since died. Many families are appealing posthumously, but I think that we are wasting our time. Many other people do not apply at all. They say, "Why should we? It seems to be a waste of time." Many others do not appeal when they get their first knock back.
As an ex-miner, I have many friends and relations who are suffering from these diseases. Although mining is no longer a great industry, a great army of people in the mining communities, as well as many people in other industries, are suffering from these diseases. There are also many other industrial diseases.
As a nation, we seem to be in a backwater when it comes to industrial medicine. Analysing industrial processes and continually assessing people in employment are not a priority for this nation. I do not know why, but I know that that is happening in other nations.
I am using this short speech to make a plea for the Government to reconsider the qualifying periods. I agree with my colleagues, especially my hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield (Mr. McCartney), who is on the Front Bench, about the 2.2 per cent. increase, which is disappointing. I also laughed when I read the words:
"rounded up or down to the nearest £1 as appropriate."
That sounds like the old negotiating tactics, when we were on piece-rate earnings in the pit. We always found that it was appropriate for the management, but never for the people whom I represented. I hope that that is not the case on this occasion.
Putting that anomaly to one side, it has to be said that 2.2 per cent. is not a great deal of money—nor is the total amount—but it makes a difference. The ex-miners and their families are worried not about the diagnosis, but about qualifying for the pensions concerned. That is the main thing. They know that the person is ill. They do not know why and cannot make a diagnosis—that is up to the medical people—and it is academic to them, but they want to make life a bit more comfortable and tolerable for themselves because they have to give constant care.
I hope that the Minister will consider the matter seriously. Yesterday's Hansard contains a written answer giving the statistics for people with emphysema or bronchitis who have claimed during the past two years. It is a damning indictment of the scheme. I hope that the Government will reassess the qualifications necessary. I cannot emphasise that enough, as it is so important to my constituents and to other people throughout the country.
6.3 pm
Mr. Michael Clapham: As the Minister said, the regulation applies

977
generally to people who are outside the mining industry. The hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conway (Mr. Llwyd) mentioned slate quarrying, for example.
However, there will be circumstances in which the regulation applies to mining. If a private mine owner who has taken out employer's liability insurance for a small colliery, for example in Wales, goes out of business, he will have to be traced at some later date, to find out whether claims can be pursued through his insurance. If not, the case would be decided under this regulation.
I want to explore with the Minister the interrelationship between the regulation and the Employers Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969. There is a relationship by virtue of the fact that only when the previous employer cannot be traced, or there is no insurance, can someone be paid under the regulation. The intention of the 1969 Act was that every employer in the United Kingdom would ensure that all his employees were insured. There would have been notable exceptions—for example, the utilities and British Coal—for which the Government would have underwritten the insurance.
The 1969 Act provided for inspectors to visit works to ensure that the certificate of insurance is displayed in a prominent place and that all the employees are aware that the employer has taken it out. Obviously, that does not always happen and people are not informed of what the certificate means. The idea was to protect employees by requiring the certificate to be placed in a prominent position in the workplace, but that does not always give employees the sort of protection that was envisaged when the Act was introduced.
I have discussed the situation with lawyers who deal with common law damages and I am told that they are experiencing extreme difficulties, especially as they are looking back to 1969 and beyond with asbestosis cases. One of the difficulties seems to have come about because there is no requirement that details of the insurance certificate should be deposited in a central office. Consequently, even when employers are traced, they cannot always remember whether they were insured, or the name of the insurer.
Perhaps the legislation could be amended to require employers to register details of such insurances in a central office, so that they would be available to the public for scrutiny. That would certainly help and I hope that the Minister will take the suggestion on board.
It is not merely a question of forgetting the name of the insurance company. If a company has gone into liquidation, it is almost impossible to trace the insurer, especially if we are talking about looking back more than 20 years. Even when an employer has complied with his obligations under the Act, one is not always able to trace the insurance. That means that we perhaps need to go beyond a central office for depositing details of certificates. It seems eminently sensible to consider the possibility of amending the legislation to require every employer, whether a company by incorporation, a partnership or an individual, to file an insurance return at a central point each year when the insurance is taken out.
There should be a central register, which, as I said, should be open to the public to scrutinise. The issue may become more important as we move into the next century because, as the Minister knows, some reports, especially that in The Lancet, which was drawn up by statisticians employed by the Health and Safety Executive, show that by 2020 there are likely to be 3,000 deaths per year
978
through asbestosis. The number of claims that will be pursued is likely to be in excess of the current number. It is therefore pressing to consider the idea of a central office where details of insurers and insurance premiums can be registered.
I am also told that there are certain other problems. Lawyers tell me that even if an employer can be traced, there are ways in which it can get round its responsibility. For example, in some circumstances, the employer will refuse to pass on a letter of claim to the insurer. The employer may hang on to the letter until such time as the insurer is not prepared to accept the claim. We could get around that problem by imposing a duty on employers to ensure that when they receive a letter of claim in cases of asbestosis, pneumoconiosis and byssinosis, it is passed on to the insurer.
I would suggest to the Minister that that principle is already established because sections 51 and 52 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 specifically provide that once an insurer has given insurance, it must meet its obligation even if a thief were driving the car. There is insurance cover even when there is an accident involving a stolen car that is being driven by the person who has stolen it. It is only one short step to relate that argument to the Employers' Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969 and consequently to these regulations. Payments would be made from insurance premiums rather having to be made by the taxpayer.
Mr. McCartney: My hon. Friend is right, but there is one critical fact that he may want to put to the Minister. Under the regulations that govern the compensation recovery unit, insurers are 100 per cent. non-liable. They know that they need only offer a payment that is less than the cost of benefits already paid and that the state cannot recover that money from them. Therefore, not only do people lose access to benefits to which they are rightly entitled because of their industrial injuries, but the state ends up paying everything and insurers walk away having paid nothing. The compensation recovery unit is a scandal because of the damage and harm done to people by employers and because the insurance companies are being subsidised by the Government's proposals, which take benefits off recipients and do not take anything from the insurance companies.
Mr. Clapham: I take my hon. Friend's point, which has already been made clear by my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley, Central (Mr. Illsley). It is a scandal that the recovery unit takes back every penny. The Minister will be aware that the 1948 legislation set the principle that national insurance contributions were paid 50 per cent. by the employer and 50 per cent. by the employee. That was always an accepted principle up to 1980s under common law in cases of assessing disablement and deductions from disablement assessments. It certainly appears to be a scandal. I hope that the Minister would be prepared to agree that the deduction should be no more than 50 per cent.
Mr. Illsley: From working on personal injury compensation claims, my hon. Friend and I know the whole history of the compensation recovery unit and the clawback. The compensation recovery unit gave the green light to the insurance companies because it meant that solicitors had to advise clients to accept minimal claims to avoid a substantial recovery by the CRU. The insurance companies got away with murder because they were

979
paying minimal payments and avoided massive compensation payments where a clawback was involved. It was an insurance companies' charter.
Mr. Clapham: I take my hon. Friend's point. The Minister should realise from my hon. Friend's intervention that there must be some changes, and not only the change that I suggested for a central office for depositing details of insurance certificates. Unless we start to look at reducing the amount that the CRU takes back, all that will happen as we move into the next century is that employers that want to be helpful to their employees will disappear. There will be no trace that they were in business. Unless the insurance certificates have been deposited, there will be little chance of tracing them. Employers may even find ways around depositing their insurance certificates to help their employees. The 100 per cent. recovery of payments made becomes self-defeating.
I think that the Minister has taken on board the principle that we should have a central office where insurance details should be deposited. That would certainly help and, as I said, that principle is already established. Only when such safeguards are in being will working people feel safe in the knowledge that there is proper insurance protection.
6.17 pm
Miss Widdecombe: This has been an interesting debate and many hon. Members have spoken movingly of their constituents, and others, who suffer from these diseases. Indeed, I think it would be a shared view that it is quite impossible to overestimate the degree of suffering that people go through. As I said in my opening speech, it is not possible to compensate sufferers or their dependants for loss of health and, ultimately, loss of life.
Various points of detail were raised in the debate and, in particular, I would like, in reverse order, to reply to the hon. Member for Barnsley, West and Penistone (Mr. Clapham), who raised several points about the problems of enforcing employers' liabilities.
You will be relieved to hear, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that I am not an expert on the Road Traffic Act 1988. I cannot therefore comment one way or the other on the principle that has allegedly been established. I can say that the Government are aware of both of the main issues that the hon. Gentleman raised.
The first issue is simply that of the disappearance of records of with whom the insurance was held and the second is that of employers not putting in claims to their insurers. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will be aware that the Government are currently reviewing the Employers' Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969 and that we are consulting interested parties on possible changes to the legislation. I cannot speculate on the outcome of that review, but I can say that the consultation document was issued in April and that comments should be received by the end of July. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to enlarge on any of his comments which, incidentally, I shall ensure that I take into account, I should be interested to receive details either by way of a meeting or in writing.
The specific issues that the hon. Gentleman has raised—records of insurance and the problem of employers having insurance, but not putting in claims—
980
have both formed part of the consultation, and we have sought views on them. I am genuinely grateful to him for bringing these issues out in parliamentary debate because they are extremely important.
The hon. Member for Midlothian (Mr. Clarke) also made a moving contribution to the debate. I am rather sad that he suggested that we tagged this debate on at the end of the Session, thus revealing that we did not consider it to be important. Once the decision on uprating was taken, we believed that it was important to avoid any further delay and we thought that it was important to have this debate before the House rose. For that reason, the debate was scheduled for today. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will take that point as made in good faith. The debate was not tagged on at the end because it was considered to be unimportant.
Several speakers raised the issue of chronic bronchitis and emphysema. The hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd)—I am sure that I have not pronounced the constituency properly—mentioned slate quarry workers. The Industrial Injuries Advisory Council is an independent statutory body. It advises the Secretary of State on matters that relate to the industrial injuries scheme and it keeps developments in occupational diseases under review. The major part of its time is spent in considering whether the list of prescribed diseases for which industrial injuries disablement benefit may be paid should be enlarged or amended. The council will recommend a disease for prescription only when it considers that there is sufficient scientific evidence to establish the link between the disease and the occupation. In the case of chronic bronchitis and emphysema, the council is satisfied that the link exists for coal miners who have worked underground for 20 years and who satisfy certain medical criteria. I understand the hon. Gentleman's point that the criteria are strict, but I point out that that is the council's scientific view.
The council also believes that it has not received sufficient scientific evidence to suggest that bronchitis and emphysema should be recommended for prescription in relation to slate quarry workers. I can only suggest to the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy that if he is aware of such evidence, he should ensure that it is presented, regularly updated and re-presented to the council so that it can take his views into account. The council is an independent statutory body and we follow its advice.
The hon. Members for Makerfield (Mr. McCartney) and for Barnsley, Central (Mr. Illsley) commented on reassessment, which is available under the British Coal scheme, and on allowance for changes in the nature of the disability or the disease. Payments are weighted—I have an extremely complex table with which I shall not weary the House—to take account of the risk of deterioration and that is built into the scheme. On more than one occasion, the question was raised of why benefits should be recovered from compensation payments.
Mr. McCartney: When the regulation was debated two years ago in Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Strathkelvin and Bearsden (Mr. Galbraith) raised the point about someone dying before the benefit proposal was approved. In such a case, the consequent award is reduced by half; there is a 50 per cent. cut on the basis of death. At the time, we asked the Department to reconsider the proposal as the compensation related to loss of earnings

981
and other matters. We felt that the reduction was unfair. Has the Minister considered the matter and, if so, what decision has she come to?
Miss Widdecombe: I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman is asking me whether the principle of reduction to take account of death when compensation is paid to dependants is wrong in itself and whether it should be the same as that paid to sufferers or whether he was relating his intervention to my point and talking about a change in the nature of the severity.
Mr. McCartney: I am making a different point. The Minister talked about weighting. We disagree with her comments because the regulations dealing with pneumoconiosis in miners are different and there is an assessment procedure. There is a recognition in law of deterioration and that should apply here. Why is it that there is a reduction in compensation on death? There seems no validity in law for that. Has the Department considered the matter since the previous discussion and if so, what was its view?
Miss Widdecombe: I refer the hon. Gentleman back even further to the origins of the regulations, which I always carry round with me, and to the debate in December 1979 when my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Tunbridge Wells (Sir P. Mayhew), who was then the Under-Secretary of State for Employment, discussed why the regulations were structured so that there should be a difference between dependants and sufferers. He referred to the pattern that had already been established under the National Coal Board scheme and he pointed out that the regulations followed that pattern exactly. The Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers' Compensation) Act 1979, which was passed by a Labour Government, made a clear distinction between categories. We followed a long-established, recognised difference between the two.
More than one speaker challenged me to say why benefit payments were recovered from compensation. The Government have long held the view that negligent employers and other compensators should not have their liabilities met through the social security system and that victims should not be compensated twice for the same incident. Those tenets led to the formation of the compensation recovery unit. The principle is, therefore, well established. In a former incarnation in the Department of Social Security, I took part in various debates on the underlying principles and I do not think that I can add much to my comments then.
Mr. McCartney: Will the Minister give way?
Miss Widdecombe: I would like to make some progress. I have tried to address the various points raised and I am aware that time is a little pressing—
Mr. McCartney: I have nowhere to go.
Miss Widdecombe: The hon. Gentleman may not have anywhere to go. I suspect that others, including some of his colleagues, may.
There has been some discussion about the failure rate of claims. I believe that a system that pays out on 75 per cent. of claims does not raise the spectre of an unduly high failure rate. The only point on which I shall seek leave not to respond but to write—
Mr. Illsley: What about pneumoconiosis?
Miss Widdecombe: I shall disregard that intervention because it was a sedentary one. The one point on which I shall write further is the one raised by the hon. Member for Barnsley, Central, who has somewhere to go—[HON MEMBERS: "He is here."] So he is. He raised the point about the quality of X-rays and about the adequacy of X-rays to be a determining factor. I shall respond on that matter in due course.
I have tried to answer the major points raised in this debate, although I could not answer the entire rant of the hon. Member for Makerfield. It has been a sensible and sensitive debate, and I commend the Order to the House.
Resolved,
That the draft Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers' Compensation) (Payment of Claims) (Amendment) Regulations 1995, which were laid before this House on 1st May, be approved.—[Dr. Liam Fox.]

Statutory Instruments, &c.
Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(5) (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.).
Statutory Instruments, &c.

  CONTRACTING OUT
  That the draft Contracting Out (Functions of the Official Receiver) Order 1995, which was laid before this House on 28th April, be approved.—[Dr. Liam Fox.]
  Question agreed to.
  Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 102(9) (European Standing Committees),

  ENERGY POLICY
  That this House takes note of European Community Document No. 4523/95, relating to European Union energy policy, and supports the Government's view that, while welcoming the consultation process, the Community should focus its efforts on completing the single market.

  COTTON REGIME
  That this House takes note of European Community Document No. 5489/95, relating to reform of the cotton regime; and supports the Government in its intention to continue to press for a rigorous reform of the cotton regime and, in particular, to reduce the level of subsidisation and to tackle fraud.—[Dr. Liam Fox.]
  Question agreed to.

Crime in Ribble Valley
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Dr. Liam Fox.]
6.29 pm
Mr. Nigel Evans: I am extremely grateful for the opportunity to raise this subject this evening, especially as it is still daylight. I trust that it will still be daylight when we finish the debate.
The last Adjournment debate that I had just before a recess was on organ donors and I was asking for a computer so that all that information could be held centrally. I was delighted when, 12 months later, I was successful in gaining that central register, so the nation will be holding its breath to see what I shall ask for this time. I have no doubt that, within a short time, the Government will deliver.
The subject of tonight's debate, "Crime in Ribble Valley", sounds like an Agatha Christie novel such as "Murder She Wrote", "Death of the Tickled Trout" or "Whodunit at Gisburn". Although the debate's title suggests that Ribble Valley is riddled with crime, that is not the case. We do not have an appalling crime rate and we want to keep it that way.
May I start by describing Ribble Valley to put it in context? Just because that beautiful rural area does not suffer from as much crime as other areas, it does not mean that we should be forgotten. It is a personal tragedy for anyone who suffers crime and we should see what we can do to eradicate even the small amount of crime that exists within Ribble valley. My hon. Friend the Minister will know the area well as it is not far from his constituency. My constituency consists of a number of beautiful villages; Clitheroe, which is a larger area; and Fullwood, which is the urban side of Preston. So it has a mix of urban and rural areas. The Ordnance Survey people who make maps tell me that Ribble Valley is at the centre of the United Kingdom. Much is said about middle England these days; if one wants to know what the people of middle United Kingdom think, one need go no further than my constituency.
Since I have been a Member of Parliament I have held three public meetings on law and order, which have all been well attended. People have been vociferous on law and order, not just because they have been victims or know others who have been victims of crime but because they hold strong views on law and order in the United Kingdom generally and want to help eradicate crime throughout the country. The perception is that crime is more widespread than it is, but that does not mean that people should not be worried. Just because news bulletins are not riddled with stories of shootings in Ribble Valley, it does not mean that we should not be concerned about crime there. There is a great community spirit within Ribble Valley which I wish could be extended to some other parts of the country.
I recently sent out a number of surveys on law and order and I have some of the forms with me today. People want to become involved and make suggestions to the Government, and I shall pass the pile of forms to my hon. Friend the Minister, who will be anxious to read the suggestions made on them and see what further measures the Government could take. He may be interested to know that I asked a specific question on identity cards, on which
984
an announcement was made yesterday. I found that 87 per cent. of those who responded want the introduction of some form of identity card because they believe that it will help to crack down on fraud and crime, and I therefore support their call.
I recently had a chat with Alistair Lyons, chief executive of National and Provincial, which issues its own credit and cheque cards. It gives people the option of having their photograph on the front and etched signature on the back. The vast majority of people with National and Provincial cards now choose to have their photograph on them. I applaud National and Provincial for that initiative. It does not charge people for the card, unlike many credit card companies, which take none of those preventive measures. I call on the banks and all card-issuing companies to take that step and allow people to have their photographs and laser-etched signatures on cards. They could all do a little more to contribute towards combating crime.
Those who responded to my survey also believe that identity cards could be used to prevent social security fraud, which has been estimated at about £1 billion. People who pick up cheques at the post office or sign on should have some form of identification to prove who they are. If identity cards would help us to cut down on such fraud, we should take that step. They would also be useful to youngsters who need to prove their age. A card with the young person's photograph, signature and age would mean that off licences, pubs and clubs would no longer have the excuse that the young person looked 18 whereas he or she was only 14 or 13. When I was 20, I was still being refused the purchase of drink in Swansea because I looked so young. An identity card would have proved that I was older than I looked, which would have come in handy for me. So identity cards would be multi-faceted and beneficial in many ways.
Dr. Robert Spink: I congratulate my hon. Friend on distributing the Viewfinder Survey, which I see on the Bench before me and which he will pass on to the Minister. In the survey, he asks his constituents a number of questions including whether they favour the introduction of a national identity card. The form that I have picked up says "Yes". Will my hon. Friend let us know at some stage—he may not have analysed the forms yet—how many of his constituents favour the introduction of a national identity card?
Mr. Evans: I am glad to tell my hon. Friend, who is interested in law and order issues and has spoken in the House many times on measures that would help to tackle crime, that a staggering 87 per cent. of people in Ribble Valley want identity cards. All the cries from Liberty that identity cards would be a terrible invasion of people's privacy are nonsense. It is an invasion of people's privacy when their houses are broken into, their cars are wrecked and money is stolen from the taxpayer. We should take that relatively simple measure to combat such crimes.
Yesterday I spoke at length with police officers in Clitheroe about burglary and theft, particularly in the villages in my constituency. Sergeant Kirk told me that the vast majority of such crimes are committed by people from outside Ribble Valley. As a result of the Government's continuing investment in the roads programme, we now have a good infrastructure with the M6, the M61 and other motorways. But it means that criminals can come to the area from Manchester,

985
Liverpool or other urban areas, perpetrate their crimes, put the goods into the back of their vans and disappear down the M6 before we know where we are. We are victims of commuter crime. One of the police officers said that, if only we could build a wall around Ribble Valley, crime would be reduced by 80 per cent. I do not suggest that we build a wall around Ribble Valley, but that shows the sort of problems faced by rural areas.
When I first moved into Ribble Valley I lived in a beautiful village called Downham. It is a relatively small village owned by Lord Clitheroe and it has barely altered throughout the years. "Whistle Down the Wind" was filmed there. Having come from Swansea, I found it remarkable that people knew that I was coming before I arrived. They know when people get up, when they go bed and who has called at houses. They know everything about the village because they take an interest in the community. That type of community spirit is absolutely wonderful.
Such community spirit also helps community policing, because policemen know people who live in the village. They recognise strangers and note those who look suspicious. They are therefore able to go up to such people and ask one or two questions. In many cases that alerts would-be criminals that Ribble Valley is not the place for them.
I was told yesterday how the police went to another beautiful village in my constituency, Sawley, and saw a vehicle that looked a bit suspicious. They had a chat with the people in it and it was not long before it had turned round and was on its way back down to the M6. Such community policing plays a valuable role when combined with the efforts of people who live in the community. We can all benefit from that partnership.
Much of the crime committed in my constituency and indigenous to it is the type of crime about which we all get upset—mindless vandalism, graffiti, broken windows and damage to cars. That is not the stuff of Agatha Christie novels, but it upsets locals, especially shop owners, who find that their windows are put through for no good reason. It is not as though all the shops that are vandalised sell jewellery—most of them use shutters—but even fruit shops are attacked. One could hardly believe that people would throw bricks through windows to steal fruit. We want to eradicate such mindless vandalism.
A camera shop, which stocked a lot of valuable products and had spent a lot of money on reinforced plate windows, was also subject to mindless vandalism. It was open just one day when someone took the trouble to try several times to break the windows. Those attempts left deep marks on the windows and the owner of that shop had to get them replaced.
Shops in my village, Longridge, have suffered from huge amounts of graffiti and traders are fed up with it all. One would think that some parents would ask where their children had been at 1 o'clock or 2 o'clock in the morning. After all, we are not just talking about 18 or 19-year-olds, because some of the youngsters who perpetrate that crime are a lot younger.
I thank the Government for the £28,500 grant they have given to Clitheroe for the closed circuit television scheme. That grant is wonderful news. I know that my hon. Friend will be interested to learn that that scheme will be operational from next month. Those cameras will help to reduce the mindless vandalism, graffiti and damage to cars that occurs in town centres. The scheme will be a
986
success, so why can we not extend it to some of the neighbouring villages? I know that Longridge has applied for cameras to be installed and it would be wonderful if that application was agreed because it would help the police to eradicate mindless crime committed there. I am 100 per cent. in favour of the CCTV scheme and I hope that my hon. Friend will consider some of the applications for its installation in rural areas in particular, which would help the police. I was also pleased to learn that, instead of sticking trained police in front of CCTV screens, civilians will monitor them. Those civilians will help the trained police to catch the criminals.
Lancashire police have also taken delivery of a helicopter and Ribble Valley has benefited from that. That may seem far-fetched, but, this morning, Superintendent Clarke of Fulwood police station listed a catalogue of incidents where the helicopter has been used. It has been particularly useful at night when the use of thermal imaging equipment means that the crew of the helicopter have been able to give directions to the police on the ground to catch criminals. That is absolutely amazing. I was sceptical when I first heard that Lancashire police intended to buy a helicopter because I thought that £1 million could buy a lot of other equipment. It has already been used to good effect, however, and even the police on the beat are using their walkie-talkies so that they can get in touch with their station and request helicopter assistance. That helicopter can get to the scene in no time at all. That saves a lot of police time because several vehicles from all over the place do not have to chase the criminals. Quite a few criminals have been caught as a result of helicopter assistance.
My hon. Friend will know that I warmly supported the introduction of the side-handled baton, which has also been used to good effect recently in Ribble Valley, when a number of people spilled out of a pub at the same time and a fight broke out. The Clitheroe police were able to call in a special team which has been trained in the use of side-handled batons and within a short time that crowd had been dispersed. It would not have been possible had those officers been using the old truncheons. I am delighted that the police are already using the new batons. I know that trials are being conducted on the use of CS gas and, should they prove successful, I would support its use by the police.
Dr. Spink: Is my hon. Friend aware that about two weeks ago the police voted 4:1 against being routinely armed? Does he welcome that decision? Does he think that we should impose stiffer penalties on those who intend to commit felonies while carrying arms, particularly those who kill police officers? Would he welcome the reintroduction of hanging? Is he aware that Lord Tebbit has asked the Government—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Janet Fookes): Order. This is becoming a speech: interventions should be short.
Mr. Evans: I understand the thrust of my hon. Friend's questions. I asked Sergeant Kirk of Clitheroe and Superintendent Clarke of Fulwood about arming the police. They both felt that that was wrong and they did not want the police to be armed. The last time a police officer was shot, I wrote to Lancashire police to ask it what sort of body armour its officers wanted and whether it was happy that it had received enough resources to buy it. Officers told me that they are looking carefully at the

987
body armour that will be made available to them. The current body armour is fine if worn for a short time, but in the summer the police would be unable to wear it all day. I would support the provision of flexible body armour to the police as soon as possible to give them protection, because, after all, they are protecting us.
Superintendent Clarke also told me how much she welcomes the new initiative on DNA sampling. It will be a great boon for the police to be able to build up a database of known criminals, because when evidence is left at the scene of crime it will point to those who perpetrated it. Those who argue about liberty have said that such sampling is a dreadful invasion of privacy. Not at all. I support it if it means that serious criminals will be caught. Superintendent Clarke wanted to know why that sampling could not be introduced retrospectively so that samples could be taken from those already in prison—known criminals. That is a good idea.
I could not make a speech about law and order in Ribble Valley without offering my thanks to all those involved in neighbourhood watch, who do a superb job not only in my area but throughout the country. They have given a commitment and they take the time and trouble to go around their communities to ensure that they are that much safer. They give a lot of support to the police and work side by side with them. I have been told of one initiative that was taken in Ribchester, which suffers from a lot of car crime. Those in the local neighbourhood watch, working with the police, sent out leaflets suggesting the measures that people could take to make their cars safer. People responded and the amount of car crime committed in Ribchester has dropped. That is a perfect working example of where the police and neighbourhood watch are working hand in hand. Such crime prevention will also help people to cut the amount of car insurance they have to pay in the long term.
I also applaud the work of the specials, a dedicated group of people who supplement the work of the police. They give up a lot of their time to ensure that law and order is kept in Ribble Valley. They are also supported by some local firms, for instance, British Aerospace, which has given the specials the use of a car in order to liaise with neighbourhood watch. It is a perfect example of a firm in the community supporting that community with something more than just words—a financial commitment. One of my local garages, Syd Brown, is also supporting the specials by providing a car. I applaud both those organisations and other commercial organisations that are backing the specials and neighbourhood watch with money.
I also welcome the fact that the police are going into schools under community action programmes. Superintendent Clarke told me that a dedicated officer goes around the schools talking to the youngsters. They organise poster competitions and quizzes in primary schools, trying to make the youngsters suggest ways of cutting crime and protecting themselves from criminals. It is important to start such education early, and I recommend the tactic to other police areas that are not already using it.
Clitheroe station has recently been refurbished, and new cells have been provided. That is welcome in a small community such as ours, because it means that police time is no longer wasted. Formerly two police officers had to
988
accompany a prisoner to another area; now the prisoner can be put into a cell immediately, and those policemen can walk the beat. A number of respondents to my "viewfinder" said that they wanted more policemen walking the beat.
The old Clitheroe court was above the police station for a long time, but, unfortunately, it closed last year because of efficiency savings. It has now moved to Blackburn. That means that the police must now go to Blackburn, which takes up a good deal of time. Rural community courts should be kept open, even for only one day a week: the administration can be carried out anywhere, but police time should not be wasted.
I am also concerned about drug and solvent abuse. Will my hon. Friend the Minister make a fresh commitment to the Government's determination not to knuckle under and give in to calls from some of the "softheads"—as I call them—for the decriminalising of soft drugs? That is the last thing that we want, because it would make drugs cheaper and more easily available. No benefits would result. We must crack down on people who take drugs, and in particular those who push them—especially those who sell them to youngsters.
Earlier in the year, I was saddened to read that two youngsters aged 15 had been caught taking soft drugs in a school in my constituency. I shall not name the school, because I know that the headmistress is working hard to tackle such problems; it is a great shame that the governors did not support her in this instance. The youngsters were given a second chance, but were subsequently caught again. The headmistress expelled them. The governing body, however, overturned her decision and gave them a third chance. That gave the wrong message to youngsters who go to the school in question, who now have the impression that the school is not all that fussed about drugs. But we are fussed about young people who become involved with drugs. Only one message should be given to them: they will wreck their lives. We will not cave in to calls for the decriminalisation of drugs.
We must take a further step, however. We must ensure that school children are educated about the damage done by drug and solvent abuse. I am involved with a charity called Life Education; it has a number of small units which visit schools throughout the country, supported by community action groups such as Rotary. They talk to youngsters, in language that they understand, about substances that are harmful if they put them into their bodies.
The other day I visited one of the units in London. It was superb to see youngsters responding to the message conveyed by Life Education members. There should be such units throughout the country, educating children as young as four and five: at that age they can be influenced. The same applies to solvent abuse. Last week a 15-year-old died in Preston as a result of such abuse; what a criminal waste of a young life. I agree with the Lancashire Evening Post that we should consider measures to restrict the sale of solvents to young people.
I own a retail store, where my sister imposes her own rule that purchasers of butane gas must be over 21. We must look afresh at ways of restricting access to solvents that can kill young people. I support the newspaper's campaign, and I have sent some relevant papers to my

989
right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary. I hope that he will seriously consider new ways of tackling the problem.
We must also ensure that the sentence fits the crime. A shop owner in Clitheroe wrote to me saying that two of her windows had been broken. That had cost her £1,000: the excess on her insurance cost her £250, and the insurance company forced her to install shutters, which cost £600. About £300-worth of goods were stolen. She got most of them back, but some were unsaleable.
So what happened to the person responsible? He was fined £53.40 and given a conditional discharge. I do not want sentencing of that kind in Ribble Valley, and I have already written to the Blackburn courts asking what went wrong. We should be getting tough with such people. Mrs. Carter, who came to my surgery, despairs of the situation. I hope that we will act to ensure that magistrates impose sentences appropriate to the crimes involved, so that others are deterred; but that can be done only through stiffer penalties, which were supported by Ribble Valley "viewfinder".
I have made my views public in my constituency: my constituents know that I am fairly hard on sentencing. I want stiffer sentences, and I think that parents should pay more attention to where their youngsters are. I believe that the use of the cane should be reintroduced in schools. My hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Dr. Spink) mentioned the death penalty earlier, last year I voted twice for its reintroduction in cases in which it is appropriate. I support the introduction of boot camps for young thugs, which has been proved to reduce the incidence of reoffending by 50 per cent. in the United States.
I was delighted when we acted to stop sentences for young thugs that involved cruises to Egypt or safari trips to Africa. The victims of their crimes must have wondered what the heck was going on; their taxes were paying for those junkets.
Since becoming Member of Parliament for Ribble Valley, I have been—on visits, I hasten to add—to Strangeways, Lancaster Farms and Fulwood prisons, and I support the work that is going on in those three institutions. Someone said to me the other day, "We are condemned for having more prisoners per head of population than any other European country, but when they are in prison we know that they are not on the streets committing crimes."
Dr. Spink: Does my hon. Friend agree that there should be glass shutters separating inmates from visitors, and more barbed wire and fewer video games and golf courses in prisons?
Mr. Evans: Indeed. The prison regime should be austere. It has been proved that contact between prisoners and their families or girl friends has enabled them to acquire drugs, and I believe that we should act swiftly to ensure that that never happens again.
I know that the county council structure plan is not in the domain of my hon. Friend the Minister, but it is relevant. I have described the rural nature of much of my constituency: it contains small villages, where there is a community life style. There is a community policeman, and people look after each other. The county council is considering the introduction of new houses on a scale that is not appropriate to Ribble Valley in Whittingham, the site of an old mental institution—it is thinking of putting
990
1,000 houses into an area that currently contains only 500—and in Whalley Calderstones, where it plans to put at least 1,000 houses. That would fundamentally alter the character of the villages, and would make it much more difficult for them to maintain their good record on law and order.
I back calls that are made when new houses are being built for crime prevention to be taken into account in the design of houses and estates. That, too, helps the police. I praise the work of others who help them—members of neighbourhood watch schemes, special constables and businesses that take the time and trouble, and contribute the money, to assist.
Crime is a war and there can be no conscientious objectors in that battle. In the Ribble Valley the people and the police work as one. Obviously, that does not mean that there is no crime; it means that we will not succumb to crime. We will fight crime wherever it exists and we will support the police when they are defending us. We will defeat the scourge of our society: the criminals who despoil our quality of life.
The Government have the support of the people of the Ribble Valley in the measures that they are taking to tackle the problem. The people of the Ribble Valley will continue to make suggestions to Government and to prod and to push for stiffer action in order to combat the criminals. Middle England has had enough; now is the time to hit back.
7 pm
The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. David Maclean): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans) on an excellent and informative speech, in which he drew the House's attention to the problems facing his constituency in the war against crime and to the achievements of the police, the community and the neighbourhood watch scheme in reducing crime. Having listened to my hon. Friend's comments on sentencing, I wish only that he was a senior judge.
My hon. Friend mentioned the possibility of death at the Tickled Trout. I have eaten some of its excellent food on a few occasions and I understand that death through over-indulgence at the Tickled Trout is a very real prospect. I am rather disappointed that, although the closed circuit television scheme, which I was very pleased to fund, opens next month, I cannot find my invitation to perform the opening ceremony and enjoy lunch at the Tickled Trout.
My hon. Friend made a number of interesting points that he believes could help us win the war against crime in the future, not only in Ribble Valley but in the country as a whole. Before dealing with the specific points made by my hon. Friend, I re-emphasise the fact that crime is falling in Ribble Valley. I share my hon. Friend's view that we cannot be complacent about that; we cannot say that we have won the battle and that it is time to go home, because even one crime is a crime too many. Even if we lowered the crime rate, it would still be far too high.
None the less, in the past two years we have had considerable success in cutting crime in this country and I believe that we can regard Ribble Valley as a success story. It is a success that I very much hope will continue; I look forward to hearing from my hon. Friend in a future debate that there has been a further and welcome fall in the crime rate in his constituency.

991
I am well acquainted with the attractions of my hon. Friend's constituency. Reaching Ribble Valley from Penrith is just a matter of going down the M6 and turning left—and I do not often turn left. I shall try to help hon. Members who are not familiar with it to picture the area. Ribble Valley is delightful. It is largely a rural area and 70 per cent. of the Ribble Valley has been designated as being of outstanding natural beauty.
It has undulating countryside, hills, valleys, gushing streams, lots of sheep, excellent pubs with good beer, and—of prime importance—an outstanding Member of Parliament. With all that, it has a population of just over 50,000—although it increases in the summer months as, not surprisingly, a growing tourist trade is attracted there by good motorway communications. But there is a down side: the motorway network also brings criminals from outside the area. I do not think that my hon. Friend will disagree when I say that the Ribble Valley has some home-grown criminals as well.
As my hon. Friend has reminded us, the major centre in Ribble Valley is Clitheroe, a bustling market town which has certainly shown itself to be wide awake when it comes to crime prevention. I am pleased to say that crime prevention throughout the Ribble Valley is paying off: figures for reported crime in the first four and a half months of the year show a substantial reduction compared with 1994.
Burglary is one of the crimes about which most people worry. Our latest figures run from the beginning of the year to May, and they show that there were just 100 domestic burglaries during that period—a decrease of 70 on the same period last year. Vehicle crime in Ribble Valley has also shown a substantial reduction. During the same five-month period, it fell from 356 to 306 cases. Regrettably, there was a slight increase in violent crimes from 20 to 23 cases, although I am pleased to say that none of them was classified as serious. There were 14 additional cases of non-domestic burglary.
Even taking the increase in those two categories into account, overall there has been a 13 per cent. fall in crime figures in Ribble Valley so far this year, with a total of 818 crimes reported to the police. I am sure that all my hon. Friends will join me in hoping that the improvement will be maintained and in congratulating Lancashire constabulary on its excellent success.
The House should draw encouragement from the fact that the improvement in crime figures for the Ribble Valley is part of the wider improvement that we have experienced nationally. I remind the House that recorded crime in England and Wales fell by 5 per cent. in 1994. Taken with the 1 per cent. fall in 1993, it is the largest percentage fall over a two-year period for 40 years. Lancashire as a whole also had a 5 per cent. drop. That proves that, provided we work together, we can reduce crime. That is why measures to tackle crime remain at the top of the Government's agenda.
Our strategy for dealing with crime is clear and is based on four main strands. First, we must do all that we can to prevent crime. Secondly, we must do all that we can to help the police to catch criminals. Thirdly, we must ensure that when suspects have been caught they are tried fairly and speedily. Fourthly, we must ensure that, if criminals are convicted, the courts have the powers that they need to deal with them appropriately and effectively.
992
The Government believe that crime prevention should involve everyone in the community: it is not something that can be left to the police or to other specialists. This is why the Government have promoted the partnership approach to crime prevention, encouraging local communities—including local authorities, business and the voluntary sector—to work alongside the police to try to reduce crime.
In response to guidance, support and encouragement from the Government, many successful local crime prevention partnerships have been formed. I am pleased to say that that is precisely what is happening in Lancashire as a whole and in the Ribble Valley. The Lancashire Partnership Against Crime was formed in 1992 as the major crime prevention initiative within the county, with the objective of bringing together commercial companies and local authorities to increase participation in crime reduction work.
The partnership is managed by a board that is made up of representatives from member organisations and it has been involved in a variety of initiatives, including steps to improve hospital security, anti-burglary measures and running community safety patrols. It has also helped to produce security advice for licensees.
A total of 28 police officers work full time on crime prevention in Lancashire and two senior crime prevention panels organise a number of local campaigns. Lancashire constabulary employs a full-time co-ordinator to run the partnership from police headquarters. I have met the co-ordinator and he is a superb operator.
The county also has an initiative to involve young people in community safety. School community action teams, known as SCATs, are proving successful. There are 53 SCATs in the county and I will briefly outline projects that they have undertaken in Ribble Valley. It is by no means a comprehensive list. West Craven high school has adopted and painted a vandalised bus shelter. The school has also had a property marking scheme which encourages people to put their postcodes on their property. At Clitheroe high school five students have undertaken a survey of drug use and abuse, which I am told was "excellent." The police have also asked children in a local school for those with learning difficulties—although I believe that it is outside my hon. Friend's constituency—to help with the clerical tasks involved in one of their crime prevention campaigns.
Other schools in the area, including Ribblesdale high school, have been involved in promoting the vehicle watch scheme and the 25 scheme. I remind the House that the vehicle watch scheme encourages motorists who do not expect to use their cars between midnight and 5 am to put special stickers on the front and rear windows of their vehicles. If the police notice a vehicle with a sticker on the road at that time, they are authorised to stop the vehicle and to question the driver.
The 25 scheme is similar. It involves putting a sticker in the window of a vehicle when a driver under the age of 25 is not normally expected to use that car. I think that the schools should be commended for taking part in that project—although I would not recommend it to my youthful-looking hon. Friend, who would be stopped all the time because the police are bound to think that he is under 25.
An important part of the partnership approach to fighting crime is the use of special constables, and my hon. Friend was correct to mention them. I understand

993
that in Ribble Valley both they and traffic wardens are playing an important role in preventing vehicle crime. While on patrol, special constables and traffic wardens who notice that a car has been left insecure or with valuables visible note the car's details so that the owner can be sent a letter giving him or her details of how to improve vehicle security measures.
The Government have set a target of increasing special constables from 20,000 to 30,000. We consider them an excellent supplement to the regular police force. They are not a replacement, and there is no question of reducing the regular police force if we recruit specials, but it is good for people to volunteer. Next to joining the volunteer reserve forces, serving as a volunteer constable is the highest level of volunteering that any British citizen can do. They are a great body of men and women. I pay the highest tribute to special constables up and down the country.
My hon. Friend said that technology is also being used to fight crime in Clitheroe. The CCTV system, consisting of 13 cameras, is currently being installed in Clitheroe, and that was funded partly through the Home Office CCTV competition that I instituted. I understand that the local police are optimistic that the scheme will deter crime in the town centre and help them to apprehend suspects. They should be optimistic as in every other place where I have seen CCTV schemes in operation—in big cities and smaller towns—it clearly deters criminals, catches criminals and, by God, it helps to convict them. Newcastle police tell me that of 350 people—of course, the figure goes up every week—who they had arrested in the city centre because they had caught them on video, 347 pleaded guilty and had not a leg to stand on. Not only is justice being done, but it saves the courts some considerable time and effort and, no doubt, helps the legal aid fund as well.
There are also plans to provide local shops most likely to experience shoplifting with two-way radios. I have seen similar systems in operation and they are excellent. It will enable shopkeepers to alert the police, each other and the monitoring station if they notice suspicious behaviour.
My hon. Friend suggested that the scheme should be introduced in Longridge. I understand that that is under local consideration, but the Government have always maintained that CCTV should be targeted where it is most needed. It is a long-term commitment involving the local authority, local enterprise and the police.
Clitheroe was successful in gaining funding through the CCTV challenge. The criteria for bids were set out in guidance issued to all local authorities and police forces last November. Under the terms of the challenge, bids are to be matched by local funding, including private sector funding where appropriate. The quality of the bids was very high. No one factor was decisive in the final choice and there were 106 winners all told, including 13 from the north-west. There is nothing to stop Longridge going ahead with a CCTV scheme, but my hon. Friend will understand that I cannot promise any additional funding at present or say whether we will instigate similar challenge schemes.
My hon. Friend mentioned funding in Lancashire. I am sure that hon. Members agree that the realistic expectation of being caught is one of the best deterrents against crime. An additional £9.82 million has been made available to Lancashire for policing purposes this year—an increase of 6.7 per cent. which compares very favourably with the
994
national increase, and even that was way above the level of inflation. Not every other Government Department or local council services department can say that its funding has been a generous as we made police funding this year because we recognise the importance of law and order. It is a good settlement for the police at a time of constraint on public expenditure.
My hon. Friend mentioned the helicopter. I am a great enthusiast for police helicopters, and I encourage him to boast about it publicly. Other police forces must not be shy about telling people that they have a helicopter. It is not an expensive waste of money or an expensive toy; it is an essential policing tool to apprehend today's highly mobile criminals. I have seen the figures, I read the statistics and I have seen police helicopters in operation.
No armed robber escapes from a police helicopter. Once the equipment on a police helicopter locks on to a car, no vehicle can outpace it. I know that one or two Porsches might go faster, but a helicopter can cut the corners.
Not only are helicopters good at catching criminals, but they reduce the chance of high-speed chases. They lower the accident rate and have other features, such as thermal imaging, so that on dark nights they can find people who have wandered off or had accidents. They act as mobile command platforms if there is a major incident or accident. They are wonderful pieces of kit. The Government are keen to fund as many as possible. We have expanded the number over the past few years and I advise police forces not to be embarrassed if they have a helicopter; it is a vital policing tool these days.
My hon. Friend also mentioned secure design or improving design. I spent most of today in Staffordshire opening the county's first industrial park, which has been awarded a "secured by design" certificate. "Secured by design" is a wonderful concept that I would encourage every architect and builder to follow. It is no more expensive to build a house securely with proper locks or to build an entire housing estate with a sensible, decent design instead of the ghastly structures that people build, which no doubt win design awards but have rabbit runs or rat runs everywhere, front doors backing on to back doors and cars scattered all over the place.
Some of those designs encourage crime, as we saw from the ghastly 1960s and 1970s housing with archways and pedestrian walkways that are now—at great cost—being demolished, redesigned and returned to a sensible structure. I pay tribute to those who dreamt up the secured by design project and I intend to host a conference later this year of police architectural liaison officers and more architects and designers to encourage them when they are designing housing estates or ordinary buildings, factories and office blocks to think about security at the design stage, as it is cheaper in the long run.
My hon. Friend mentioned DNA sampling. The Government have been responsible for a number of other measures that are designed to enable the police to do their job more effectively. I am keen on using all forms of technology. The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 introduced the possibility of DNA sampling. The world's first national DNA database is now up and running, and once again little old Britain got there first. In so many cases, whether it is automated fingerprint computer recognition systems, where the Americans may have the computer, but we invented the data which make it work, or DNA sampling, the British police service is in

995
the lead the world over. Our database has now come on stream and will result in many people being caught and convicted and people regard it as the greatest policing breakthrough since fingerprints. It is the greatest tool that the police can have.
My hon. Friend mentioned the risks that serving police officers take in their operations against crime. My right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary and I share his concern. It is terribly important for officers to have suitable protection against those dangers.
One of the first jobs that my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary did when he came to the Home Office two years and three days ago was to authorise proper scientific assessment of the side-handled baton. Street trials of the expandable version were encouraging, and in June 1994 it was formally approved by the Home Secretary. In November, the Home Secretary, as the police authority for the Metropolitan police, agreed to the issue of straight batons up to 26 in long, and he has given his support to the side-handled baton following a proper programme of evaluation to ensure that it meets officers' needs. At the same time, he gave his support to other chief constables who wished to introduce similar batons.
Since last year, most police forces have replaced the little, short traditional truncheon. I understand that Lancashire has had a programme running for the past four or five months to train officers in the use of side-handled batons and that has been widely welcomed in the force. The new batons can make a big difference to an officer's ability to carry out his duties, both in terms of the protection they offer and the greater confidence that results from it.
We welcome the side-handled batons and the extendable ones. We are receiving information now and we shall collate it. Much of it is anecdotal as the batons have been issued only recently, but we understand that injuries to officers in situations where they would normally have anticipated injuries have declined, that more prisoners are coming quietly and that some minor riots and disturbances have been avoided because the officer appears with a worthwhile baton rather than the tickling stick that the police had for 100 years.
My hon. Friend mentioned body armour. Of course, we are concerned scientifically to evaluate the best possible armour, but despite some of the claims in certain magazines I must tell my hon. Friend that no one has yet invented a body armour that protects against both bullets and stab wounds. There are some good vests which are bullet resistant; there are others which are stab resistant. So far, putting the two together has not resulted in anything that a bobby could wear for more than half an hour at a time. We shall continue to evaluate all kit so that chief constables will be able to know which body armour works and what its limitations are. They can then ensure that their officers are as well protected as possible.
Sentencing is important too. Effective action against crime does not stop with apprehending the suspect. We have ensured that the courts have all the powers they need to deal appropriately with offenders who come before them. My hon. Friends have supported us in the Division Lobby time after time on this issue. Parliament has taken its responsibility seriously to ensure that the powers are available to the courts—if only they would use them.
996
Severe sentences are available for serious crimes. I shall be careful about what I say when discussing the Executive and the judiciary, but it has been noticeable—judging by the public and the press outcry—that most of our constituents think not that Parliament has failed in its duty to provide adequate sentences but that lenient sentences are handed out. That dismays people; and if the House had not introduced powers to refer over-lenient sentences to the Attorney-General, they would be even more dismayed.
The clear message to those responsible for sentencing is that they must not disappoint the people of this country, who will get very indignant if they feel that sentences are inadequate.
My hon. Friend also mentioned capital punishment. He knows that I am an awful wet on that issue. My wife is much more robust, and starts with hanging for those who have double parked. I would begin with more serious offences—and with those who have been found guilty. My hon. Friend knows that the subject has been debated in the House, and that I share his view that we should have the ultimate deterrent.
My hon. Friend drew the attention of the House to another side of youth culture in his constituency. Unfortunately it appears that there is a problem with solvent abuse in some schools, and my hon. Friend has called for a change in the law. Under existing law, the Intoxicating Substances (Supply) Act 1985 makes it an offence for a person to sell a substance such as glue to a person under 18 if he knows that the substance or its fumes are likely to be inhaled for the purpose of causing intoxication. It was interesting to learn that my hon. Friend's sister sets the limit at the higher age of 21. The primary purpose of the law is to counter the activities of unscrupulous retailers. Enforcement is a matter for the police. By 1993 there had been 70 prosecutions under the Act, 45 of which resulted in findings of guilt.
On this and many other technical matters to do with drugs, the Government are advised by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, which recently published a report on volatile substance abuse. The report makes no recommendations for changing the law, but I am happy to look at all the information from the campaign on solvent abuse which my hon. Friend is leading. I will happily study it and bring it to the attention of my colleagues who are responsible for drugs in the Home Office.
The one firm assurance that I can give my hon. Friend—and will always give the House as long as I am a Minister and my right hon. and learned Friend is Home Secretary—is that we shall never legalise any drugs that are currently banned. I know that there are sophisticated trendies who say that they can smoke a bit of pot after dinner parties in Hampstead—they can handle it. No doubt they can. Many people can handle a few glasses of port after dinner, but millions cannot. It is no good telling our kids that some drugs are really bad for them, some are in the middle and some are all right. That is a confusing message. Our message is simple: all drugs are harmful. It is nonsense to say that cannabis is not harmful. It may not be as bad as cocaine, but it is still harmful.
Many kids at the moment are able to resist drugs because they can say that they are illegal—they do not want to do something illegal. That can provide their

997
excuse when they are refusing drugs offered by other kids. We shall never undermine those kids by removing the legal sanction. I remind the House that not a single chief constable among the 43 police forces of England and Wales for which I am responsible thinks that we should legalise drugs.
My hon. Friend went on to mention ID cards, suggesting that they could help to solve the problem of solvent abuse, and other crimes. We know that there is widespread public interest in the issue and that there is a wide range of views on what they would achieve and on how any scheme should operate. So much is clear from today's press articles. The Green Paper that we published yesterday will allow a full national debate before any final decision is taken. I agree with my hon. Friend that ID cards could help to prevent the illegal sale of age-restricted goods such as solvents, as well as helping to prevent crimes involving the use of a false identity, such as cheque and credit card fraud. But the Government do not believe that ID cards would be a general panacea for all crime—let us not kid ourselves about that.
That is why we need to consider the issue carefully and explore all its aspects. This is a genuine consultation exercise of the kind that we always intended to hold. The Government are setting out the options—naturally, that has been presented as a U-turn. It is nothing of the sort. We want to listen to genuinely held views about the sort of identity card that we should have—if we should have one at all—and about the driving licence and social security options.
I look forward to the outcome of this important national debate and if necessary to taking action on it.
998
We shall continue to do all that we can to reduce crime and to protect the public. That is one of the first duties of any Government. But the responsibility for preventing crime does not rest solely with the Government, the police, local councils or any single organisation. Respect for the law will be encouraged when everyone joins in—families and parents, schools, the Government, the local community, the business sector, people playing their part in neighbourhood watch schemes and in the special constabulary. If everyone plays his part we can get the crime figures down.
The message of the falling crime figures of the past two years is that it is no use running around wringing our hands and saying that it is all too difficult—where should be start? Nothing will get done that way. But if we tackle burglary and the police mount operations such as Operation Bumblebee, Operation Claw, the Bear Bites Back operation in Warwickshire, Operation Spider and Operation Gemini, involving the community and businesses in genuine partnerships against crime such as the one in Lancashire, we can bring down crime sector by sector. That has to be the right approach.
The community in Ribble Valley are playing an excellent part, and I would ask my hon. Friend to pass on my hope to his constituents that they will keep up the good work and keep supporting their police force, who do an excellent job. I trust that they will continue to shoulder part of the burden, as all good citizens should. What we can do in Lancashire we can do in other parts of the country as well—although my hon. Friend might disagree with me about that.
Question put and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at twenty-eight minutes past Seven o'clock.

LORD CHANCELLOR'S DEPARTMENT

  Immigration Adjudicators
  Mr. Robert Ainsworth
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many full-time and part-time immigration adjudicators employed by the Immigration Appellate Authority are currently designated as special adjudicators to hear appeals against a refusal of asylum; and what plans he has to increase that number. [26179]

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  Of the 20 full-time and 91 part-time immigration adjudicators appointed by the Lord Chancellor, 20 and 57 respectively are currently designated as special adjudicators to hear appeals against a refusal of asylum. Increases in the numbers of full-time and part-time immigration adjudicators are planned during the course of 1995.

  It is expected that all full-time immigration adjudicators appointed will be designated as special adjudicators. Increases in the number of part-time immigration adjudicators designated as special adjudicators will be made as they gain sufficient experience of immigration work, the number depending on the work load of the Immigration Appellate Authority.

  Mrs. Kuldip Kaur
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, pursuant to his answer of 4 May,Official Report, column 259, concerning Mrs. Kuldip Kaur, what decision was taken by the regional adjudicator on whether her appeal may proceed out of time; and if he will make a statement. [25996]

  Mr. John M. Taylor
  I now understand that the Immigration Appellate Authority sent copies of the case papers to the former address of Mrs. Kaur's representatives. These were returned by the Post Office undelivered, and as Mrs. Kaur's representatives had not had an opportunity to submit their written observations, a decision was not taken by the adjudicator on 12 May.

  The case papers have now been sent to Mrs. Kaur's representatives at their current address. I apologise for the delay to Mrs. Kaur's case and confirm that it is now due to be placed before the regional adjudicator on 23 June.

  Legal Aid
  Mr. Boateng
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if he will list the day and exact time when his Department's press office released copies of the Green Paper on legal aid published on 17 May to(a) legal correspondents of the broadsheet newspapers, (b) the Bar Council, (c) the Law Society, (d) the National Association of Citizen's Advice Bureaux, (e) the National Consumer Council, (f) the Consumers' Association, (g) the Law Centres' Federation and (h) the Legal Action Group; and if he will make a statement. [26020]
  656
  Mr. John M. Taylor
  The Lord Chancellor's Department's press office invited representatives of the media, including the legal correspondents of the broadsheet newspapers, to collect one copy each of the Green Paper on legal aid, embargoed for 16.00 on 17 May, from the Department's headquarters building at 11.15 on 17 May. Representatives of the Bar Council, the Law Society, the National Association of Citizen's Advice Bureaux, the National Consumer Council, the Law Centres' Federation, and the Legal Action Group received advance copies on the same basis. A copy of the Green Paper on legal aid was sent to the Consumers' Association by post on 17 May.

DEFENCE

  Chinook Crash, Mull of Kintyre
  Mr. Sykes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects to publish the results of the inquiry into the Chinook crash on the Mull of Kintyre on 2 June 1994. [26619]

  Mr. Soames
  The circumstances of this tragic accident have been the subject of a most exhaustive investigation. The proceedings are now almost complete and I hope to release the findings by the middle of June. A summary will be placed in the Library of the House in the usual way.

  Defence Postal and Courier Services
  Mr. Sykes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to rationalise the activities of the Defence Postal and Courier Services agency. [26751]

  Mr. Soames
  As part of "Front Line First", my Department announced its intention to integrate departmental mail services, rationalise vehicle fleets, provide better training of all personnel and set up a strategic management structure across all three services.

  These proposals were explained in a consultative document issued on 9 March 1995. No objections to the proposals were received during the consultation period, and I have therefore decided that we shall begin work on rationalising the mail and courier operations of the Department. A number of activities previously carried out at several separate locations in the centre of London will be rationalised, and concentrated at the British forces post office site, in Mill Hill, north-west London. This will involve the main MOD mail sorting operation and the Defence Postal and Courier Service terminal centred on St. Giles court, London WC2, and mail and courier vehicles currently located at Regents Park barracks.

  Inglis barracks, Mill Hill is the headquarters of the Defence Postal and Courier Service agency and will absorb the additional personnel management and training commitment implicit in the rationalisation.

  We will of course continue to consult staff and trade unions about the detailed implementation of this rationalisation.

  Royal Marines School of Music, Deal
  Mr. Heald
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if his Department has concluded its consideration of the future of the Royal Marines school of music, Deal; and if he will make a statement. [26693]

  Mr. Soames
  Our proposal to transfer the Royal Marines school of music from Deal was announced by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence on 14 July 1994,Official Report, column 1171. A consultation document was issued on 17 October. We have considered very carefully all the representations made during the consultation period.

  I can now announce that we have decided to confirm the preferred option contained in the consultative document. The Royal Marines school of music will therefore transfer from Deal to Portsmouth, by spring 1966, where it will be housed in the Royal Naval detention quarters. They will not be required for their present purpose from the autumn of this year, and can be refurbished at modest cost to adapt them for the Royal Marines school of music.

  The move will result in significant savings for the Defence budget. The closure of the stand-alone site at Deal, which is far too large for its present purpose, and the removal of the school to within the perimeter of the larger naval base at Portsmouth will save about £3 million per year in support costs. No significant additional support costs will be incurred at Portsmouth where the naval base has adequate infrastructure to absorb the relatively small school of music. The case for the transfer of the Royal Marines school of music has been thoroughly discussed with all interested parties including the hon. Member for Dover (Mr. Shaw), who has represented his constituents' views with understandable vigour. Indeed, of the many measures arising as a result of the "Defence Costs Study", the decision to close the Royal Marines school of music at Deal is one taken only with the greatest regret and in view of the clear financial case. We fully recognise the warm and close relationship which has grown up between the people of Deal and the Royal Marines in an association which dates back to 1664. I know that successive generations of recruits have been grateful for the friendliness and support they have received.

  Advisers
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will publish the names of the individuals who were recruited from outside the civil service and the military to advise him on "Options for Change" and "Front Line First", respectively. [26143]

  Mr. Freeman
  No external advisers were recruited for "Options for Change". For external advisers on "Front Line First", I refer the hon. Member to the answer my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond and Barnes (Mr. Hanley) gave to the hon. Member for Leyton (Mr. Cohen) on 29 April 1994,Official Report, column 399.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if his previous paid special adviser, Perry Miller, underwent security clearance. [26146]

  Mr. Rifkind
  Yes.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what restrictions on future employment were made when Perry Miller was recruited as his special adviser. [26142]
  658
  (2) what written agreement on the scope of employment to be undertaken by Perry Miller when he left his Department as special adviser was reached with his private sector employer. [26144]

  Mr. Rifkind
  None, as special advisers are at present explicitly excluded from the business appointments rules.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if his unpaid adviser, David Hart, underwent security clearance. [26147]

  Mr. Rifkind
  Mr. Hart has been subject to the checks necessary to permit him from time to time to have access to classified information.

  Trident
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what assurances were provided by his Department to Devonport Management Ltd. in relation to the refitting of Trident submarines; and if he will make a statement; [26130]

  (2) what is his Department's policy concerning the location of the refitting of Trident submarines; and what change there has been in his Department's policy in the last two years; [26132]

  (3) what recent discussions he has had with Babcock International concerning the refitting of Trident submarines. [26131]

  Mr. Freeman
  It was announced by my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Defence on 24 June 1993,Official Report, column 447, that, subject to satisfactory contractual negotiations, refitting of Trident submarines will be undertaken at Devonport. Contractual negotiations are continuing, the details of which are commercially confidential, and no assurances have been provided to Devonport Management Ltd. There has been no change to that policy and Babcock International has no involvement of which I am aware with the provision of nuclear facilities at Devonport.

  Anti-ballistic Missile Defence System
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his Department's policy on the development of a European anti-ballistic missile defence system. [26128]

  Mr. Freeman
  The UK is currently considering whether a requirement exists for ballistic missile defence and this will be informed by the programme of pre-feasibility studies which I announced in the House on 18 October 1994, at columns 239–400. This assessment will include opportunities for European collaboration.

  Royal Welch Fusiliers, Gorazde
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if the Royal Welch Fusiliers based in Gorazde have(a) an adequate supply of fuel and (b) adequate stocks of food. [26252]

  Mr. Soames
  Yes, although restrictions on the movement of convoys to and from Gorazde have limited the use of fuel to essential tasks.
  659
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the date of the three most recent deliveries of mail to the Royal Welch Fusiliers based in Gorazde. [26251]

  Mr. Soames
  On 21 April, 28 April and 19 May.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the morale of the Royal Welch Fusiliers based in Gorazde; and if he will make a statement. [26124]

  Mr. Soames
  The British contingent in Gorazde is in good spirits and morale is high. Regular contact is maintained with the base and the situation is closely monitored.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if the Royal Welch Fusiliers based in Gorazde are under water rationing; and if water is available for washing purposes; [26250]

  (2) if the Royal Welch Fusiliers based in Gorazde are under water rationing; and if water is available for washing purposes. [26250]

  Mr. Soames
  In order to preserve fuel, the water purification plant at the British base in Gorazde is running at a reduced rate and consequently some rationing of purified water has been introduced. However, supplies are being supplemented with sterilised water and adequate stocks are available. Water is also freely available for washing purposes.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if he will make a statement on the(a) leave roster for the Royal Welch Fusiliers based in Gorazde and (b) backlog in the granting of leave to members of the Royal Welch Fusiliers in Gorazde; [26122]

  (2) what effect recent fighting in Gorazde has had on the granting of leave to members of the Royal Welch Fusiliers in Gorazde. [26123]

  Mr. Soames
  Restrictions on the movement of UN personnel to and from Gorazde have caused some difficulties for the leave roster of the Royal Welch Fusiliers. There are currently some 42 personnel with a backlog of leave which they are expected to be able to take before the end of their current tour of duty.

  Nimrod Aircraft
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which company is responsible for the maintenance and support of the Nimrod aircraft which crashed off the coast of Scotland on 16 May; when the contract with the company commenced; how many of his Department's aircraft are maintained by this company; who was responsible for the maintenance and support of the Nimrod aircraft before this contract came into force; and if he will list the dates and circumstances of any previous accidents involving Nimrod aircraft in the last five years. [26090]

  Mr. Soames
  Maintenance and servicing of RAF Nimrod aircraft is currently undertaken by RAF personnel at the Nimrod major servicing unit at RAF Kinloss. As a result of the "Competing for Quality" initiative, the work of the NMSU has been market tested and FRA Serco will assume responsibility for Nimrod servicing next month.
  660
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the conclusion of the investigation into the recent crash off Scotland of a Nimrod aircraft; if he will place a copy of the report in the Library; and if he will make a statement. [26126]

  Mr. Soames
  A RAF board of inquiry was convened immediately after the accident; it is not, however, expected to report for some time. A copy of the summary of the inquiry's findings will be placed in the Library of the House.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the base of the Nimrod which recently crashed off the Scottish coast; what operational duties it was carrying out at the time of the crash; and how many crew were on board the aircraft. [26089]

  Mr. Soames
  The Nimrod aircraft which ditched in the Moray firth on 16 May 1995 was based at RAF Waddington. It was engaged in a post-servicing air test. A total of seven crew were on board.

  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Nimrod maritime patrol aircraft his Department possesses; what was the total cost of purchase of the aircraft; and where the aircraft are stationed. [26125]

  Mr. Freeman
  There are 26 operational Nimrod MR2 aircraft, including two in use reserves plus four spares. All are stationed at RAF Kinloss. The original total cost of these aircraft is not readily available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what changes to his Department's policy on a comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty have been made in the last four years. [26176]

  Mr. Freeman
  For many years, HMG have been committed to achieving the conclusion of an effective and verifiable comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. We welcomed in August 1993 the conference on disarmament mandating an ad hoc committee on a nuclear test ban to negotiate such a treaty. We have kept our policy under close review and, for example, on 6 April this year announced in the conference on disarmament that we have now accepted that there should be no exemption in the draft treaty for tests in exceptional circumstances.

  Office Accommodation
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he maintains a record of the total office area of his Department's main building on Whitehall which remains unused. [26175]

  Mr. Freeman
  My Department does record office accommodation which becomes temporarily vacant in main building. This record is updated on a regular basis.

  Compulsory Drug Tests
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many members of the Army have taken part in compulsory drug tests; how many of these were positive drug tests and what has happened to these people; if individuals or units are selected for compulsory drug tests; which units have had compulsory drug tests; and how people are selected for compulsory drug tests. [26082]

  Mr. Soames
  At present, 4,420 officers and soldiers have provided specimens of urine as part of the
  661
  compulsory drug testing programme. To date, 21 soldiers have tested positive; and of these, 15 have been either discharged or recommended for discharge; two are recommended to be given formal warnings, one of whom it is also recommended should be reduced in rank; two have elected for premature voluntary release; a decision on the remaining two is awaited. Units or sub-units have been selected at random, and individuals within them have been chosen by random selection of surname initial. The units and sub-units selected are as follows:

  Ministry of Defence, (Army department Main Building)

  Headquarters Northern Ireland

  Headquarters 1st (UK) Armoured Division

  Headquarters 42nd (Northern Western) Brigade

  Headquarters Herford Garrison

  Headquarters Lisburn Station

  Headquarters Joint Support Group Northern Ireland

  16 Air Defence Regiment Royal Artillery

  47th Field Regiment Royal Artillery

  33 Engineer Regiment Royal Engineers

  1st (UK) Armoured Division Headquarters and Signal Regiment

  15th Signal Regiment

  16th Signal Regiment

  241 Signal Squadron

  253 Signal Squadron

  Joint Communications Unit (Northern Ireland)

  1st Battalion The Grenadier Guards

  1st Battalion The Scots Guards

  1st Battalion The Kings Own Scottish Borderers

  1st Battalion The Queens Lancashire Regiment

  1st Battalion The Highlanders

  2nd Battalion The Parachute Regiment

  9th Regiment Army Air Corp

  5 Airborne Brigade Combat Services Support Battalion

  12 Supply Regiment Royal Logistic Corp

  15 Supply Regiment Royal Logistic Corp

  21 Logistic Support Regiment Royal Logistic Corp

  221 Explosive Ordnance Disposal Squadron Royal Logistic Corp

  321 Explosive Ordnance Disposal Squadron Royal Logistic Corp

  5 Field Ambulance Royal Army Medical Corp

  Army Pay and Documentation Office (Northern Ireland)

  Royal Military Police Training Centre Chichester

  2nd Regiment Royal Military Police

  74 Provost Company Royal Military Police

  115 Provost Company Royal Military Police

  36 Detachment Special Investigation Branch Royal Military Police

  32 Army Education Centre

  45 Army Education Centre

  Education Services

  7 Dental Group

  9 Dental Group

  Garrison Labour Support Unit Herford, Germany

  Army Families and Welfare Services Herford, Germany

  Army Careers and Information Office Herford, Germany

  Station Services Office Herford, Germany

  Where parts of the units only are to be tested, individuals are selected by random selection based on surname initials. The selection involves the commanding officer and the drug testing officer completing separately a matrix. One matrix lists initials and the other contains numbers. Once completed, one matrix is then placed on the top of the other, and the surname initials are listed in order of priority according to the random selection. Personnel are then tested until the number of specimens
  662
  allocated for testing that day are collected. If a whole unit is to be tested, as has been the policy since the beginning of March, the unit is selected by my Department at random from those available, and all personnel in barracks on that day are tested.

  Western European Union
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his policy concerning the creation of a WEU military satellite capability; and if he will make a statement. [26127]

  Mr. Soames
  The Western European Union is currently studying the possibilities of co-operation on a military satellite capability. The United Kingdom is contributing fully to that work. No decisions have yet been taken.

  Nuclear Test Veterans
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his Department's policy in respect of nuclear test veterans, and if he will make a statement. [26177]

  Mr. Soames
  Over a period of more than 40 years from the atmospheric nuclear tests in the 1950s and early 1960s, up to the end of 1990, there has been no overall excess of death and malignant disease among British nuclear test veterans. Out of over 20,000 veterans studies by the National Radiological Protection Board, more than 3,000 would have died, over 900 of them from cancer, if the veterans had suffered the same death and cancer rates as members of the public in the same age groups. In fact, fewer than 2,800 veterans died, fewer than 800 of them from cancer, these figures being no higher than for the matched control group in the NRPB study. These facts do not sustain a case for compensation.

  Manpower Reductions
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is to be the percentage fall in the manpower strength of(a) the Army, (b) the Royal Air Force and (c) the Royal Navy between January 1990 and the completion of his Department's plans under the "Options for Change" and "Front Line First" initiatives. [26129]

  Mr. Soames
  The percentage fall in manpower strength of the Army, Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy on completion of MOD's plans under "Options for Change" and the "Front Line First" initiatives will depend on such factors as recruiting and turnover of personnel. Some of the "Front Line First" initiatives are still being considered. Manpower forecasts indicate that by 1995–96, manpower strengths will have fallen by 26 per cent, in the Army, 24 per cent, in the Royal Air Force and 21 per cent, for the Royal Navy since January 1990. These figures include some of the "Options for Change" measures already implemented.

  Gibraltar Garrison
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the oral statement of the Minister of State, the hon. Member for Eddisbury (Mr. Goodlad) of 20 December 1994,Official Report, column 1535, how many people have benefited from the tailored training courses provided by the Ministry of Defence for those affected by the drawdown of the Gibraltar garrison; and if he will make a statement. [26267]
  663
  Mr. Soames
  To ease the impact of reductions in the garrison, the Ministry of Defence in Gibraltar provides training and retraining opportunities for its locally entered civilian staff. Courses are conducted either internally or by employing external educational authorities for vocational training. They include driver instruction, information technology, management, administration and engineering, all of which are recognised by the Gibraltar Government as valuable skills for future employment. Some 250 personnel have so far benefited from these training initiatives.

  EC Explanatory Memoranda
  Mrs. Gorman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many explanatory memoranda on EC proposals his Department has prepared since 19 July 1993; and for how many explanatory memoranda on EC proposals compliance cost assessments have been drawn up. [25799]

  Mr. Freeman
  None.

  Building Works
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for each piece of work subject to a building process under the auspices of(a) the Ministry of Defence and (b) agencies for which the Ministry of Defence is responsible, where work was carried out, who were the successful bidders, and which contracts were won by in-house bidders in (1) 1993–94 and (2) 1994–95 and (3) 1995–96. [25498]

  Mr. Freeman
  The MOD assumed responsibility for the management and procurement of its works services from the PSA in April 1990. This was a new sphere of activity for the Department for which it had no in-house capacity. To meet this requirement, MOD set up Defence Works Services to act as its intelligent customer capability.

  All of the information requested is not available centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. However, it is possible to provide details of works contracts placed by my Department for construction projects, each costing more than £24,000, excluding VAT.

  Contracts

  Value (inc. VAT) £ million

  a)1993–94

  568

  720

  b) 1994–95

  479

  545

  c) 1995–96

  22

  125

  Note:

  1 April 1995 only.

  My Department has no in-house capability for construction contracts and therefore there are no in-house bids.

  Details of MOD works requirements are published fortnightly in the "Works Services Opportunities" bulletin—an example of which has been placed in the House of Commons Library—which is widely available on subscription.

  Retirements and Redundancies
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many people in(a) the Defence Department and (b) agencies for which the Defence Department is
  664
  responsible (i) took early retirement, (ii) took voluntary redundancy, (iii) took compulsory redundancy and (iv) were retired on medical grounds in (1) 1993–94 and (2) 1994–95; and what is the projected figure for 1995–96. [25475]

  Mr. Freeman
  Details of staff who left my Department early are set out in the table. Records held centrally do not distinguish between staff of individual top level budgets or agencies, or terms of redundancy. Such information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. Our present plans assume that more than 2,000 staff will leave under early retirement or redundancy terms in 1995–96.

  Year

  Early retirement

  Redundancy

  Ill-health retirement

  1993–94

  399

  2,639

  1,200

  1994–95

  166

  3,058

  1,120

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the annual cost to his Department of staff leaving under redundancy/ early retirement schemes to incorporate(a) added years lump sum payments, (b) redundancy payments, (c) pension payments, including enhancements and (d) any other special arrangements for (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95, (iii) projected for 1995–96 and (iv) projected for 1996–97. [25663]

  Mr. Freeman
  The costs to my Department of early retirement and redundancies are borne from the running costs provision. A detailed breakdown of the various costs could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. The total costs borne on my Department's running costs in 1993–94 and 1994–95 were £62 million and £59 million respectively. For 1995–96, the amount is estimated at £51 million. Projections for 1996–97 will be determined during the coming public expenditure survey.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many posts were lost in(a) the Defence Department and (b) agencies for which the Defence Department is responsible, listing the total lost posts agency by agency for (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and how many posts are proposed to be lost in 1995–96. [25085]

  Mr. Freeman
  Historical information on posts lost is not kept centrally by my Department and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. The total number of permanent UK-based posts which it is estimated will be lost in 1995–96 is some 6,000.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what changes there have been in the numbers of staff employed by(a) the Ministry of Defence and (b) agencies for which the Ministry of Defence is responsible, listing the changes in the number of staff agency by agency in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what changes are projected for 1995–96; [25066]

  (2) how many staff of (a) the Defence Department and (b) agencies for which the Defence Department is responsible, were employed on a casual or short-term basis in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96; [25482]

  (3) what changes there have been in the number of staff in employment by grade in (a) his Department is responsible in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25555]
  665
  Mr. Freeman
  The numbers of permanent and casual staff employed by my Department in 1993–94, projected outturn for 1994–95, and plans for 1995–96 are published annually in the departmental report by the Ministry of Defence, a copy of which is in the Library of the House.

  No projections broken down by grade are available.

  Defence Export Services Organisation
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many people work on the Iranian desk of the Defence Export Services Organisation. [26134]

  Mr. Freeman
  The DESO does not have a desk responsible specifically for Iran. Inquiries are handled by a section of three people, who are also responsible for seven other countries.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  Intergovernmental Conference on Political Union
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if, in respect of the intergovernmental conference on political union convened by the European Council at its meeting in Dublin on 25 and 26 June 1990, he will state(a) the date and location of each meeting, (b) the names of those representing the United Kingdom, (c) the relevant duration of each meeting and (d) which parts of the draft treaty on political union (i) were, and (ii) were not incorporated into the draft treaty on European Union signed at Maastricht on 9 and 10 December 1991.

  Mr. David Davis
  [holding answer 7 March 1995]: Ministerial meetings were held on the following dates as part of the 1990–91 intergovernmental conference on political union:

  Date

  Representative

  Location

  1990

  15 December

  (Formal Opening of IGC) Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary

  Rome

  1991

  4–5 February

  Foreign Secretary

  Brussels

  4 March

  Foreign Secretary and the right hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones)

  Brussels

  26 March

  (Informal Foreign Ministers meeting) Foreign Secretary

  Luxembourg

  8 April

  (Special European Council) Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary

  Luxembourg

  15 April

  Right hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones)

  Luxembourg

  27–28 April

  (Informal Foreign Ministers meeting) Foreign Secretary

  Luxembourg

  666

  Date

  Representative

  Location

  13–14 May

  Foreign Secretary and the right hon. Member for Watford (Mr.Garel-Jones)

  Brussels

  3 June

  (Informal Foreign Ministers meeting) Foreign Secretary

  Dresden

  17–18 June

  Foreign Secretary

  Luxembourg

  23 June

  Right hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones)

  Luxembourg

  28–29 June

  (European Council) Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary

  Luxembourg

  29–30 July

  Right hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones)

  Brussels

  30 September

  Foreign Secretary and the right hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones)

  Brussels

  5–6 October

  (Informal Foreign Ministers meeting) Foreign Secretary

  The Hague

  28 October

  Right hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones)

  Brussels

  4–5 November

  Foreign Secretary and the right hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones)

  Brussels

  12–13 November

  Foreign Secretary and the right hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones)

  The Hague

  2–3 December

  Foreign Secretary and the right hon. Member for Watford (Mr. Garel-Jones)

  Brussels

  9–10 December

  (European Council) Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary

  Maastricht

  This was an on-going negotiation, none of which was finalised until the Maastricht European Council on 10 December 1991, following which the treaty on European Union was signed at Maastricht on 7 February 1992.

  Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty
  Mr. Menzies Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's policy in respect of the recommendations made in the European Parliament's motion on the extension of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, adopted on 5 April, relating to(a) nuclear weapon states opening all their nuclear facilities to inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency, (b) the creation of an international office to control plutonium and highly enriched uranium, (c) nuclear weapon states declaring that they will refrain from the first use of nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states, (d) for the conference of disarmament to begin negotiations on a nuclear weapons convention, (e) for the nuclear weapons states to agree a timetable and funding for fulfilling their obligations under article VI of the

  667
  nuclear non-proliferation treaty and (f) for the creation of a nuclear weapons register; and if he will list those recommendations which Her Majesty's Government (i) support and (ii) do not support.

  Mr. David Davis
  [holding answer 4 May 1995]: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs made a statement on the nuclear non-proliferation treaty review and extension conference on 16 May. Our civil nuclear facilities are subject to international safeguards. We do not support any of the other recommendations.

  European Union
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which east European states he expects to be eligible for EEC membership; what timetable he envisages; and what size of fishing fleet each of these states has. [25381]

  Mr. David Davis
  The Copenhagen European Council in 1993 agreed that the associated countries of central and eastern Europe that so desired would become members of the European Union. Their accessions would take place once they were able to assume the obligations of membership. The present associates are Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania and Bulgaria. Similar association agreements are expected to be signed with the Baltic states at the 12 June Foreign Affairs Council, and another is being negotiated with Slovenia.

  According to the latest FAO figures, for 1992, the Polish fishing fleet has 521 vessels, 249,079 gross tonnage; the Bulgarian, 38 vessels, 86,600 gross tonnage; the Latvian, 141 vessels, 343,236 gross tonnage; the Lithuanian, 162 vessels, 236,268 gross tonnage; the Estonian, 249 vessels, 180,921 gross tonnage; and, according to 1989 OECD figures, the Romanian fleet has 106 vessels, 237,457 gross tonnage. Figures are not available for Slovenia.

  Mr. Gill
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what are the specific contributions to the nation's security which arise from membership of the European Union which are not adequately covered by membership of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, the Western European Union, the United Nations and Organisation of Security and Co-operation. [25770]

  Mr. David Davis
  The security of the United Kingdom is enhanced by the contribution that membership of the European Union makes to our prosperity. It benefits from intergovernmental co-operation under the Maastricht treaty in the fields of justice and home affairs, especially with respect to fighting cross-border crime and drug trafficking. Our participation in the common foreign and security policy enables us to exercise greater influence in foreign affairs, including relations with Russia, Ukraine and central and eastern Europe.

  National Minorities
  Sir Donald Thompson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his answer of 3 March,Official Report, column 731, what further actions are necessary prior to ratification by the United Kingdom of the Council of Europe framework convention for the protection of national minorities; when he expects these actions to be completed; and if he will make a statement. [25473]
  668
  Mr. David Davis
  The framework convention accords closely with our national legislation and policies on non-discrimination equality of opportunity, hence our decision in principle to ratify it. There are some technical points which we wish to consider further before ratifying.

  Ms Mukhtaj Bibi
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when Ms Mukhtaj Bibi, ref: GV100/21701/VT, is going to be interviewed and the United Kingdom post in Islamabad in connection with her application to enter the United Kingdom. [25990]

  Mr. Baldry
  I have asked the high commission at Islamabad for details and will arrange for the hon. Member to receive a substantive reply from the migration and visa correspondence unit as soon as possible.

  Turkey
  Sir Russell Johnston
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make it the policy of Her Majesty's Government to support the proposal of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, in recommendation 1266–1995, that the Committee of Ministers should call on Turkey to withdraw its forces from northern Iraq and set a specific timetable for Turkey to bring its constitution and legislation in line with the principles and standards of the Council of Europe; and if he will make a statement. [25860]

  Mr. David Davies
  At its meeting on 11 May, the Committee of Ministers took note of the Parliamentary Assembly's recommendation 1266–1995 on"Turkey's military intervention in norther Iraq and on Turkey's military intervention in northern Iraq and on Turkey's respect of commitments concerning constitutional and legislative reforms",
  and instructed its deputies to prepare a reply.

  We have noted with satisfaction the announcement by the Turkish Government on 4 May that their forces have withdrawn completely form northern Iraq. We are urging the Turkish Government to take equal account of our concerns over democratisation and human rights.

  Gibraltar
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reply he has received to his representation made on 19 April to Foreign Minister Carlos Westendorp about the delays on the Gibraltar-Spain border. [26260]

  Mr. David Davis
  None.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) pursuant to the oral statement of the Minister of State, the right hon. Member for Eddisbury (Mr. Goodlad) of 20 December,Official Report, column 1535, what courses of action Her Majesty's Government have taken as a consequence of the deliberations of the Gibraltar joint economic forum; [26268]

  (2) what assistance and advice has been offered to the Gibraltar Government to expand and diversify their economy; and if he will make a statement. [26255]

  Mr. David Davis
  We have provided extensive advice and assistance to the Government of Gibraltar. An economic study, identifying market opportunities which could be exploited by Gibraltar, was supplied in 1993, and another dealing with the impact of MOD drawdown and ways to compensate for that in 1994. In 1994, we set
  669
  up the joint economic forum to consider ways of assisting Gibraltar in the wake of that rundown. We have also negotiated considerable EC structural funds help for Gibraltar. The MOD runs a training programme.

  All this took place against the background of the completion of the 1986 to 1990 development grant, following which the Gibraltar Government have not requested further UK bilateral assistance.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will give details of the longest wait and extent of delays for pedestrians and cars in either direction on the Gibraltar-Spain border, for each day since 17 May. [26259]

  Mr. David Davis
  I will write to the hon. Member shortly.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the oral statement of the Minister of State, the hon. Member for Boothferry (Mr. Davis), of 17 May,Official Report, column 307, if he will amplify on the method by which Her Majesty's Government have stood up for the rights of Gibraltarians in the current border problems; and what is the measure of success to date. [26257]

  Mr. David Davis
  The oral statement of the Minister of State referred to set out the position.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the oral statement of the Minister of State, the right hon. Member for Eddisbury (Mr. Goodlad) of 20 December,Official Report, column 1534, if he has anything to add to his comments about spurious claims by the Spaniards in regard to the success rate of the Royal Gibraltar police in seizing illegal substances. [26265]

  Mr. David Davis
  I have nothing further to add to the remarks made by my right hon. Friend the Member for Eddisbury, except to add my own congratulations to the splendid achievements of the members of the Royal Gibraltar police. The continued achievements this year are worthy of the highest praise.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the current status of the talks under the Brussels process in respect of Gibraltar; and if he will make a statement. [26254]

  Mr. David Davis
  The last ministerial meeting under the Brussels process took place on 20 December 1994. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer the Minster of State, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Grantham (Mr. Hogg), gave the hon. Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Shersby) on 10 January 1995,Official Report, column 62.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reply the United Kingdom ambassador to Spain has received following his representations on 21 April to the Spanish Foreign Minister about the delays on the Gibraltar-Spain border. [26261]

  Mr. David Davis
  None. I made clear in my oral statement of 17 May,Official Report, columns 300–7, the attitude of the Spanish Government to the delays at the Spain-Gibraltar frontier remains unacceptable.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the oral statement of the Minister of State, the right hon. Member for Eddisbury (Mr. Goodlad), of 20 December,Official Report, column 1533, if it is Her Majesty's Government's
  670
  policy to abide by the democratically expressed wish of the people of Gibraltar, in respect of their links with the Crown. [26269]

  Mr. David Davis
  Yes. Our commitment remains firm, as set out in the preamble to the 1969 Gibraltar constitution.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his oral answer of 20 December 1994,Official Report, column 1535, what response has been received to the request that the Spanish Government substantiate their allegations that Gibraltar is a money laundering centre. [26188]

  Mr. David Davis
  None.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list those European directives which the United Kingdom Government have requested the Gibraltar Government to enact in their legislature. [26263]

  Mr. David Davis
  As in any other part of the EU, the Gibraltar Government must implement all applicable EU legislation.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations have been made by the United Kingdom Government to the Spanish Government since 17 May about the delays on the Gibraltar-Spain border; and what replies have been received. [26258]

  Mr. David Davis
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs has made our views clear to the Spanish Foreign Minister.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the oral statement of the Minister of State, the right hon. Member for Eddisbury (Mr. Goodlad), of 20 December,Official Report, column 1532, if he will detail the protests previously made by Her Majesty's Government to Spain about border controls and delays. [26266]

  Mr. David Davis
  On 1 December 1994, I summoned the Spanish ambassador to express our strong concern at the intrusive and disruptive checks in question; and made clear that they should cease. We also repeatedly and vigorously protested at the highest levels to the Spanish authorities on other occasions.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he has in his discussions and communications with the Chief Minister of Gibraltar, intimated circumstances where the United Kingdom Government might suspend the Gibraltar constitution or dismiss the Gibraltar Government. [26253]

  Mr. David Davis
  No.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the legislation, other than that derived from European directives, which the United Kingdom Government have requested the Gibraltar Government to enact in their legislature; and if he will detail the reason in each case. [26262]

  Mr. David Davis
  We have asked the Government of Gibraltar to enact a number of pieces of legislation relating to good government and fulfilling the UK's international obligations.
  671
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his answer of 20 December 1994,Official Report, column 1535, what response has been received to the request that the Spanish Government substantiate their allegation that the co-operation of Gibraltar has been refused in respect of combating money laundering. [26189]

  Mr. David Davis
  None. We have asked the Spaniards twice since then at trilateral talks with Gibraltar, and have received no response.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the oral statement of the Minister of State, the hon. Member for Boothferry, (Mr. Davis), of 17 May,Official Report, column 307, what response has been received in respect of United Kingdom protests at the delays on the Gibraltar-Spain border from (a) the Schengen states, (b) the European Commission, (c) the Schengen secretariat and (d) the Schengen presidency. [26256]

  Mr. David Davis
  We cannot provide details of confidential discussions; but we are confident that our concerns are fully understood by all those to whom we have spoken.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what quantity of illegal substances has been seized by the Royal Gibraltar police in each of the past two years. [26264]

  Mr. David Davis
  In 1993, approximately 1.5 tonnes were seized or found. In 1994, over 2 tonnes were seized or found.

  Western Sahara
  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what protests have been made to the Moroccan Government over the arrests of Polisario supporters on 11 and 12 May during a peaceful demonstration; and if he will make a statement on Her Majesty's Government's policy towards the Western Sahara. [26270]

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  The UN is investigating the incident and will report to the Security Council. We continue to support the efforts of the UN Secretary-General to bring about an early resolution of the dispute concerning the Western Sahara in accordance with the UN's settlement plan.

  Armenia
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs on what date he now expects a British embassy to be established in Armenia; and if he will make a statement. [25983]

  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  We expect our ambassador, Mr. David Miller OBE, to arrive at post in Yerevan by the end of July.

  Iran
  Dr. David Clark
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is his Department's policy on the export of arms to Iran; and what changes there have been to it there have been in the last two years. [26135]
  672
  Mr. Douglas Hogg
  There have been no changes to our policy on arms exports to Iran since it was announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs on 1 March 1993. We continue to apply the following criteria in considering applications for the export of licensable goods to Iran:

  (i) With two exceptions we should not approve licences for any goods or technology on the military or atomic energy lists— schedule 1, part 3, groups 1 and 2—of the Export of Goods (Control) Order 1992, as amended. The exceptions are:

  (a) goods essential for the safety of civil aircraft and air traffic control systems;

  (b) radioactive material in the form of sources for medical equipment and deuterium labelled compounds for medical use.

  (ii) We should not approve licences for any equipment, including the exceptions to the complete ban mentioned above, where there was knowledge or reason to suspect that it would go to a military end-user or be used for military purposes.

  Existing export licences, approved under the old guidelines, will remain valid. We shall support efforts among supplier countries, in particular the G7 and our European partners, to promote a harmonised approach to effective controls on the export of dual-use goods to countries of particular concern.

TRANSPORT

  Smoked Glass Windows (Cars)
  Mr. John Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will introduce legislation to prohibit motorcars having smoked glass in their side and rear windows. [25408]

  Mr. Norris
  No. Regulation 32 of Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 already prohibits, with certain limited exceptions, the fitment of excessively dark or smoked glass in the windows of motorcars first used on or after 1 June 1978.

  British Rail Employees (Statutory Rights)
  Mr. Chidgey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if former employees of British Rail working for a new railway contractor following the privatisation of British Rail will be entitled to statutory redundancy pay and statutory sick pay based upon their cumulative employment under both employers. [25806]

  Mr. Watts
  Provided a move from one employer to another is part of a transfer of an undertaking where employees are transferred with their existing contracts of service to the new undertaking—that is, a transfer to which the provisions of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 1981 apply— then continuity of employment is maintained. This means that employment with both employers counts towards any statutory or contractual entitlements which have a minimum qualifying period or are based on length of service.

  Road Accident Victims (Compensation)
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will review the Road Traffic Acts with a view to providing scope for compensation for the victims of driving offences. [26190]
  673
  Mr. Norris
  There are no plans for such a review.

  Motor Cycle Tests
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) how many motor cycle testing stations there are in(a) Bradford and (b) Leeds; what is the current waiting list at each of these stations; how many test inspectors are employed at each station; how many hours and on what days each station holds tests; what contingency arrangements are to be introduced if motor cyclists are unable to be tested before the expiry of a provisional licence; and if he will make a statement; [26138]

  (2) what action he is taking to facilitate motor cyclists living in (a) Bradford and Leeds and (b) other parts of West Yorkshire to take any tests they are required to take without undue delay. [26137]

  Mr. Norris
  These are operational matters for the Driving Standards Agency. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from B. I. Herdan to Mr. Max Madden, dated 25 May 1995:
  The Secretary of State for Transport has asked me to reply to your questions about motorcycle tests in Bradford and Leeds.
  The Agency offers motorcycle tests at the centres at Wibsey, Bradford and Horsforth, Leeds. At these centres local demand is such that current waiting times are 2 and 9 weeks respectively. These include test slots provisionally reserved by Approved Training Bodies where payment is required not later than 10 clear working days before the day of the test. Earlier dates may therefore become available at Horsforth if provisionally reserved slots are not taken up, or there are cancellations, and the centre is within reasonable travelling distance of Wibsey where current demand is not so great. There is one motorcycle examiner at each centre who conducts tests three days a week. At Wibsey this is on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, and at Horsforth on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. These involve full daily programmes of 8 tests a day.
  Where there is a specific need for an earlier test date, for example the expiry of a provisional licence, our Regional Office in Newcastle which currently deals with the books for West Yorkshire always endeavours to make additional programmes available to meet this need. This will obviously depend on the examiner resources available at the time and the method of notice given by the candidate.

  Lorry Registration
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what evidence he has that United Kingdom lorry firms are registering their vehicles elsewhere in the European Union; and what loss of revenue is involved. [26027]

  Mr. Norris
  I know of no such evidence.

  A13
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is the latest date when the construction of the new A13 road between the Heath way-Thames avenue and Mardyke-Wennington sections must commence before compensation or penalty payments may be invoked by the promoters of the channel tunnel rail link route; and if he will make a statement. [26026]

  Mr. Watts
  The competition to select the private section promoter is still under way, and the details of the contract between the promoter and the Secretary of State are not yet finalised. However, the environmental statement for the hybrid Bill assumed that these sections of the A13 would be completed before the relevant part of CTRL construction commenced.

  Taxis (Smoking Ban)
  Mr. Bendall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what is the Government's policy on allowing licensed taxi drivers to ban smoking in their cabs; and what plans the Government have to allow them to do So. [26184]

  Mr. Norris
  Taxi drivers may request passengers not to smoke in their cabs.

  The courts, in interpreting the compellability law, have ruled that the fact that an intending passenger was smoking was not a "reasonable excuse" for the driver to refuse to carry him or her.

  The Government have already announced in "The Health of the Nation" White Paper that they propose to change the law to allow a taxi driver to designate his or her cab as a "no smoking" one and then to refuse passengers that are smoking. This proposal awaits a suitable legislative opportunity.

  Driving Tests
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, pursuant to his letter M/PSO/5928/95 of 1 May, when he expects to complete his assessment of hazard perception tests and to reach decisions about heavy elements in driving tests as required by the second EC directive on driver licensing. [25761]

  Mr. Norris
  [holding answer 24 May 1995]: I refer the hon. Member to the written answer that I gave my hon. Friend the Member for Eltham (Mr. Bottomley) on 23 May, Official Report, columns 567–68.

  Double Glazing Grails
  Mr. Chidgey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what grants his Department provides for double glazing of residential properties adjacent to motorways where noise levels are unreasonably high. [25033]

  Mr. Watts
  [holding answer 23 May 1995]: This is an operational matter for the Highways Agency. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from Lawrie Haynes to Mr. David Chidgey, dated 25 May 1995:
  The Minister for Railways and Roads, John Watts, has asked me to reply to your recent question about the provision of double glazing adjacent to motorways where noise levels are unreasonably high.
  The Highways Agency does not provide specific grants for double glazing of residential properties.
  Owners of properties eligible under the Noise Insulation Regulations 1975 are offered a provision of insulation or grant in lieu in accordance with the relevant specifications set out in Schedule 1 of the Regulations. The regulations specify secondary glazing of existing windows or exceptionally a new replacement double window.

  Bus Services (Complaints)
  Ms Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list by traffic area office for each of the last five years the number of complaints received from members of the public regarding the operation of local bus services. [25912]

  Mr. Norris
  The available information is given in the attached table.
  675

  Number of complaints received by Traffic Area Offices from the general public since 1990

  Traffic Area

  1990–91

  1991–92

  1992–93

  1993–94

  1994–95

  WTA

  84

  53

  87

  101

  105

  SEMTA

  34

  40

  62

  42

  69

  NWTA

  41

  59

  52

  35

  32

  SCOT

  37

  63

  55

  95

  120

  ETA

  98

  103

  76

  71

  109

  NETA

  1220

  1230

  237

  321

  205

  WMTA

  n/a

  n/a

  90

  133

  109

  SWTA

  n/a

  n/a

  96

  60

  110

  Note:

  1 Estimated figures.

  Road Scheme Acquisitions
  Mr. Spearing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport under what Acts and statutory instruments road scheme acquisitions have or will have been made of(a) housing north and south of the A40 Western avenue in the London borough of Hammersmith and (b) housing on the north side of the A13 Newham way west of its intersection with the A112 Prince Regent land; and in respect of each scheme (i) what are the costs of housing acquisitions and compensations, (ii) what is the total cost of the scheme, (iii) what statutory procedures are outstanding and (iv) what are the firm dates of commencement and completion. [24481]

  Mr. Watts
  This is an operational matter for the Highways Agency. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from Lawrie Haynes to Mr. Nigel Spearing, dated 25 May 1995:
  I have been asked to write to you with the information you requested in your question in the house about the trunk road improvement schemes at A40 Western Circus and A13/A112 Prince Regent Land junctions.
  The Secretary of State for Transport acquires properties for road construction under the Highways Act 1980, the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 and the Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 and, in planning blight cases, under the Town and Country Planning act 1990. He pays compensation for the properties acquired under the Land Compensation Acts 1961 and 1973.
  The Highways Agency, on behalf of the Secretary of State, requires (a) houses north and south of the A40 for the trunk road improvement scheme at Western Circus in the Borough of Hammersmith and (b) houses north of A13 Newham Way to the west of A112 Prince Regent Land for the improvement of the A13/A112 junction.
  (1) The total cost of the housing and compensation for these properties is estimated for (a) at £3.1 million and for (b) £3.4 million.
  (ii) The total estimated costs of the schemes are (a) £48 million and (b) £40 million; including costs already incurred of £10 million and £3 million respectively.
  (iii) The statutory procedures for (a) are complete, and for (b) are awaiting a decision by the Secretaries of State whether the scheme should proceed, following the public inquiry held last year. The outstanding statutory procedures for (b) are:
  the A13 Trunk Road (A112 Prince Regent Lane Junction Improvement, The Trunk Road and Slip Roads) Order 19; the A13 Trunk Road (A112 Prince Regent Lane Junction Improvement, Slip Roads) Order 19;
  the A13 Trunk Road (A112 Prince Regent Lane Junction Improvement) Compulsory Purchase Order (No.) 19; and the proposal to issue a certificate of exchange land; entitled, The Open Space Land at Canning Town Recreation Ground, former Beckton Lido Site and Prince Regent Lane Playing Field.
  676
  (iv) The main construction of the A40 Western Circus scheme is planned to start in the first quarter of 1996; a firmer date for start of works will not be available until tenders for the project have been assessed. The improvement scheme for the A13/A112 junction will proceed to construction after the statutory procedures are completed, provided resources are available.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Export Licences
  Mr. Bennett
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) under which military list specifications, as specified in group 1 of part III of schedule 1 of Statutory Instrument 1992 No. 3092 goods for export to Argentina were refused five export licences in 1993; [25751]

  (2) goods for export to China were refused three export licences in 1993. [25752]

  Mr. Ian Taylor
  The goods in question were classified under ML5, ML9 and ML10 in respect of Argentina and ML5, ML11 and ML15 in respect of China.

  Mr. Byers
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade, pursuant to his answer of 30 March,Official Report, column 777 if the exporters of goods with potential defence applications were required in every case to obtain end user certificates for the export of goods licensed under the military list. [25697]

  Mr. Ian Taylor
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: Where military list goods were to be exported to an overseas Government Department, no end-user certificate was required by the DTI export licensing unit, though a copy of the contract or purchase order was requested.

  For military list exports to companies and private consignees, exporters were required to submit sufficient information to enable the ELU to assess the export licence application. The guidance note on filling out an export licence application said that exporters should supply an end-user certificate, or an end-use statement or an international import certificate, but this was not insisted upon in all cases.

  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list the companies to which export licences were granted for the export of electronic batons in 1991. [25614]

  Mr. Ian Taylor
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: No licences were granted for these goods in 1991.

  Iraq (Export Credit Guarantees)
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade, pursuant to his answer of 30 March,Official Report, column 777, if BMARC received support from the Export Credits Guarantee Department for contracts with Iraq between 1985 and 1990. [25684]

  Mr. Ian Taylor
  No.

  Instruments of Torture
  Mrs. Clwyd
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will further regulate the sale of equipment which can be used, and has been designated, for use against persons in repressive conditions. [25693]
  677
  Mr. Ian Taylor
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: It is not feasible to control the export of the many innocuous goods that can be misused for torture. Exports of weapons, security and para-military police goods are controlled under the terms of the Export of Goods (Control) Order. Licences are granted only after careful consideration of the political and military implications of the proposed sale, with particular attention paid to the human rights record of the proposed recipient country. The Department would not knowingly give any support to promote sales overseas of torture equipment. I see no need for further regulation.

  The regulation of firearms sales within Great Britain is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department.

  Regional Airports
  Mr. Jim Cunningham
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what recent economic assessment he has made of the economic benefits of regional airports to regional economies. [24977]

  Mr. Eggar
  The Department of Trade and Industry has not made any such recent economic assessment. The Department is aware of a recent study by the Civil Aviation Authority entitled "The Economic Impact of New Air Services", which examines the impact of new long haul services from Manchester and Birmingham airports. This contains useful references to other similar studies.

  Consultants
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what is the level of expenditure on consultancy by(a) his Department and (b) agencies for which his Department is

  Early retirement

  Voluntary redundancy

  Compulsory redundancy

  Medical retirement

  Current total projections 1995–96 (all categories)

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1993–94

  1994–95

  DTI

  302

  64

  5

  28

  22

  16

  31

  34

  300

  Agencies:

  CH

  0

  0

  0

  0

  2

  0

  8

  13

  0

  INSS

  10

  18

  0

  0

  0

  7

  13

  11

  13

  LGC

  14

  7

  0

  10

  0

  1

  0

  1

  5

  NEL

  0

  0

  69

  44

  0

  0

  0

  0

  10

  NPL

  35

  1

  0

  0

  1

  0

  8

  0

  55

  NWML

  1

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  1

  0

  PATS

  1

  7

  0

  0

  0

  1

  7

  13

  18

  RA

  10

  5

  0

  0

  4

  0

  5

  2

  6

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what is the annual cost to his Department of staff leaving under redundancy/early retirement schemes to incorporate (i) added years lump sum payments, (ii) redundancy payments, (iii) pension payments, including enhancements and, (iv) any other special arrangements for(a) 1993–94, (b) 1994–95, and projected for (c) 1995–96 and (d) 1996–97. [25635]

  Mr. Ian Taylor
  Most of the costs to the Department of early retirement and redundancies are borne from the Department's running costs provision. A detailed breakdown of the various costs could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
  678
  responsible for (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25542]

  Mr. Ian Taylor
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Gordon (Mr. Bruce) on 10 February 1995,Official Report, column 429, which shows the fees paid by the Department for general consultancies for 1993–94. Corresponding provisional outturn figures for 1994–95, budget figures for 1995–96 and a breakdown of the 1993–94 figure between the Department and its agencies are detailed in the following table.

  £000

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1995–96

  Department

  3,345

  4,445

  1—

  Executive Agencies

  1,429

  1,734

  1,584

  Total

  4,774

  6,179

  1,584

  Note:

  1 The Department's allocation for 1995–96 will be set shortly in the light of the outcome of MINIS 95.

  Retirements and Redundancies
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many staff of(a) the Department of Trade and Industry and (b) agencies for which the DTI is responsible (i) took early retirement, (ii) took voluntary redundancy, (iii) took compulsory redundancy and (iv) were retired on medical grounds in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25416]

  Mr. Ian Taylor
  The figures requested are shown in the following table. The 1995–96 projections represent current estimates which may be modified during the course of the year. In preparing these tables, redundancies have been taken as covering those cases which involve early severance on redundancy.

  The total costs borne by the Department in 1993–94 and 1994–95 were £13,498,000 and £13,515,000 respectively. For 1995–96, the amount is estimated at £3,634,000. Projections for 1996–97 will be determined during the coming public expenditure survey.

  Contracting Out
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what work has been contracted out(a) by his Department and (b) by agencies for which his Department is responsible in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what is projected for 1995–96. [25541]
  679
  Mr. Ian Taylor
  The following areas of work have been contracted out under the "Competing for Quality" programme. For those areas where work is shown as under way in 1995–96, contracting out will be dependent on the Department or agency receiving bids which offer value for money compared with keeping the activity in-house.

  (a) Areas of work contracted out by the Department in:

  (i) 1993–94

  Central Training

  Offshore Geology

  Stationery Supply

  Translation

  (ii) 1994–95

  IT Services

  Accounts Services Agency

  Work is under way to contract out the following in 1995–96:

  Services Management Division Building Management National Physical Laboratory

  In addition, the following areas of work were contracted out in part under partnership arrangements between the private sector and in-house staff in 1994–95:

  Mail and Messengers

  Reprographics

  Central File Store

  Internal Audit

  Oil and Gas IT Services

  (b) Areas of work contracted out by agencies for which the Department is responsible in:

  (i) 1993–94

  Patent Office

  Various Support Services

  (ii) 1994–95

  Radiocommunications Agency

  Ships Radio Licensing

  Work is under way to contract out the following in 1995–96:

  Companies House

  London Office and satellites

  Edinburgh Office

  Cardiff Office; range of activities

  Insolvency Service

  Official Receivers' Administrative Functions

  Patent Office

  Various support services

  Radiocommunications Agency

  Various Support Services

  Regional Challenge
  Mr. Tony Lloyd
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will give details of the cost of the launch of regional challenge and the cost of administering it; and if he will make a statement. [25701]

  Mr. Eggar
  The cost to Government Departments of the launch of regional challenge has been less than £10,000. The challenge will be administered within the normal running cost budgets of the various Departments and Government offices responsible for structural funds administration.

  Mr. Tony Lloyd
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if moneys from European Union sources will be used to fund regional challenge. [25702]

  Mr. Eggar
  Yes. Regional challenge is a competition for grants from the European regional development and social funds.

  Petrol
  Sir Irvine Patnick
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what proportion of the total sales of petrol in the United Kingdom are now accounted for by the sale of unleaded and super unleaded fuel. [26013]

  Mr. Page
  In the first quarter of 1995, premium unleaded petrol and super unleaded petrol accounted for 56.3 per cent. and 4.7 per cent. respectively of total sales of petrol in the United Kingdom. Thus, 61 per cent. of total petrol sales were unleaded.

  Fire Safety
  Mr. Pike
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade if the review team's report regarding fire safety legislation and enforcement matters arising from the deregulation proposals has now been considered; and when he expects to be able to make a statement on the outcome. [26245]

  Mr. Jonathan Evans
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) on 24 May 1995,Official Report, column 643.

  Import and Export Controls
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade to what extent the emergency powers contained in the Import, Export and Customs Powers (Defence) Act 1939 have been made permanent by subsequent amending legislation. [25511]

  Mr. Heseltine
  The judgment handed down by the Court of Appeal on 22 May confirmed on all counts the continuing validity of the powers to control imports and exports in the Import, Export and Customs Powers (Defence) Act 1939, and in the orders made under that Act. The Import and Export Control Act 1990 made the powers in the Act permanent.

  Nuclear Power
  Mr. Alan W. Williams
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) if the special status of nuclear power stations that guarantees that they run continuously to provide base load electricity will be reviewed as a result of privatisation; [25284]

  (2) by what authority nuclear power stations are empowered to provide their maximum output whenever available to base load electricity supply. [27277]

  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: For safety reasons, Nuclear Electric's plants are permitted by the National Grid Company to offer a level of flexible operation less than that of other generating plant. In Scotland, arrangements dealing with SNL's access to the Scottish distribution system are covered by the Nuclear Energy Agreement between SNL and Scottish Power and Hydro-Electric.

  I understand that Nuclear Electric and the National Grid Company are in discussion about ways in which the flexibility of their plant can be increased without in any way compromising rigorous standards of safety.

  Mr. Alan W. Williams
  To ask the President of the Board of Trade what restrictions will be imposed on the new privatised nuclear company from diversifying into building gas-fired power stations. [25291]
  681
  Mr. Eggar
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: Decisions on new generating plant will be a commercial matter for the privatised companies, subject to meeting the appropriate regulatory requirements.

PRIME MINISTER

  Engagements
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 May. [24806]

  Sir Peter Tapsell
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 25 May. [24807]

  The Prime Minister
  This morning, I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with Ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

  Lockerbie
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library the correspondence between Nelson Mandela and himself on the issue of Lockerbie. [25952]

  The Prime Minister
  No. It is not my normal practice to do so.

  Wild Mammals (Protection) Bill
  Mr. Chidgey
  To ask the Prime Minister, what amount of correspondence he has received requesting that extra parliamentary time be given to the Wild Mammals (Protection) Bill. [26133]

  The Prime Minister
  I have received a substantial number of representations on the Wild Mammals (Protection) Bill.

  Intergovernmental Conference
  Mr. Marlow
  To ask the Prime Minister by what date he expects to decide whether Her Majesty's Government's submission to the reflections group of the inter-governmental conference should be placed before Parliament either as a White or Green Paper. [25390]

  The Prime Minister
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: I have made it clear that Parliament will have a full opportunity to discuss the issues relating to the intergovernmental conference before that conference gets under way. Precisely when the conference will start is not yet clear. Meanwhile the Government are examining in detail what the British position should be. The purpose of the study group is explanatory. My hon. Friend the Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs will represent the Foreign Secretary. We do not intend to make a single written submission, although we naturally contributed to the Council submission which has been published as Command Paper 2866. Parliament will be kept informed of the study group's progress.

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

  Large Narcissus Fly
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) what research her Department has carried out into methods of controlling the large narcissus fly; [24740]

  (2) what research her Department has carried out into the effect of the large narcissus fly on daffodil crops; [24741]

  (3) how much money has been spent on research into methods of controlling the large narcissus fly in each year for the last five years; [24742]

  (4) what plans her Department has to fund research into alternative methods of controlling the large narcissus fly. [24743]

  Mr. Jack
  The large narcissus fly is widely recognised as representing a serious problem for commercial bulb production. Consequently, our research has focused on methods of control. This has included studies of the efficacy of insecticides; the susceptibility of narcissus varieties to the fly; and the effects of a range of growing practices. The Department's spend on this strategic research, on behalf of the industry, since 1991 was as follows:

  1991–92: £32,000

  1992–93: £34,000

  1993–94: £35,000

  1994–95: £36,000

  In April 1995, the Department established a new, four-year project estimated to cost £40,000 in 1995–96, investigating the relationship between the large narcissus fly and the chemicals emitted by narcissus plants. The identification of such chemicals may offer some opportunity for attracting flies to decoy plants and then destroying them, repelling flies from narcissus crops or for breeding varieties resistant to attack by the fly.

  New Zealand Flatworm
  Mrs. Wise
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) if he will list the areas in which the New Zealand flatworm has now been observed; and what guidelines he has issued to growers and gardeners in those areas; [25203]

  (2) what steps he is taking to deal with the spread of the New Zealand flatworm and its threat to the United Kingdom worm population; [25205]

  (3) what discussions he has held with his New Zealand counterpart as to how the New Zealand flatworm is dealt with in its native habitat with particular reference to its predators. [25204]

  Mrs. Browning
  The Government have sponsored research which shows that the New Zealand flatworm has been found in certain areas of the United Kingdom. These findings have been sporadic and have largely been confined to private gardens, allotments and some garden centres and the flatworm is not considered likely to pose a major threat to the agricultural and horticultural industries in the United Kingdom. A code of practice is planned to supplement information and advice already provided by the Agricultural Departments to industry and the public. This advice emphasises the need to avoid spreading the New Zealand flatworm. Since 1992, it has been an offence in Great Britain under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to release flatworms, or allow them to escape, into the wild. It is understood from contacts in
  683
  New Zealand that in its natural environment a number of factors combine to maintain a balance between the flatworm and the native earthworm population.

  Tuberculin Testing
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will publish the qualifications he will require to allow lay personnel to carry out tuberculin testing under veterinary direction. [24954]

  Mrs. Browning
  My Department is consulting with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons on this matter. If and when an order is made to allow lay personnel to carry out tuberculin testing, the necessary qualifications will be published.

  Live Animal Exports
  Mr. Etherington
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received from Compassion in World Farming on the lawfulness of restrictions on(a) the export of calves for rearing in veal crates and (b) the export of all live farm animals; and if he will make a statement on them. [24984]

  Mrs. Browning
  Compassion in World Farming wrote to my right hon. Friend on 4 April advising him to consider the lawfulness of restrictions of this type. My right hon. Friend wanted, before replying, to have the advice he had sought from lawyers on the legal opinion, commissioned from Gerald Barling QC by the RSPCA, which argued that a ban on the export of calves would be legal. My right hon. Friend's conclusions in the light of that legal advice were set out in his reply of 22 May to the hon. Member for Nuneaton, (Mr. Olner), column 456, and conveyed to CIWF in a letter which he sent on the same date. The letter also explained that he saw no reason to change his view that a ban on the export of all live farm animals would be incompatible with European law, as well as with the Government's policy.

  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for how long the MV Northern Cruiser carrying livestock trucks from Dover to Boulogne on Friday 12 May was delayed outside Boulogne; what was the cause of delay, when he was informed of the delay by the boat's operators; whether, as a result of the delay, any of the animals went without being offered food and water for more than 15 hours; if any prosecutions are to be brought; and if he will make a statement. [25581]

  Mrs. Browning
  We have not at present received any information which suggests that an offence occurred under the Welfare of Animals during Transport Order 1994, in relation to the voyage of the Northern Cruiser on 12 May 1995.

  Retirements and Redundancies
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the annual cost to his Department of staff leaving under redundancy/early retirement schemes to incorporate(a) added years lump sum payments, (b) redundancy payments, (c) pension payments, including enhancements and (d) any other special arrangements for (i) 1993–94 (ii) 1994–95, (iii) projected for 1995–96 and (iv) projected for 1996–97. [25665]

  Mr. Waldegrave
  The cost to the Department, including its agencies, of early retirements and 684
  redundancies are borne from the Department's running costs provision.

  A detailed breakdown of the various costs could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  The total costs borne on the Department's running costs in 1993–94 and 1994–95 were £7 million and £9 million respectively. For 1995–96, the total amount is estimated at £7 million. Projections for 1996–97 will be determined during the coming public expenditure survey.

  Vessel Engine Capacity
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment he has made of whether the engine capacity registered by(a) British, (b) Spanish and (c) Dutch vessels under the multi-annual guidance targets is accurate; what steps are taken to check this in each country; and if he has asked the Commissioner to verify registered capacities under the programme. [25385]

  Mr. Jack
  It is the European Commission's responsibility to ensure that member states comply with Community obligations, and for member states authorities to ensure proper administration in relation to their own vessels. In the United Kingdom, it is the responsibility of the chief executive of the Marine Safety Agency to ensure that the details entered on a vessel's certificate of registry accurately reflect that vessel's characteristics. The characteristics of the engine of each vessel on the UK register are obtained by a surveyor approved by the Marine Safety Agency before registration of the vessel takes place.

  Where specific instances of discrepancies arise or are brought to my attention, they are taken up with the Commission or, in the case of a UK-registered vessel, with the Marine Safety Agency.

  Eastern European Fishing Fleets
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what information he has on the size of the fishing fleets of Bulgaria, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia; and what historic fishing rights each of these nations can claim in British or European waters before the Fishing Limits Act 1976. [25382]

  Mr. Jack
  The latest year for which information on the size of nations' fishing fleets is available is 1992, showing the following:

  Country

  Number of vessels

  Size

  Bulgaria

  38

  186,600 GRT

  Poland

  521

  249,079 GRT

  Latvia

  141

  343,236 GRT

  Lithuania

  162

  236,268 GRT

  Estonia

  249

  180,921 GRT

  Source: FAO fleet statistics.

  1 GRT = gross registered tonnage.

  Before the Fishery Limits Act 1976, British waters extended only to 12 miles. None of the above countries fished within our 12 mile limits, nor have they claimed historic fishing rights within the British fishing limits established in 1976. The EU currently has reciprocal fishing agreements with Poland and the three Baltic states, but these are confined to the Baltic sea. We have no record of Bulgarian vessels having fished in waters around the United Kingdom.

  Coarse Fish Close Season
  Sir Cranley Onslow
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what research into the likely effects of the ending of the coarse fish close season his Department has considered. [25595]

  Mr. Jack
  We have not commissioned any special research into the likely effects of ending the coarse fish close season. However, in coming to a conclusion on a recent proposal from the National Rivers Authority to dispense with the coarse fish close season on lakes, ponds and reservoirs, we took account of opinions expressed by a wide range of expert bodies. We also noted that in those parts of England and Wales in which the close season had already been dispensed with, there was no evidence that this had an adverse effect on either fisheries or fish.

  Bovine Immunodeficiency
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what survey he has made of research into BIV being undertaken in other countries. [25857]

  Mrs. Browning
  In September 1994, senior veterinarians from the Veterinary Investigation Service, and the virology department of the Central Veterinary Laboratory carried out a study tour of North America, where research into bovine immunodeficiency-like virus has been undertaken for a number of years. Discussions were held with the veterinary regulatory authorities in Washington and Ottawa and with veterinarians and research workers at the National Animal Disease Centre, Ames, Iowa; the National Cancer Institute, Frederick, Maryland; the Louisiana State university; the Animal Disease Research Institute, Ottawa; Ontario Veterinary college, Guelph; and the veterinary laboratory services, Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Guelph, Ontario.

  The veterinary regulatory authorities in the USA and Canada confirmed that they had no concerns whatsoever over food safety with respect to BIV and were unaware of any concern by the public health authorities with regard to BIV. They also confirmed that there was no scientific evidence that the lentivirus in question caused immunodeficiency in cattle.

  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment he has made of whether it has been proved that the BIV organism is destroyed by normal dairy pasteurization. [25855]

  Mrs. Browning
  Judging from the similarities with other lentiviruses, we would expect that bovine immunodeficiency-like virus would get into milk but that pasteurisation would kill it. We are carrying out experimental work at the Department's Central Veterinary Laboratory to investigate this hypothesis.

  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what research is being conducted into BIV and cross infection to humans. [25852]

  Mrs. Browning
  None. Bovine immunodeficiency-like virus infection of cattle has been known for a long time. There is no evidence that it affects humans, whether through contact with animals, through drinking milk or 686
  eating meat or indeed when injected into the body, as happened, accidentally, to two US researchers who suffered no ill effects. Experimental efforts in the USA to grow the virus in human cells have failed. It is characteristic of these types of viruses to be highly species specific.

  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what number and percentage of United Kingdom herds are infected by BIV. [25856]

  Mrs. Browning
  A limited laboratory investigation was carried out by the Central Veterinary Laboratory in 1990. Several hundred cattle sera, from a considerable number of cattle herds spread throughout Great Britain, were tested as part of a programme to develop a diagnostic test for bovine immunodeficiency-like virus. Approximately 10 per cent. of the samples tested were serologically positive for BIV using the tests being developed at that time. This level of infection is consistent with what has been found in other countries but the investigation was not structured nor were the results validated and for that reason it is not possible to estimate with any precision what is the actual level of incidence of BIV infection in the United Kingdom.

  A full-scale survey would currently be inappropriate, particularly in the absence of a specific and sensitive test suitable for widespread application.

  Environmentally Sensitive Areas
  Dr. Strang
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many hectares of land(a) are eligible for entry into each environmentally sensitive area in England and (b) have been entered into each tier of each environmentally sensitive areas in England. [25793]

  Mr. Waldegrave
  The information for environmentally sensitive areas in England is as follows:

  Eligible area in hectares

  Area currently under agreement in hectares

  Stage I ESAs (launched in 1987)

  Broads

  24,000

  Tier 1–8,596

  Tier 2–5,906

  Tier 3–354

  Tier 4–256

  Total

  15,112

  Pennine Dales

  39,100

  Tier 1–24,280

  Tier 2–1,198

  Total

  25,478

  Somerset Levels and Moors

  25,900

  Tier 1–10,630

  Tier 2–2,244

  Tier 3–881

  Total

  13,755

  South Downs

  51,700

  Tier 1–4,810

  Tier 2–408

  Tier 3–5,964

  Total

  11,182

  West Penwith

  6,900

  Tier 1–6,125

  687

  Eligible area in hectares

  Area currently under agreement in hectares

  Stage II ESAs (launched in 1988)

  Breckland

  51,600

  Tier 1–2,595

  Tier 2–99

  Tier 3–2,431

  Tier 4–281

  Total

  5,406

  Clun

  18,900

  Tier 1–12,125

  Tier 2–1,142

  Tier 3–178

  Total

  13,445

  North Peak

  50,500

  Tier 1–22,980

  Tier 2–11,244

  Total

  34,224

  Suffolk River Valleys

  32,600

  Tier 1–6,910

  Tier 2–1,607

  Tier 3–324

  Tier 4–98

  Total

  8,939

  Test Valley

  3,300

  Tier 1–934

  Tier 2–116

  Total

  1,050

  Stage III ESAs (launched in 1993)

  Avon Valley

  3,800

  Tier 1–572

  Tier 2–42

  Total

  614

  Exmoor

  67,700

  Tier 1–38,529

  Tier 2–931

  Total

  39,460

  Lake District

  219,300

  Tier 1–87,280

  Tier 2–4,066

  Total

  91,346

  North Kent Marshes

  11,600

  Tier 1–3,030

  Tier 2–599

  Total

  3,629

  South Wessex Downs

  38,300

  Tier 1–17,583

  Tier 2–1,218

  Total

  18,801

  South West Peak

  27,000

  Tier 1–11,279

  Tier 2–3,043

  Total

  14,322

  Stage IV ESAs (launched in 1994)

  Blackdown Hills

  32,200

  Tier 1–3,162

  Tier 2–49

  Total

  3,211

  Cotswold Hills

  66,100

  Tier 1–20,128

  Tier 2–939

  Total

  21,067

  688

  Eligible area in hectares

  Area currently under agreement in hectares

  Dartmoor

  89,000

  Tier 1–6,729

  Tier 2–324

  Total

  7,053

  Essex Coast

  23,000

  Tier 1–1,925

  Tier 2–115

  Tier 3–223

  Total

  2,263

  Shropshire Hills

  34,900

  Tier 1–7,035

  Tier 2–32

  Total

  7,067

  Upper Thames Tributaries

  18,000

  Tier 1–2,264

  Tier 2–312

  Tier 3–262

  Total

  2,838

  Dr. Strang
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many farms(a) are eligible to have land entered into each environmentally sensitive area in England and (b) have had land entered into each environmentally sensitive area in England.

  Mr. Waldegrave
  Records are not kept of the number of farms in each designated environmentally sensitive area in England which are eligible to enter the scheme.

  The number of agreements in each ESA in England is as follows:

  Number

  Stage I ESAs (launched in 1987)

  Broads

  740

  Pennine Dales

  716

  Somerset Levels and Moors

  888

  South Downs

  213

  West Penwith

  187

  Stage II ESAs (launched in 1988)

  Breckland

  113

  Clun

  195

  North Peak

  76

  Suffolk River Valleys

  396

  Test Valley

  32

  Stage III ESAs (launched in 1993)

  Avon Valley

  32

  Exmoor

  390

  Lake District

  812

  North Kent Marshes

  52

  South Wessex Downs

  130

  South West Peak

  320

  Stage IV ESAs (launched in 1994)

  Blackdown Hills

  126

  Cotswold Hills

  276

  Dartmoor

  156

  Essex Coast

  62

  Shropshire Hills

  123

  Upper Thames Tributaries

  106

  French Pig Sector (Illegal Aid)
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what progress has been made in relation to his representations to the EU for the recovery of illegal aid to the French pig sector. [25742]

  Mr. Jack
  After sustained pressure from the United Kingdom, the European Commission finally initiated article 93(2) procedure against two schemes in the pigmeat sector in April 1994. The two schemes were a FF30 million scheme for relieving pig producers of the high cost of commercial loans already taken out and a reduced rate loan arrangement through Stabiporc using Government funds, and Government guarantees for loans given by commercial banks and other organisations.

  The Commission's decisions announcing that it had found elements of both schemes to be illegal and requiring the repayment of the illegal aid were published on 8 and 10 November and 23 December 1994. The French Government are required to advise the Commission of steps they have taken to recovers the illegal aid.

  I understand that the Commission is in dialogue with the French Government. We shall persist with our pressure on the Commission to ensure that the French Government recover the aid which was illegally paid.

  Sheep Slaughter (France)
  Mr. Dowd
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what reports he has received on the recent slaughter in Paris of sheep exported from Britain; what assessment he has made of compliance with the EU directive on the slaughter of animals; what representations he has made to the French Government in the light of the article; and if he will make a statement. [25800]

  Mrs. Browning
  The allegations in a daily newspaper about the slaughter of sheep in Paris have been discussed with officials of the French Ministry of Agriculture. I am advised that such slaughtering elsewhere than in a slaughterhouse is illegal under French law, although the European directive on the protection of animals at slaughter permits it, subject to certain conditions. I understand that the French Government are discussing this matter with the relevant organisations and therefore, neither my right hon. Friend nor I believe that it is necessary to make representations to them on this matter.

  Farm and Conservation Grant Scheme
  Mr. Morley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what expenditure has been saved as a result of the ending of the farm and conservation grant scheme; and if that saving has been redirected to other areas of MAFF expenditure. [25744]

  Mr. Jack
  No decision has yet been made to discontinue the farm and conservation grant scheme. An official working group reviewing the development of environmental land management schemes in England has proposed that the F and CGS should not continue as a separate scheme in England after February 1996, but that capital grants for conservation purposes should then be integrated into the countryside stewardship scheme. The working group's proposals were published for public consultation on 18 May. Current expenditure on conservation grants under the F and CGS in England amounts to £4 million in a full year.
  690

  Majority Shareholdings
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list those companies in which the holder of his office is a majority shareholder which(a) are currently in existence and (b) have been wound up in the past five years. [25703]

  Mr. Waldegrave
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: None.

  Water Level Management Plans
  Sir Cranley Onslow
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) what steps his Department took to consult representatives angling organisations before publishing the procedural guide for operating authorities entitled water level management plans; [23103]

  (2) for what reasons no angling organisations are included in the list of useful contacts and addresses in annex II of his Department's guide water level management plans. [23104]

  Mr. Jack
  [holding answer 11 May 1995]: The main purpose of the procedural guide to which my right hon. Friend refers is to help flood defence authorities to draw up water level management plans in areas of conservation importance so as to balance the needs of flood defence, economic activity, and conservation. Such plans are prepared at local level and the guide emphasises the importance of consultations with all those affected, including recreational and sporting interests, during the preparation of a water level management plan for a particular area.

  Although representative angling organisations were not consulted prior to publication of the Ministry's procedural guide, such organisations should be consulted by local flood defence authorities when individual plans are in preparation. Annex II of the guide is not intended as an exhaustive list of all those who should be consulted, but to meet my right hon. Friend's point representative angling organisations and other recreational and sporting interests will be added when the guide is next reprinted.

EDUCATION

  Area Cost Adjustment
  Mr. Blunkett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education if she will list for each education authority(a) not in receipt and (b) in receipt of area cost adjustment for the last year that figures are available. [25953]

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The information requesed is set out in the attached lists.

  LEAs WHICH RECEIVE AREA COST ADJUSTMENT CITY OF LONDON

  Inner London Boroughs

  Camden

  Greenwich

  Hackney

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  Islington

  Kensington and Chelsea

  Lambeth

  Lewisham

  691

  Southwark

  Tower Hamlets

  Wandsworth

  Westminster

  Outer London Boroughs

  Barking

  Barnet

  Bexley

  Brent

  Bromley

  Croydon

  Ealing

  Enfield

  Haringey

  Harrow

  Havering

  Hillingdon

  Hounslow

  Kingston upon Thames

  Merton

  Newham

  Redbridge

  Richmond Upon Thames

  Sutton

  Waltham Forest

  Shires

  Bedfordshire

  Berkshire

  Buckinghamshire

  East Sussex

  Essex

  Hampshire

  Hertfordshire

  Kent

  Oxfordshire

  Surrey

  West Sussex

  Isle of Wight

  Isles of Scilly

  LEAs WHICH DO NOT RECEIVE AREA COST ADJUSTMENT

  Metropolitan Authorities

  Birmingham

  Coventry

  Dudley

  Sandwell

  Solihull

  Walsall

  Wolverhampton

  Knowsley

  Liverpool

  St. Helen's

  Sefton

  Wirral

  Bolton

  Bury

  Manchester

  Oldham

  Rochdale

  Salford

  Stockport

  692

  Tameside

  Trafford

  Wigan

  Barnsley

  Doncaster

  Rotherham

  Sheffield

  Bradford

  Calderdale

  Kirklees

  Leeds

  Wakefield

  Gateshead

  Newcastle upon Tyne

  North Tyneside

  South Tyneside

  Sunderland

  Shire Counties

  Avon

  Cambridgeshire

  Cheshire

  Cleveland

  Cornwall

  Cumbria

  Derbyshire

  Devon

  Dorset

  Durham

  Gloucestershire

  Hereford and Worcester

  Humberside

  Lancashire

  Leicestershire

  Lincolnshire

  Norfolk

  North Yorkshire

  orthamptonshire

  Northumberland

  Nottinghamshire

  Shropshire

  Somerset

  Staffordshire

  Suffolk

  Warwickshire

  Wiltshire

  Complaints
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education what policy and procedures exists for dealing with complaints against her Department by members of the public; when the policy was last updated; what time limit and target for dealing with such complaints her Department has; and what follow-up procedure exists where complainants are not satisfied with her Department's response to a complaint. [26224]

  Mr. Boswell
  Any complaint about the conduct of a member of the Department would be dealt with under the Department's agreed disciplinary procedures. These are set out in its terms and conditions handbook, which was
  693
  revised in 1994 and made available to all staff. If a complainant remains dissatisfied with the handling of a complaint, it is open to them to take further action through the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration.

  Information Technology Teachers
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many qualified information technology teachers there were in secondary schools in each year since 1979; and what proportion of the total number of teachers in this subject they represent. [25772]

  Mr. Robin Squire
  The information requested is available only for 1984, 1988 and 1992 from the secondary school staffing surveys. In those years, the number of full-time teachers who were teaching information technology, including computer studies, in maintained secondary schools in England and who had a post A-level qualification in information technology was as follows:

  Year

  Number of IT teachers (000)

  Number with an IT qualification (000)

  Percentage with qualification

  1984

  9.4

  2.3

  24

  1988

  12.1

  3.1

  26

  1992

  10.4

  2.8

  27

  The total number of full-time teachers with an information technology qualification, including those not teaching IT, in each year was:

  Year

  All teachers with an IT qualification (000)

  1984

  4.1

  1988

  6.4

  1992

  7.1

  It should be noted that the definition of information technology has changed slightly over the years, so the figures quoted may not be strictly comparable.

SOCIAL SECURITY

  VAT on Fuel (Compensation)
  Mr. Foulkes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, what is the total cost of the compensation for VAT on fuel given annually to women aged between 60 and 65 years. [24948]

  Mr. Roger Evans
  The information is not available.

  Benefit Fraud
  Mr. Etherington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will list, by town or city and region, all his Department's research trials, conducted since 1990, aimed or associated with trials testing procedures to prevent the fraudulent encashment of instruments of payment, giving(a) the cost of each trial, (b) the target population, (c) the period of trial, (d) other joint/collaborative agencies and (e) schemes involving incentive payments to participants. [24985]

  Mr. Arbuthnot
  This information is laid out by geographical area since January 1994, the first date for 694
  which information is available. No specific target population was sought, since this was not an important factor in any of the trials.

  Devon

  Hole punching of order books by Postmasters prior to their return to BA offices, to render them valueless.

  Cost: £ Nil

  Period: 05 September 1994–02 December 1994

  Other agencies: Post Office Counters Ltd.

  Incentive involved: No

  Sunderland

  Identity trial

  Cost: £ Nil

  Period: 06 March 1995 due to end 03 June 1995

  Other agencies: Post Office Counters Ltd.

  Incentives involved: No

  London and Clyde Valley

  Secure delivery order books

  Cost: £ Nil

  Period: 10 October 1994–02 December 1994

  Other agencies: Post Office Counters Ltd.

  Incentives involved: No

  London

  Alert-Computerised system to prevent fraudulent encashment of lost or stolen order books.

  Cost: £2.4 million

  Period: 30 November 1992–31 August 1994

  Other agencies: Post Office Counters Ltd.

  Incentives involved: No

  London

  Secure delivery of order books

  Cost: £21,936

  Period: 22 March 1993–02 April 1995

  Other agencies: Post Office Counters Ltd. and Royal Mail

  Incentives involved: No

  Manchester

  UV lamps—Post Office use

  Cost: £11,808

  Period: 04 July 1994–31 August 1994

  Other agencies: Post Office Counters Ltd

  Incentives involved: No

  Birmingham

  Post Office Reward Scheme

  Cost: £18,594

  Period:25 October 1993–29 August 1994

  Other Agencies: Post Office Counters Ltd

  Incentives involved: Yes

  Midlands Area

  Post Office Reward Scheme

  Cost: £95,931

  Period: 30 August 1994–ongoing

  Other agencies: Post Office counters Ltd.

  Incentives involved: Yes

  Benefit Recipients
  Ms Short
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what percentage of claimants for each benefit were(a) male and (b) female for the latest available

  Figures rounded to nearest Thousand

  Benefit

  Total claimants (000s unless indicated)

  Total males (000s)

  Males as percentage of total claimants

  Total females (000s)

  Females as percentage of total claimants

  Date of enquiry

  Non-means tested benefits

  Attendance allowance1

  996

  286

  29

  710

  71

  31 March 1994

  Child benefit

  6,905

  227

  3

  6,678

  97

  31 December 1994

  Child's special allowance3

  69

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  31 December 1994

  Disability living allowance1

  1,491

  769

  52

  723

  48

  28 February 1995

  Guardian's allowance3

  2,125

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  31 December 1995

  Invalid care allowance

  127

  39

  31

  88

  69

  31 March 1995

  Industrial death benefit

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  Industrial injuries disablement2

  209

  180

  86

  29

  14

  3 April 1993

  Invalidity benefit

  1,580

  1,156

  73

  424

  27

  3 April 1993

  Maternity allowance

  16

  —

  —

  16

  100

  31 March 1993

  Non contributory retirement pension

  28

  6

  20

  22

  80

  30 September 1994

  One parent benefit

  925

  80

  9

  845

  91

  31 December 1994

  Other industrial injuries benefits3

  312

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  1994

  Reduced earnings allowance/retirement allowance2

  155

  125

  81

  30

  19

  3 April 1993

  Retirement pension

  10,139

  3,579

  35

  6,560

  65

  30 September 1994

  Sickness benefit

  534

  312

  58

  222

  42

  3 April 1993

  Severe disablement allowance

  316

  121

  38

  195

  62

  3 April 1993

  Unemployment benefit

  2,341

  1,784

  76

  556

  24

  10 November 1994

  Widow's benefit

  324

  —

  —

  324

  100

  30 September 1994

  War pension4

  99

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  31 March 1995

  Means tested benefits

  Council tax benefit5

  5,641

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  30 November 1994

  Disability working allowance

  5

  3

  60

  2

  40

  31 October 1994

  Family credit6

  578

  250

  43

  327

  57

  October 1994

  Housing benefit

  4,711

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  30 November 1994

  Rent rebate

  3,009

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  30 November 1994

  Rent allowance

  1,702

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  n/a

  30 November 1994

  Income support

  5,675

  2,702

  48

  2,973

  52

  May 1994

  Notes:

  1 Beneficiaries.

  2 Assessments current at 3 April 1993.

  3 Extract figures quoted.

  4 All claims includes first and subsequent claims.

  5 Figure includes 53,000 second adult rebate cases.

  6 Figures based on sex of main earner.

  7 Male and female recipients may not total due to rounding.

  Retirements and Redundancies
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many staff of(a) the Department of Social Security and (b) agencies for which the DSS is responsible (i) took early retirement, (ii) took voluntary redundancy, (iii) took compulsory redundancy and (iv)

  Retirement on medical grounds

  Compulsory redundancy

  Other early retirement/voluntary redundancy

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1993–94

  1994–95

  Department of Social Security1

  472

  650

  64

  41

  352

  823

  Benefits Agency

  395

  513

  0

  0

  207

  294

  Child Support Agency

  13

  21

  0

  0

  6

  4

  696
  year. [25138]

  Mr. Hague
  The information is in table.

  were retired on medical grounds in (a) 1993–94 and (b) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25420]

  Mr. Hague
  The information is not readily available in the form requested and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. The available information is in the table.
  697

  Retirement on medical grounds

  Compulsory redundancy

  Other early retirement/voluntary redundancy

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1993–94

  1994–95

  Contributions Agency

  37

  49

  0

  0

  67

  244

  Information Technology Services Agency

  15

  27

  0

  0

  50

  246

  Resettlement Agency

  2

  0

  64

  41

  15

  15

  War Pensions Agency

  —

  14

  0

  0

  —

  2

  Notes:

  No projections are available for 1995–96.

  1 The number of retirements and redundancies in the executive agencies are included in the departmental figures.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the annual cost to the Department of staff leaving under redundancy/early retirement schemes to incorporate (i) added years lump sum payments, (ii) redundancy payments, (iii) pension payments including enhancements and (iv) any other special arrangements(a) 1993–94, (b) 1994–95, and projected for (c) 1995–96 and (d) 1996–97. [25638]

  Mr. Hague
  The costs to the Department of early retirement and redundancies are borne from the Department's running costs provision.

  A detailed break-down of the various costs could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  The total costs borne on the Department's running costs in 1993–94 and 1994–95 were £23.975 million and £17.903 million—provisional—respectively. For 1995–96, the amount is estimated at £22.607 million. Projections for 1996–97 will be determined during the coming public expenditure survey.

  Motability
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what measures are in place to ensure the best use of public money by Motability and its associate companies and charities and that those bodies are accountable to his Department; and if he will make a statement. [25947]

  Mr. Hague
  Motability is an independent charity which receives grant in aid from the Department for all its administration costs and part of its grant-making provision. A comprehensive financial agreement exists between the Department and Motability which has been drawn up in accordance with Government accounting procedures. This gives Motability the responsibility for ensuring it obtains good value for money in its dealings with suppliers to the scheme.

  Contracting Out
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what work has been contracted out(a) by his Department and (b) by agencies for which his Department is responsible in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95 and (iii) the projected figures for 1995–96. [25657]

  Mr. Roger Evans
  The value of work previously carried out by civil servants and contracted out by the Department and each of its agencies in 1993–94 and 1994–95 is shown in the tables. In 1995–96, we will be examining running costs of some £166 million with a view to contracting out. We will examine a further £27 million with a view to inviting in-house bids, together with bids from the private sector, in market tests. We
  698
  cannot predict in advance of the market tests the value of work that will be contracted out.

  Financial year April 1993–March 1994

  Value £

  Benefits Agency

  Travel Services

  200,000

  Accommodation and Office Services

  840,000

  Training

  3,609,191

  Storage Archives

  490,000

  Headquarters

  Accommodation and Office Services

  722,734

  Facilities Management

  Accommodation and Office Services

  2,114,000

  Information Technology Services Agency

  Audit

  1,200,000

  Contributions Agency

  Cleaning (Emerson house)

  732,202

  Financial year April 1994–March 1995

  Benefits Agency

  Publishing

  4,326,046

  Accommodation and Office Services (19 Contracts)

  43,707,618

  Storage Printed Material

  2,711,019

  Information and Technology Services Agency

  Security Guarding

  422,000

  Area Computer Centre

  6,100,000

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security for each piece of work subject to a bidding process under the auspices of(a) his Department and (b) agencies for which his Department is responsible (i) where work was contracted out, who were the successful bidders and (ii) which contracts were won by in-house bidders in (1) 1993–94, (2) 1994–95 and (3) 1995–96. [25651]

  Mr. Roger Evans
  The Department and its agencies procure a wide range of goods and services by competitive tender. I have provided information showing the outcomes of competitive tenders of work carried out by civil servants and a copy has been placed in the Library.

  Consultants
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the level of expenditure on consultancy by(a) his Department and (b) agencies for which his Department is responsible for (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25644]
  699
  Mr. Hague
  The available information is in the table. Information on projected levels of expenditure for 1995–96 is not available.

  Financial Year

  Agency

  1993–94 £

  1994–95 £

  Benefits Agency

  8,111,715

  5,730,220

  Contributions Agency

  3,170,895

  1,113,425

  Information Technology Services Agency

  17,996,000

  9,660,000

  Child Support Agency

  2,300,000

  7,426,938

  Resettlement Agency

  95,111

  65,203

  War Pensions Agency

  1—

  456,798

  Sub totals

  31,673,721

  24,452,584

  DSS Headquarters

  2,322,877

  1,653,173

  Grand total

  233,996,598

  26,105,757

  1 War Pensions Agency set up 1 April 1994. Consultancy expenditure for 1993–94 included in Benefits Agency total.

  2 This figure has been adjusted from those previously quoted due to accounting adjustments.

  Family Credit
  Mr. Chidgey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what steps his Department are taking to inform family credit claimants of the extra money they are entitled from July for working full time. [25808]

  Mr. Roger Evans
  We plan to undertake extensive publicity to inform people about the new premium for working 30 hours or more a week on family credit and the associated extra help in housing benefit, council tax benefit and disability working allowance. People already receiving family credit or disability working allowance will receive a new claim pack shortly before their renewal claim is due to be made. The claim pack will advise them of the new premium.

  We plan also to provide information to advisors of people likely to be affected to inform them of the new premium.

  Notes:

  1. Because approval for expenditure on the campaign cannot be given until regulations have been laid, we cannot be explicit at this stage on the form the advertising will take.

  2. The new claim pack is planned to be available a few days in advance of the change.

  Mr. Chidgey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what percentage of family credit claims from employees currently take five working days to be dealt with from the time of the claim being received by his Department; and if he will give the figures for each working day up 30 working days. [25807]

  Mr. Roger Evans
  The administration of family credit is a matter for Mr. Ian Magee, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from Ian Magee to Mr. David Chidgey, dated 25 May 1995:
  The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the clearance times of claims made by employees to Family Credit.
  The table below details the information that you have requested. Such figures are produced on a monthly basis and I have therefore provided information for the month ending 30 April 1995 which is the latest full month available. The figures provided relate only to employees and do not include claims made by self-employed people.
  700

  Days

  Percentage cleared

  5

  47.2

  6

  52.3

  7

  54.8

  8

  57.7

  9

  63.9

  10

  67.1

  11

  71.5

  12

  73.6

  13

  75.6

  14

  79.4

  15

  81.1

  16

  83.7

  17

  84.8

  18

  85.8

  19

  87.8

  20

  88.6

  21

  90.0

  22

  90.5

  23

  91.0

  24

  92.0

  25

  92.5

  26

  93.1

  27

  93.4

  28

  93.7

  29

  94.3

  30

  94.5

  I hope you find this reply helpful

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Asylum Seekers
  Mrs. Roche
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 16 May,Official Report, columns 185–88, if he will publish a breakdown of the location of asylum seekers as at 10 May listed as 'other' in table 3 of the answer. [25810]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  This information is not readily available as comprehensive statistics are not currently compiled on all the places of detention of persons who have sought asylum. For this reason, only the main places were separately identified.

  Mrs. Roche
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 16 May,Official Report, columns 185–88, when he now expects to phase out the detention of asylum seekers in prisons and police cells. [25811]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  The plans to expand and improve the detention accommodation for which the immigration service is responsible will reduce the need to hold immigration detainees in prisons and police cells in the future.

  There will, however, always be a need for some immigration detainees to be accommodated in prisons, either because of known violent tendencies or because of a need for closer supervision than can be provided in immigration detention centres. Similarly, there will be a continuing need to use police cells for the initial detention of immigration offenders detected within the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Robert Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum-seekers have been removed to Sweden on safe third country grounds since 26 July 1993; and how many of those so removed have been returned to the United Kingdom by the Swedish authorities. [26174]
  701
  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  The available information identifies 29 persons who had been refused asylum in the United Kingdom on safe third country grounds having been removed to Sweden since 26 July 1993. Of these, four have been returned to the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Robert Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for asylum are currently outstanding. [26180]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  As at 31 April 1995, there were 57,610 applications for asylum outstanding in the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Gerrard
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 15 February,Official Report, column 695, to the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham (Mrs. Gillan), if he will identify the evidence which indicates that in the bulk of cases the asylum application is not made immediately after leave to enter or remain has been granted, but shortly before it is due to expire. [25692]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  An analysis of the available information for 1994 suggests that some 60 per cent. of asylum applications made by in-time visitors had not been made within one month of arrival in the United Kingdom, and about 40 per cent. had not been made within three months.

  Immigration Officers
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to increase the establishment of immigration officers at Leeds—Bradford airport; and if he will make a statement. [26139]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 31 March,Official Report, column 860. As part of the routine review of staffing and work load levels, the complement of immigration officers at Leeds—Bradford has recently been increased by one.

  Eurostar
  Mr. Robert Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for asylum have been made by individuals arriving at Waterloo railway station on board Eurostar trains since January. [26181]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  Between 1 January 1995 and 24 May 1995, a total of 148 applications for asylum were made by passengers arriving at Waterloo international terminal on Eurostar trains.

  Detention Costs
  Mr. Robert Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 18 May,Official Report, column 364, what was the total amount of detention costs reclaimed from carrying companies in (a) the most recent financial year for which information is available, (b) 1994 and (c) 1995 to date. [26273]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  The total amount of detention costs reclaimed from carrying companies in the financial year 1994–95 is £674,538.51. The total for 1994 is £597,125.21, and the total for this year to 23 May is £289,136.07.

  Data Protection
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 8 March,Official Report, column 181, if he will make a statement on the parameters applying to filing systems under the draft data protection directive; and if he will make a statement on the implementation of the data protection directive. [26448]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  In implementing the directive in respect of manual data, member states must have regard to the definition of a "personal data filing system" contained in article 2. Subject to this, the directive allows member states some flexibility in determining precisely the types of manual records to which the directive should apply. Once the final form of the directive is known, we shall be consulting widely on how these and other provisions should be implemented in United Kingdom law.

  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the new offence of procuring unregistered disclosures, under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994; and what discussions he has had with the Data Protection Registrar in relation to this offence. [26449]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  On the information available to me, I believe that the new offence, which was brought into force in February this year, has had a positive effect upon the unacceptable activities at which it was aimed. The Data Protection Registrar has kept Home Office officials closely informed of her plans for enforcing the offence.

  Equine Crime Unit
  Mr. Harry Greenway
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what measures he is taking to enhance the work and performance of the Metropolitan equine intelligence unit; and if he will make a statement. [25596]

  Mr. Maclean
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: I understand from the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis that he plans to make more resources available to the equine crime unit, including personnel and information technology. The unit is now based in New Scotland Yard.

  Immigration
  Mr. David Shaw
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to introduce application forms for use by foreign nationals wishing to apply for leave to remain in the United Kingdom. [26623]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  Application forms will enable the Immigration Department to provide a more efficient service to applicants at a lower cost to the public purse. Genuine applicants will receive a speedier decision while those not entitled to further leave to stay will be refused more quickly, strengthening the immigration control. From 5 June, application forms for requests for limited leave to remain will be available from the application forms unit of the Immigration Department. Forms for settlement applications are in preparation. The scheme will not include applications under European Community law or applications for asylum. The operation of the scheme will be reviewed later this year following which we envisage making the use of application forms compulsory.

  Departmental Performance
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what performance indicators and performance targets there are for measuring the performance of his Department in(a) answering letters from members of the public and (b) answering telephone calls from members of the public; how performance is monitored; and what are the latest figures for performance measured against the target set. [26234]

  Mr. Howard
  Individual units and agencies are required to set clear targets for the time taken to deal with correspondence from the public and to monitor performance against those standards. The targets set range from five to 30 working days. Some parts of the Department use computerised tracking systems to monitor performance, and others take samples periodically. No records are however kept centrally of performance against targets.

  There is no similar system of targets for answering telephone calls in most parts of the Department, but standards relating to courtesy and helpfulness have been laid down.

  Complaints
  Ms. Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what policy and procedures exist for dealing with complaints against his Department by members of the public; when his Department last updated its policy; what time limit and target for dealing with such complaints his Department has; and what follow-up procedure exists where complainants are not satisfied with his Department's response to a complaint. [26218]

  Mr. Howard
  There are various arrangements for dealing with complaints in different parts of the Department. These involve a range of time limits and targets. For example, the UK Passport Agency aims to deal fully with all problems raised within 15 working days, or to acknowledge them within five working days if they are not straightforward, and the Immigration and Nationality Department aims to respond within eight weeks of receiving a complaint.

  The IND complaints system is monitored by an independent Complaints Audit Committee, which ensures that procedures are working effectively. The leaflets on complaints procedures produced by the Passport Agency and by IND make it clear that complainants who are not satisfied with the response they receive can raise the matter with the Home Office Minister responsible for the service, or with the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration.

  Contracting out
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for each piece of work subject to a bidding process under the auspices of(a) the Home Office and (b) agencies for which the Home Office is responsible where work was contracted out, who were the successful bidders; and which contracts were won by in-house bidders in (i) 1993–94; (ii) 1994–95; and (iii) 1995–96. [25523]

  Mr. Howard
  The table set out, for 1993–94 and 1994–95, the results of those "Competing for Quality" exercises in the Home Office, including the Prison Service, which proceeded to competition.
  704

  Activity

  Result

  (i) 1993–94—Prison Service

  Court Escort and Custody Services—Metropolitan Area

  Contract awarded to Securior Services

  Doncaster Prison

  Contract awarded to Premier Prison Services

  Manchester Prison

  In-house win

  (ii) 1993–94—rest of Home Office

  Statistical Data Collection

  In-house win

  Internal Audit

  In-house win

  Immigration and Nationality Department Security Guards

  In-house win

  (iii) 1994–95—Prison Service

  Buckley Hall Prison

  Contract awarded to Group 4

  Court Escort and Custody Services—East Anglia, the North West and North Wales

  Contract awarded to Group 4

  Facilities Management at the Prison Service College, Newbold Revel

  In-house win for administration, works and ground maintenance. Contract awarded to Taylorplan Services for catering and housekeeping

  IT Helpdesk

  Contract awarded to Serco

  (iv) 1994–95—rest of Home Office

  Central Typing Services

  In-house win

  Records Storage and Retrieval

  In-house win

  Administrative Computer Services

  Contract awarded to Sema Group plc

  Central Training Services

  In-house win

  Central Reprographics and Design and Illustration Services

  Service Level Agreement awarded to Her Majesty's Stationery Office (HMSO)

  Central Office Keeping and Messengerial Services

  In-house win

  Immigration and Nationality Department Typing Services

  In-house win

  Immigration and Nationality Department Messengerial and Reprographic Services

  In-house win

  Immigration and Nationality Department File Management

  Contract awarded to Britannia Data Management (BDM)

  705
  No contracts or service level agreements have yet been awarded as a result of "Competing for Quality" exercises in 1995–96.

  The estimated annual savings figures arising so far from the "Competing for Quality" programme since April 1992 are £19 million for the Prison Service and £11 million for the rest of the Home Office.

  A substantial number of competitions also take place outside the "Competing for Quality" programme, mainly to meet requirements for a wide range of specialist services. Information on the results of these competitions is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Dangerous Dogs Act
  Mr. Barry Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what has been the total cost so far of keeping dogs held under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in kennels; and if he will make a statement; [25671]

  (2) what has been the total cost so far of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991; and if he will make a statement. [25670]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  Information on the cost to the police, local authorities, the Crown Prosecution Service, and the courts of operating the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is not held centrally.

  Staff
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what changes there have been in the number of staff employed by (i) the Home Office and (ii) each agency for which the Home Office is responsible in(a) 1993–94 and (b) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96;.[25496]

  (2) what changes there have been in the number of staff in employment by grade in (a) his Department and (b) each agency for which his Department is responsible in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96; [25632]

  (3) how many staff of (a) the Home Office and (b) agencies for which the Home Office is responsible, were employed on a casual or short-term basis in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95 and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25514]

  Mr. Howard
  The numbers of permanent and casual staff employed by my Department and each of its executive agencies in 1993–94, projected outturn for 1994–95, and plans for 1995–96 are published in my Department's annual report, a copy of which is in the Library. No projections broken down by grade are available.

  Contracting Out
  Ms. Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what work has been contracted out by (i) his Department and (ii) by agencies for which the Department is responsible in(a) 1993–94, (b) 1994–95 and projected for 1995–96. [25521]

  Mr. Howard
  Details of work contracted out by my Department and agencies for which my Department is responsible for the specified years, are as follows:
  706
  1993–94

  i. Court Escorts— Greater London (Area 3).

  ii. HMP Doncaster

  iii. Education services in some prison establishments following the Further and Higher Education Act.

  iv. HMP Reading (staff and inmate catering).

  1994–95

  i. Campsfield House Immigration Detention Centre

  ii HMP Buckley Hall

  iii. Banking Services

  iv. Court Escorts—East Anglia (Area 4).

  v. Court Escorts—Merseyside, Greater Manchester, North Wales (Area 6).

  vi. Legal Services—Fire Service College.

  vii. Radio link installation and maintenance—Police Department.

  viii. Immigration and Nationality Department—File storage and retrieval services.

  ix. Building support services—Forensic Science Service

  x. Administrative Computer Services.

  xi. IT Helpdesk.

  Projected work— 1995–96

  i. Court Escorts—South West, South Wales (Area 1).

  ii. Court Escorts—South, South East (Area 2)

  iii. Court Escorts—West Midlands, Mid Wales (Area 5).

  iv. HMP Bridgend—Design, Construct, Manage and Finance.

  v. HMP Fazakerley—Design, Construct, Manage and Finance

  vi. HMP Lowdham Grange—Rebuild on Existing site.

  vii. HMP Coldingley—Staff/Inmate catering and prison shop.

  viii. HMP Brixton—Staff Catering

  ix. HMP Wealstun—Staff catering and prison shop.

  x. HMP Highpoint—Prison Shop

  xi. Transport for Police Staff College Bramshill.

  Information on low-value work that has been contracted out during the period specified is not recorded centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Talbot Bail Hostel
  Mr. John Morris
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the report on the Port Talbot bail hostel will be published. [25406]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  Early in the summer.

  Trespassers
  Mrs. Gorman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions the police have used their discretionary power to direct trespassers to leave land since 8 November 1994. [25539]

  Mr. Maclean
  This information is not available centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Lewis Probation Centre
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received, and what consultations he has had, concerning the closure of Lewis probation centre, Neville street, Riverside, Cardiff; and what proposals he has to fund alternative specialist provision. [25601]
  707
  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  My right hon. and learned Friend has received no representations concerning the decision of the South Glamorgan probation committee to relocate its probation centre, with Home Office capital grant support, from Lewis street to Westgate street, Cardiff.

  Fire Safety
  Mr. Beith
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what plans he has to reform the legislation in respect of Crown buildings which require a fire certificate but are not obliged to apply for one; and if he will make a statement; [25861]

  (2) when he expects to lay before the House the Fire Precautions (Places of Work) Regulations to be made under section 12 of the Fire Precautions Act 1971. [25862]

  Mr. Nicholas Baker
  Action on both these issues will depend on the outcome of the Government's consideration of the recommendations of the interdepartmental review of fire safety legislation and enforcement on which we hope to make an announcement shortly.

  Mentally Ill Offenders
  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many places were available in secure units for mentally ill offenders(a) in 1990 and (b) in the latest year for which figures are available. [26081]

  Mr. Bowis
  I have been asked to reply.

  In 1990, there were 572 places in medium secure units. By March 1995, this had increased to 792. The completion of our centrally funded building programme, to which we have allocated more than £47 million between 1991 and 1995, will take the total to over 1,150 by the end of 1996. There are also about 450 places in interim secure psychiatric units, many of which are of medium secure standard, and others which are funded by health authorities in independent sector facilities.

  In addition, there are about 1,600 places in the three special hospitals at Ashworth, Broadmoor and Rampton. The number of secure places in local hospitals is not recorded centrally but is estimated at about 2,000.

  There were no purpose-built NHS medium secure places in 1979, despite the fact that the Glancy committee had recommended them in its 1974 report.

WALES

  Industrial Development
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales, pursuant to his oral answer of 24 April,Official Report, columns 504–5, concerning Government grants and locational incentives, if he will ensure that no jobs are lost in the food processing industry in Wales as a direct displacement arising from grant-aided new jobs being created in the same industrial sector in Northern Ireland. [24950]

  Mr. Redwood
  When applications for assistance are being assessed displacement is always considered and the same criteria apply throughout the United Kingdom. The hon. Gentleman has written to me about a particular case and I will reply to him as soon as possible.

  Water Treatment Directive
  Mr. Ainger
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) if he will list those areas of the Welsh coastline that have been designated(a) less sensitive and (b) high natural dispersion areas under the urban waste water treatment directive, 91/27 I/EEC; and if he will make a statment; [25991]

  (2) what criteria has been used to designate those areas of the Welsh coastline as less and high natural dispersion areas under the urban waste water treatment directive, 91/271/EEC; and if he will make a statement; [25993]

  (3) what plans he has to reclassify the Severn and Afan estuaries as coastal waters under the urban waste water treatment directive, 91/271/EEC, and what practical effect reclassification will have on existing or future sewage discharges in these estuaries [25992]

  Mr. Gwilym Jones
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 18 May 1994 by my hon. Friend the Minister of State for the Environment and Countryside, columns 511–12.

  The criteria for identifying high natural dispersion areas—otherwise known as less sensitive areas—are set out in annex II B of the urban waste water treatment directive. A map showing all the areas identified in England and Wales as high natural dispersion areas was placed in the Library of the House. Maps defining, for the purposes of the directive, the outer limits of estuaries, including the Severn and Afan, are available for inspection at the National Rivers Authority's principal offices. The Government have no plans to redefine these limits.

  Staff
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) what changes there have been in the numbers of staff employed by(a) the Welsh Office and (b) agencies for which the Welsh Office is responsible, listing the changes in the number of staff agency by agency in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what changes are projected for 1995–96. [25060]

  (2) what changes there have been in the number of staff in employment by grade in (a) his office and (b) each agency for which his office is responsible in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96 [25625]

  (3) how many staff of (a) the Welsh Office and (b) agencies for which the Welsh Office is responsible, were employed on a casual or short-term basis in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25490]

  Mr. Redwood
  The numbers of permanent and casual staff employed by my Department and Cadw in 1993–94, projected outturn for 1994–95 and plans for 1995–96 are published in my Department's annual report, a copy of which is in the Library of the House.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many posts were lost in(a) the Welsh Office and (b) agencies for which the Welsh Office is responsible, listing the total lost posts agency by agency in (i) 1993– 94 and (ii) 1994–95; and how many posts are proposed to be lost in 1995–96. [25082]

  Mr. Redwood
  This information is not held centrally.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many staff of(a) the Welsh Office and (b) agencies
  709
  for which the Welsh Office is responsible (i) took early retirement, (ii) took voluntary redundancy, (iii) took compulsory redundancy and (iv) were retired on medical

  Welsh Office

  Cadw

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1995–96

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1995–96

  Early Retirement

  4

  39

  16

  —

  1

  —

  Redundancy

  9

  25

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Ill Health

  19

  28

  3

  3

  3

  1

  32

  92

  19

  3

  4

  1

  These figures include those who chose redundancy as an alternative to employment at other locations. Projected figures are not available.
  710
  grounds in (1) 1993–94 and (2) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25479]

  Mr. Redwood
  The information is set out as follows:

TREASURY

  Debt Management
  Mr. Matthew Banks
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on Government debt management. [26624]

  Mr. Nelson
  Yes. The current tax rules for gilts and bonds inhibit the development of new types of gilts and bonds and make the introduction of an official gilt strips market impossible. They also offer scope for tax avoidance and hence necessitate lengthy and complex anti-avoidance legislation.

  The Inland Revenue has therefore today published a consultative document outlining a much simpler system, under which all returns on gilts and bonds would be taxed as income. This would also provide a consistent framework for the taxation of new types of bonds and gilts.

  Reform on these lines is a necessary precondition for the introduction of an official gilt strips market. The Bank of England is today publishing a consultative document on the introduction of a strips market.

  The consultative period will end on 30 June and the Government will make an announcement shortly afterwards on how they intend to proceed.

  Copies of both consultative documents have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

  Environmental Satellite Accounts
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has set a date for the establishment within the Central Statistical Office of a new unit to develop a pilot system of environmental satellite accounts linked to national accounts. [25293]

  Mr Nelson
  The Central Statistical Office is in the course of establishing the unit which will carry out this development.

  Real Net Capital Stocks
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will provide estimates of real net capital stocks by industry at 1990 replacement cost for each year since 1979. [25197]

  Mr. Nelson
  Estimates of real net capital stock by industry at 1990 replacement cost are unavailable.

  Estimates of gross capital stock by industry at 1990 replacement cost are shown in table 14.8 of "United Kingdom National Accounts", a copy of which is available in the House of Commons Library.

  Sterling-dollar Exchange Rate
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the change in the real exchange rate of the dollar to the pound in terms of relative export unit values for manufactures in the second quarter of 1994 compared to the first quarter of 1980; and what estimate he has made of the effect of this change on the balance of trade between(a) the United States of America and (1) the world and (2) the United Kingdom and (b) the United Kingdom and (1) the United States of America and (2) the world. [25675]

  Mr. Nelson
  The sterling-dollar real exchange rate in terms of export unit values for manufactures can be calculated from data available on the Central Statistical 712
  Office database, which can be accessed through the Library of the House.

  The balance of trade between countries depends on a variety of factors, including price and non-price competitiveness, domestic demand, and overseas demand, none of which are easy to isolate.

  Retirements and Redundancies
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been the annual cost to the Treasury of staff leaving each Department under redundancy or early retirement schemes, to incorporate(a) added years lump sum payments, (b) redundancy payments, (c) pension payments, including enhancements and (d) other special arrangements for (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95, (iii) projected for 1995–96 and (iv) projected for 1996–97. [25471]

  Mr. Nelson
  The costs of early retirement and redundancies are borne from individual Departments' running costs provision in respect of their own staff. But in the case of individuals leaving the civil service in the period 1 October 1994 to 31 March 1997, Departments will bear 20 per cent. of such costs, with the remaining 80 per cent. being covered by the Treasury, through the civil superannuation vote, as announced in the civil service White Paper (Cm 2627).

  For 1994–95, the cost to the civil superannuation vote of the 80:20 central funding scheme was £26.9 million. Provision for £150 million has been taken in main estimates for 1995–96. Projections for 1996–97 will be determined during the coming public expenditure survey.

  Contracting Out
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer for each piece of work subject to a bidding process under the auspices of(a) the Treasury and (b) agencies for which the Treasury is responsible (i) who the successful bidders were when work was contracted out and (ii) which contracts were won by in-house bidders in (1) 1993–94, (2) 1994–95 and (3) 1995–96. [25559]

  Mr. Nelson
  The table shows the work subjected to competition by the Treasury under the "Competing for Quality" initiative, who won the contracts and in which year.

  Successful Bidders

  Contract

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1995–96

  Library Services

  In house Team

  Nil

  Nil

  Touche Ross

  Internal Audit

  Price Waterhouse

  Nil

  Nil

  Security Guarding

  Nil

  SAFE

  Nil

  Mortgage Holders (Compensation)
  Mr. Wray
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has to compensate mortgage holders unable to meet their mortgage costs owing to rises in interest rates. [24222]

  Mr. Nelson
  [holding answer 24 May 1995]: The Government have no such plans. Home ownership is very affordable in the UK: less than one third of the total increase in base rates since September 1994 has been passed through by building societies to average variable mortgage rates. Even allowing for that increase, the overall reduction in mortgage interest rates since October

  713
  1990 has resulted in a net saving of £130 per month for the average mortgage holder. Fixed-rate mortgages are available for borrowers who want certainty about the level of their mortgage payments over a given period.

  Taxation
  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will publish estimates for the revenue cost/yield in 1996–97 and for a full year of levying a new top rate of tax of(a) 30 per cent., (b) 35 per cent., (c) 45 per cent., (d) 50 per cent., (e) 55 per cent., (f) 60 per cent., and imposing it on incomes above (i) £27,825, (ii) £30,000, (iii) £40,000, (iv) £50,000, (v) £60,000, (vi) £70,000, (vii) £80,000, (viii) £90,000, (ix) £100,000 and, (x) £110,000 (xi) £120,000, (xii) £130,000, (xiii) £140,000 and, (xiv) £150,000, and assuming that where the new top rate is lower than 40 per cent., the 40 per cent. band is abolished, and where it is higher, the 40 per cent. band remains in place; [23349]

  (2) if he will provide estimates for the revenue cost or yield in 1995–96 and for a full year of levying a new top rate of tax of (a) 30 per cent., (b) 35 per cent., (c) 45 per cent., (d) 50 per cent., (e) 55 per cent. and (f) 60 per cent. and imposing it on incomes above (i) £27,825, (ii) £30,000, (iii) £40,000, (iv) £50,000, (v) £60,000, (vi) £70,000, (vii) £80,000, (viii) £90,000, (ix) £100,000, (x) £110,000 (xi) £120,000, (xii) £130,000, (xiii) £140,000 and (xiv) £150,000 assuming that where the new top rate is lower than 40 per cent., the 40 per cent. band is abolished, and where it is higher, the 40 per cent. band remains in place. [23975]

  Sir George Young
  [holding answer 9 May 1995]: To provide all of the details sought could be done only at disproportionate cost. Therefore, the table gives available estimates showing the variation in revenue costs over the specified ranges of tax rates and bands of taxable income. These estimates do not allow for any behavioural changes that might result from the introduction of the new tax rate.

  £ billion

  Full year revenue cost (-)/yield (+) at 1995–96 levels1 Higher rate

  Lower limit taxable income £

  30 per cent.

  45 per cent.

  60 per cent.

  24,300

  -4.7

  2.4

  9.3

  50,000

  -6.2

  1.0

  3.9

  70,000

  -6.5

  0.7

  2.7

  100,000

  -6.8

  0.5

  1.9

  1 The figures include consequential effects on the yield of capital gains tax.

  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will estimate the revenue yield in 1995– 96 and in a full year of introducing an alternative minimum tax of(a) 20 per cent., (b) 25 per cent., (c) 30 per cent. and (d) 35 per cent. at the levels of income of (i) £50,000, (ii) £60,000, (iii) £70,000, (iv) £80,000, (v) £90,000, (vi) £100,000, (vii) £110,000, (viii) £120,000, (ix) £130,000, (x) £140,000 and (xi) £150,000. [24365]

  Sir George Young
  [holding answer 16 May 1995]: The table gives available estimates showing the variation in revenue yields over the specified ranges of tax rates and thresholds of gross income up to £100,000. Reliable
  714
  estimates are not available for higher thresholds of gross income.

  £ million

  Full year revenue yield at 1995–96 levels Rate of minimum tax

  Gross income

  20 per cent.

  25 per cent.

  30 per cent.

  35 per cent.

  Over £50,000

  15

  60

  510

  2,030

  Over £70,000

  10

  20

  100

  700

  Over £100,000

  5

  10

  40

  250

  Note:

  The estimates do not take account of any behavioural effects which might result from the introduction of the new arrangements.

  VAT (Tour Operators)
  Mr. Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will delay the introduction of VAT on tour operators total margin until he has reviewed the equity of the exemption of operators with an in-house travel capacity; and if he will make a statement. [24760]

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  [holding answer 17 May 1995]: No. The proposed changes which bring the VAT scheme for tour operators into line with a judgment of the European Court of Justice were announced by Customs and Excise last October, over 14 months before the implementation date of 1 January 1996. While I recognise that some concern has been expressed about possible distortions of competition, there are differing views within the industry and this is one of several complex issues which does not relate solely to the 1 January 1996 changes and which can be addressed only in the longer term and in full consultation with industry representatives. It will therefore be included in a wide-ranging review of the tour operators' margin scheme which Customs proposes to begin next month.

  I am satisfied that, in the meantime, the changes must be made, and a Treasury order will be laid before the House.

  Mr. David Atkinson
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received from(a) the Association of Independent Tour Operators and (b) other small companies in the outbound travel industry to his VAT changes to tour operators margin scheme; and if he will make a statement. [25590]

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  The Association of Independent Tour Operators and others have raised several concerns about the proposed changes to the tour operators' margin scheme. The changes, which were announced by Customs and Excise last October and will be implemented on 1 January 1996, bring the scheme into line with a judgment of the European Court of Justice. Many, but not all, wish to see the implementation of the changes delayed.

  Some concern has been expressed about possible distortions of competition. This is one of several complex issues connected with the scheme which do not solely relate to the 1 January 1996 changes and which can be addressed only in the longer term and in full consultation with industry representatives. Customs propose to begin just such a wide-ranging review of the scheme next month.
  715
  There will also be further contacts between Customs and Excise and the Association of Independent Tour Operators to discuss the position, but I am satisfied that the changes must be made, and a Treasury order will be laid before the House.

  Leeds/Bradford Airport
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when a flexible anti-smuggling team of Customs and Excise was first established at Leeds/Bradford airport; and how many Customs and Excise staff are based permanently at the airport; how many people arriving at the airport have telephoned requesting to declare goods for excise charges to be levied; and if he will make a statement. [26140]

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  Flexible anti-smuggling teams were introduced by Customs at Leeds/Bradford airport in early 1992. There are no Customs staff based permanently at the airport. Local Customs management estimate that about six telephone calls per month are made to declare goods for which excise charges are to be levied.

  There are no Customs-free ports or airports. Over recent years, Customs enforcement strategy has progressively moved away from a static presence at all ports and airports towards more flexible checks operated by fast response teams targeted at both areas and times of highest risks. At major ports and airports these anti-smuggling teams are based on site, the smaller places being covered by mobile anti-smuggling strategy, which encompasses both anti-smuggling and fiscal controls, there are some locations where passengers can telephone Customs if they have anything to declare for fiscal purposes. This facility is not a part of anti-smuggling controls.

  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received about the absence of permanent Customs and Excise staff at Leeds/Bradford airport. [26141]

  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  Since 1 January 1994, two representations have been received referring specifically to concerns about the absence of permanently based Customs staff at Leeds/Bradford airport, and a further representation expressed concern about airports, including Leeds/Bradford, which have no permanently based staff.

  Developing Countries (Debt)
  Miss Lestor
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will list the total stock of existing and estimated debt outstanding to the United Kingdom by developing countries for each year from 1990 to 2000; [22674]

  (2) if he will list by country the total stock of existing and estimated debt outstanding to the United Kingdom by developing countries for each year from 1900 to 2000. [22677]

  Mr. Nelson
  The figures for the Export Credit Guarantees Department are not readily available. To assemble them manually would incur disproportionate costs. Figures for outstanding ECGD debt stock as at 31 March 1995 are below. For the ODA figures, I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to her by the Under-Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on 10 May 1995,Official Report, column 463.
  716

  Outstanding debt stock as at 31 March 1995—ECGD

  £ million

  Africa

  Algeria

  70.69

  Angola

  56.97

  Benin

  3.83

  Burkina Faso

  1.94

  Cameroon

  58.61

  C A R

  0.25

  Congo

  106.96

  Cote d'Ivoire

  30.25

  Egypt

  345.48

  Ethiopia

  9.80

  Gabon

  118.06

  Gambia

  2.36

  Ghana

  8.34

  Guinea Republic

  5.06

  Kenya

  57.45

  Liberia

  6.64

  Madagascar

  18.14

  Malawi

  0.72

  Mali

  11.36

  Mauritania

  7.50

  Morocco

  121.73

  Mozambique

  87.66

  Niger

  10.64

  Nigeria

  2,304.30

  Senegal

  2.62

  Sierra Leone

  3.62

  Somalia

  16.22

  Sudan

  168.23

  Tanzania

  163.31

  Togo

  13.22

  Uganda

  25.33

  Zaire

  80.03

  Zambia

  236.45

  4,153.77

  America

  Argentina

  142.29

  Bolivia

  41.47

  Brazil

  861.44

  Chile

  0.00

  Costa Rica

  1.72

  Cuba

  28.55

  Ecuador

  60.85

  Guyana

  117.21

  Jamaica

  4.32

  Mexico

  193.65

  Nicaragua

  0.91

  Peru

  130.60

  Trinidad and Tobago

  12.24

  1,595.25

  Asia and Middle East

  Indonesia

  3.55

  Philippines

  53.83

  Vietnam

  10.40

  Jordan

  365.21

  432.99

  6,182.01

DUCHY OF LANCASTER

  Departmental Committees
  Mr. Forman
  To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will list all the departmental committees of inquiry which have been established since November 1990, and in each case the date of establishment and the name of the chairman. [23145]

  Mr. David Hunt
  I list in the table those inquiries of which I am aware. I assume that "departmental committee
  717
  of inquiry" should include any ad hoc inquiry set up by a Minister or Ministers bringing in expert or lay opinion and chaired by someone from outside Government to investigate either a specific event or a more general issue.

  Departmental Committees of Inquiry

  Department

  Committee

  Established

  Chairman

  MAFF

  Advisory Committee on Flood and Coastal Defence Research and Development

  December 1990

  Mr. P. Ackers

  MAFF

  Expert Group on Animal Feeding-stuffs

  February 1991

  Professor G. E. Lamming

  MAFF

  Committee on Sea Level and Wave Recording

  February 1991

  Mr. M. J. Tucker

  MAFF

  Committee on the Ethics of Genetic Modification and Food Use

  September 1992

  Reverend Dr. J. C. Polkinghorne FRS

  MAFF

  Review of the Hygiene and Structural Requirements in a Sample of Slaughterhouses which have applied for temporary derogations under the Fresh Meat (Hygiene and Inspection) Regulations 1992

  October 1992

  Dr. A. M. Johnston Mr. B. J. Spun

  MAFF

  Committee to Review Fertility Aspects of Sewage Sludge Application to Agricultural Land

  January 1993

  Professor A. D. Bradshaw

  MAFF

  Ad Hoc Committee to consider the Ethical Implications of Emerging Technologies in the Breeding of Farm Animals

  May 1993

  Professor Michael Banner

  Attorney General

  Possible merger of SFO with CPS

  July 1994

  Rex Davie

  MOD

  MOD Policy Study

  December 1993

  Sir John Blelloch

  MOD

  Independent Review of Armed Forces' Manpower, Career and Remuneration Structures

  April 1994

  Michael Bett

  MOD

  Review of Representational Entertainment in the Armed Forces

  October 1994

  Sir Peter Cazalet

  DFE

  Review of the Further Education Unit and Further Education Staff College

  January 1993

  Ken Young CBE

  DFE

  Review of the National Curriculum and Assessment Framework

  April 1993

  Sir Ron Dearing

  DFE

  A short study to investigate the potential of emerging technologies to improve the effectiveness of the learning process for pupils of statutory school age

  January 1995

  Peter Seaborne

  DFE

  Review of the 16–19 Qualifications Framework

  April 1995

  Sir Ron Dearing

  DOE

  Inquiry into the Rating of Plant and Machinery

  June 1991

  Derek Wood QC

  DOE

  Enquiry into the Planning System in North Cornwall District

  August 1992

  Miss Audrey M. Lees

  DOE

  Task Force on Government Departments' Empty Houses

  December 1992

  John Baker

  DOE

  Inquiry into the Investment arrangements of the National Rivers Authority

  March 1993

  Sir Michael Kerry

  DOE

  Review of the Procurement and Contracting in the Construction Industry

  July 1993

  Sir Michael Latham

  DoH

  Committee of Enquiry into Complaints about Ashworth Hospital

  April 1991

  Sir Louis Blom-Cooper

  DoH

  Fundamental Review of the Existing System of Remuneration of General Dental Practitioners

  July 1992

  Sir Kenneth Bloomfield KCB

  DoH

  Panel of persons appointed under the Medicines Act 1968 to hear company representations on the proposed revocations of the product licences for Halcion/Triazolam

  January 1993

  Miss Diana Cotton QC

  DoH

  The Allitt Enquiry

  May 1993

  Sir Cecil Clothier

  DoH

  Review of NHS Complaints Procedures

  June 1993

  Professor Alan Wilson

  DoH

  Advisory Group on Osteoporosis

  November 1993

  Professor P. J. Barlow

  DoH

  Task Force to Review Services for Drug Misusers

  May 1994

  Reverend Dr. John Polkinghorne FRS

  DoH

  Expert Group to Investigate Cot Death Theories

  November 1994

  Lady Sylvia Limerick

  HO

  Royal Commissionon Criminal Justice

  July 1991

  Viscount Runciman of Droxford

  HO

  Enquiry into Police Rewards and Responsibilities

  July 1992

  Sir Patrick Sheehy

  HO

  Enquiry into the Escape of IRA Prisoners from Whitemoor Jail

  September 1994

  Sir John Woodcock

  HO

  Enquiry into Prison Security

  December 1994

  Sir John Learmont

  LCD

  An Inquiry into Access to Civil Justice

  March 1994

  Conducted by Lord Justice Woolf

  DNH

  Review of press Self-Regulation

  July 1992

  Conducted by Sir David Calcutt QC

  DNH

  Fire protection measures for the Royal Palaces

  January 1993

  Sir Alan Bailey

  NI

  Taxi Industry

  November 1991

  Mr. R. Stirling

  NI

  Operational Policy in Belfast Prison from Management of Paramilitary Prisoners

  December 1991

  Viscount Colville of Culrose QC

  NI

  Overtime Inquiry

  January 1993

  Sir John Blelloch

  NI

  Northern Ireland Energy Efficiency Action Group

  March 1993

  Dr. William J. McCourt

  NI

  Stormont Fire and Safety in Crown Buildings

  January 1995

  Sir Reginald Doyle

  718
  I have not included inquiries set up routinely in pursuance of responsibilities under a statutory requirement, for example public inquiries held under planning legislation.
  719

  Departmental Committees of Inquiry

  Department

  Committee

  Established

  Chairman

  OPSS

  Expert Working Group on Human Genome Research

  February 1993

  Professor Kay E. Davies

  OPSS

  Review of UK Microbial Culture Collections

  January 1994

  Professor Roger Whittenbury CBE

  OPSS

  Committee to Review the Contribution of Scientists and Engineers to the Public Understanding of Science, Engineering and Technology

  January 1995

  Sir Arnold Wolfendale FRS

  PM

  Committee on Standards in Public Life

  October 1994

  Lord Nolan

  SO

  Committee to review Curriculum and Examination in the Fifth and Sixth years of Secondary Education in Scotland

  March 1990

  Prof. John M. Howie CBE

  SO

  The Cairngorms Working Party

  March 1991

  Magnus Magnusson KBE

  SO

  The Loch Lomond and Trossachs Working Party

  November 1991

  Sir Peter Hutchinson Bt CBE

  SO

  Committee to review Initial Training of Further Education College Lecturers

  May 1992

  Prof. Janette Anderson

  SO

  Inquiry into Cervical Cytopathology at Inverclyde Royal Hospital, Greenock

  April 1993

  Dr. Euphemia McGoogan

  DSS

  The Pension Law Review Committee

  June 1992

  Prof. Roy Goode

  DTI

  Coal Task Force

  November 1990

  Dr. Eoin Lees

  DTI

  Renewable Energy Advisory Group

  September 1991

  Dr. Martin Holdgate

  DTI

  Radio Spectrum Review Committee Stage 3: 28–470 Mhz

  July 1992

  Sir Colin Fielding CB

  DTI

  Inquiry into the Export of Defence Equipment and Dual-Use Goods to Iraq 1984–90

  November 1992

  Sir Richard Scott

  DTp

  Review of London Underground Limited's response to fires and other emergencies

  September 1991

  Dr. Brian Appleton

  DTp

  Inquiry into river safety

  December 1991

  John W. Hayes

  DTp

  Inquiry into the prevention of pollution from merchant shipping

  January 1993

  Lord Donaldson

  DTp

  Assessment of what further work should be undertaken to identify the cause of the sinking of the MV Derbyshire

  March 1995

  Lord Donaldson

  DTp

  Review of Coastguard actions during and after the Lyme Bay canoe tragedy

  May 1995

  John Reeder QC

  DTp

  Study into aircraft noise mitigation measures at Redhill Aerodrome and Wycombe Air Park

  November 1990

  A. J. O'Connor

  HMT

  Inquiry into the Supervision of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International

  July 1991

  Rt Hon. Lord Justice Bingham

  HMT

  Report on the role and functions of the Securities and Investments Board

  July 1992

  Andrew Large

NATIONAL HERITAGE

  Children's Play Funds
  Mrs. Golding
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage in what areas of children's play funds will be available to bid for in the coming year. [25771]

  Mr. Sproat
  Bids will be invited in the near future for funds to carry out work in the areas of information dissemination, playwork education and training, and play safety.

  National Vocational Qualifications
  Ms Hoey
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will list the centres and the sports concerned in the awarding of national vocational qualifications. [25043]

  Mr. Sproat
  Thirty-three sports were included in a pilot project to establish national vocational qualification centres.

  These are:

  archery

  association football

  athletics

  badminton

  basketball

  bowls

  canoeing

  cricket

  cycling

  dinghy sailing

  720

  exercise and fitness

  fencing

  gymnastics

  hockey

  judo

  mountaineering

  movement and dance

  netball

  orienteering

  rowing

  rugby league

  rugby union

  skiing

  squash

  sub aqua

  surfing

  swimming

  table tennis

  target shooting

  tennis

  trampolining

  volleyball

  721
  Currently, there are 12 fully approved centres in the following sports:

  association football

  swimming

  hockey

  gymnastics

  tennis

  basketball

  karate

  yachting

  A number of other centres are in line for approval by the end of this year.

  Ms Hoey
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage (1) how many national vocational qualifications have been awarded in martial arts; [25042]

  (2) what assessment he has made of the progress of awarding national vocational qualifications for martial arts. [25041]

  Mr. Sproat
  National vocational qualifications will not be awarded in the category "martial arts". There are eight different recognised martial arts, each with varying styles and techniques and each has to be treated separately in its

  Let by

  Activity

  Name of successful bid

  Won by in-house bid

  (i) 1993–94

  DNH

  Consultancy for advice on competitive tendering of works management functions

  Watts and Partners

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Reprographics

  William Lea FM

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Central Typing and Secretarial

  Manpower plc

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Mailroom

  Security Despatch Group

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Security

  Royal British Legion association

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Minor Maintenance

  Richard Devine

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Cleaning

  Ramoneur

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Reception

  Manpower plc

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Payments and Accounts Services

  Accounts Services Agency

  No in-house bid

  The Royal Parks

  Property maintenance management

  Tarmac Facilities Management

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Kew Palace—Security Services

  Royal British Legion

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Hampton Court Palace—Gardens Litter Clearance

  SITA

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Hampton Court Palace

  Initial Cleaning Services

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Kensington Palace—Catering

  De blanks

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Kensington Palace—Cleaning

  Swanlux

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Kensington Palace—Cash Collection

  Armaguard/Security Express

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Banqueting House—Cleaning Services

  Sloane Cleaning

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Banqueting House—Security

  Royal British Legion

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Banqueting House—Porterage

  Universal

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Banqueting House—Catering

  10 companies used—selected by tender

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Banqueting House—Floristry

  Nancy Ford

  No in-house bid

  (ii) 1994–95

  DNH

  Provision of works management services for certain properties in central London

  E C Harris

  No in-house bid

  722
  preparation for NVQ centre approval. Details of awards in the eight recognised martial arts are not available.

  Contracting Out
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage (1) what work has been contracted out(a) by his Department and (b) by agencies for which his Department is responsible in (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95 and (iii) projected for 1995–96; [25661]

  (2) for each area of work subject to a bidding process under the auspices of (i) his Department and (ii) agencies for which his Department is responsible where work was contracted out who were the successful bidders; and which contracts were won by in-house bidders in (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95 and (iii) 1995–96. [25518]

  Mr. Dorrell
  Details of work contracted out for the first time which would previously have been carried out in-house by (i) my Department and (ii) the two agencies for which I am responsible in (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95 and (iii) 1995–96 are given in the table below. Only one of the tenders was subject to an in-house bid, which was successful.
  723

  Let by

  Activity

  Name of successful bid

  Won by in-house bid

  DNH

  Provision of works management services for central ceremonial activities

  Unicorn Consultancy Ltd.

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Provision of works services management at the Royal Naval College, Greenwich

  Taylor Woodrow Facilities Management

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Statue maintenance services

  Stonewest Ltd.

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Services relating to Trafalger Square Christmas Tree and New Year works

  Building and Property Facilities Management Ltd.

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Record Storage, Retrieval and Review

  Britannia Data Management

  No in-house bid

  The Royal Parks

  Management of Car Parking Facilities

  Apcoa Parking Ltd.

  No in-house bid

  The Royal Parks

  Audit Services

  Price Waterhouse

  No in-house bid

  The Royal Parks

  Estate management duties

  Daniel Smith

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  IT Consultants

  Internet Solutions

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Ticketing/EPOS Systems

  MHG Systems Select Ticketing

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  HM Tower of London—Window Cleaning

  Metropolitan

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  HM Tower of London—Computer Maintenance

  HMSO

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  HM Tower of London—Commercial Guard Force

  RBLA

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  HM Tower of London—Signage—Moat Gardens

  HB Sign Company

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  HM Tower of London—Costumed Interpretation

  Past Pleasures

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  HM Tower of London—Garden Maintenance

  Ground Control

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Hampton Court Palace—Catering

  Town and County

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Hampton Court Palace—Costumed Interpretation

  Past Pleasures

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Hampton Court Palace—Recorded Tour Service

  Acoustiguide

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Hampton Court Palace—Warding Services

  Group 4

  In-house bid unsuccessful

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Kensington Palace—Catering

  De blanks/Diby Trout

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Kensington Palace—Catering

  Securicor

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Kensington Palace—Cash Collection

  Armaguard/Security Express

  No in-house bid

  (iii) 1995–96

  DNH

  Consultancy for provision of professional support and advisory services relating to other Royal Estate Division works responsibilities

  Tenders under consideration

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Services relating to Remembrance Day ceremony works

  Tendering exercise planned for later in the year

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Stationery

  Not yet awarded

  No in-house bid

  DNH

  Payments and Accounts Services

  CSL Managed Services

  No in-house bid

  The Royal Parks

  Car Park Security duties

  Reliance Security

  No in-house bid

  The Royal Parks

  Entertainment organiser

  Not yet awarded

  —

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Computer Maintenance

  LCE Computer Systems

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  HM Tower of London—Cash Collection/Counting

  Security Express

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Kensington Palace— Catering

  Securicor

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Kensington Palace—Cleaning

  Securicor

  No in-house bid

  Historic Royal Palaces

  Kensington Palace—Cash Collection

  Armaguard/Security Express

  No in-house bid

  Archaeological Sites
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if it remains Her Majesty's Government's policy to legislate, as parliamentary time permits, to implement proposals for new controls for archaeological sites. [24723]

  Mr. Dorrell
  The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 is the primary legislation in operation to safeguard ancient monuments and archaeological remains in England, Wales and Scotland. Proposals to update and improve the 1979 Act will be included in the Heritage Green Paper which I intend to publish later this year.

  Consultants
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what is the level of expenditure on consultancy by (i) his Department and (ii) agencies for which his Department is responsible for(a) 1993–94, (b) 1994–95 and (c) projected for 1995–96.

  Mr. Dorrell
  My Department's expenditure on consultancy for the years 1993–94, 1994–95 and the forecast expenditure for 1995–96 is as follows:724

  DNH £

  Agencies £

  1993–94

  1,547,125

  4,456,430

  1994–95

  1,145,996

  2,470,325

  1995–96(est)

  761,000

  2,430,921

  Staff
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage (1) how many staff of(a) the Department of National Heritage and (b) agencies for which the Department of National Heritage is responsible, were employed on a casual or short-term basis in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96; [25508]

  (2) what changes there have been in the number of staff employed by (i) his Department and (ii) each agency for which his Department is responsible in (a) 1993–94 and (b) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25497]
  725
  Mr. Dorrell
  The numbers of permanent and casual staff employed by my Department and its two executive agencies—the Royal Parks agency and the Historic Royal Palaces agency—in 1993–94; projected outturn for 1994–95; and plans for 1995–96 are published in my Department's annual report, a copy of which is in the Library of the House. No projections broken down by grade are available.

  Majority Shareholdings
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will list those companies in which the holder of his office is a majority shareholder which(a) are currently in existence and (b) have been wound up in the past five years. [25712]

  Mr. Dorrell
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: In my capacity as Secretary of State for National Heritage, I am not a majority shareholder in any companies which are either (a) currently in existence or (b) have been wound up in the past five years.

EMPLOYMENT

  Staff
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many staff of(a) the Department of Employment and (b) agencies for which the Department is responsible (i) took early retirement, (ii) took voluntary redundancy, (iii) took compulsory redundancy and (iv) were retired on medical grounds in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1994–95. [25414]

  Miss Widdecombe
  The information is not readily available in the form requested. The total number of staff who left on voluntary early retirement schemes in 1993–94 and 1994–95 were 1,909 and 1,884 respectively. The total number of staff who left on ill health retirement in 1993–94 and 1994–95 were 291 and 328 respectively. It is too soon to project the likely outcomes for 1995–96.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what is the annual cost to his Department of staff leaving under redundancy/early retirement schemes to incorporate (i) added years lump sum payments, (ii) redundancy payments, (iii) pension payments, including enhancements and (iv) any other special arrangements for(a) 1993–94, (b) 1994–95, and projected for (c) 1995–96 and (d) 1996–97. [25636]

  Miss Widdecombe
  The cost to the Department of early retirement and redundancies are borne from the department's running costs. A detailed breakdown of the various costs could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  The total costs borne on the Department's running costs in 1993–94 and 1994–95 were £61.87 million and £25.7 million respectively. It is too soon to project the costs to be borne for 1995–96 or 1996–97.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) how many staff of(a) the Department of Employment and (b) agencies for which the Department is responsible, were employed on a casual or short-term
  726
  basis in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what is the projected figure for 1995–96; [25413]

  (2) what changes there have been in the number of staff in employment by grade in (a) his Department and (b) each agency for which his Department is responsible in (i) 1993–94 and (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25626]

  Miss Widdecombe
  The numbers of permanent and casual staff employed by the Department and the Employment Service agency in 1993–94, estimated outturn for 1994–95, and plans for 1995–96 can be found in annexe A table iii of the Department's annual report, Cm 2805, a copy of which is available in the Library. No projections broken down by grade are available.

  Job Vacancies
  Mr. Chidgey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment, pursuant to his answer of 16 May,Official Report, column 160, what consideration he has given to instructing jobcentres to refuse the acceptance of job vacancies with age restrictions in all circumstances where the employer cannot prove that age limits are essential to the performance of the job. [25804]

  Miss Widdecombe
  The Government are not convinced that refusing to accept vacancies with age restrictions would persuade many employers to change their attitudes. Those employers who currently insist on imposing age restrictions may choose to fill their vacancies by other means. We are concerned that any movement away from using jobcentres would have a harmful effect on the job prospects of the unemployed, especially those who are disadvantaged.

  Minicab Drivers
  Mr. Bendall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many operations against benefit fraud by minicab drivers have been mounted by the Employment Service since January 1991; how many investigations were carried out; how many minicab drivers were found to be claiming social security benefits; what was the value of the benefits saved; and what was the cost of the operation. [26182]

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

  Letter from A. G. Johnson to Mr. Vivian Bendall, dated 25 May 1995:
  The Secretary of State has asked me, in the absence of the Chief Executive, to reply to your question about investigations by Employment Service (ES) Inspectors into mini cab drivers since 1991.
  Unfortunately, the information you requested is not available.
  Over the last 18 months (the period for which details concerning individual investigations is kept) ES Inspectors have carried out over 400,000 investigations covering all areas of the economy. However case files are held under clients' names and not by occupation or industry.
  Experience has shown that benefit fraud is more prevalent in certain areas of employment, mini cab driving being one. My inspectors have and will continue to target these areas. Often it has been legitimate licensed taxi drivers and their trade associations who have provided information for my inspectors to act on.
  Although I am unable to supply the information you seek on the investigation of mini cab drivers, the table below shows the performance of the ES Inspectors over the last three years.
  727

  1992–93

  1993–94

  1994–95

  Total number of staff

  1,343

  1,343

  1,343

  (investigators)

  (780)

  (780)

  (780)

  £71.15

  £80.12

  £92.1

  Gross savings1

  million

  million

  million

  Cost of fraud Operation

  £26.44

  £26.84

  £27.5

  million

  million

  million

  £44.71

  £53.28

  £64.6

  Net savings

  million

  million

  million

  Investment return2

  £2.69

  £2.99

  £3.35

  Number of sign-offs3

  61,129

  67,426

  78,231

  1 This figure is calculated by multiplying the weekly amount of benefit saved by 22. The 22-week figure was identified by the Department of social Security research and represents the average number of weeks claimants would have remained on the register if they had not been investigated by fraud staff.

  2 Pounds of benefit saved for ever £ of cost.

  3 Number of clients withdrawing their claims to benefit after investigation by ES inspectors.

  I hope this is helpful.

  Workstart
  Mr. Chidgey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many unemployed people will be taking part in the new workstart pilot schemes running in(a) the west midlands and (b) the north-west. [25805]

  Miss Widdecombe
  The new workstart pilots, which pay a subsidy to employers who recruit very long-term unemployed people, began last month in the west midlands conurbation, Greater Manchester and Cheshire.

  No targets have been set for the number of people who will participate on the individual workstart pilots. However, 5,000 places are available for the pilots as a whole.

  Mr. Chidgey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what steps his Department is taking(a) to evaluate the workstart pilot scheme in the west midlands in which a subsidy for placing an unemployed person is negotiated with an employer on an individual basis and (b) to monitor the workstart pilot scheme in the north-west in which the use of a subsidy varies according to the duration of a client's unemployment; and when he expects to publish the results of his evaluations. [25809]

  Miss Widdecombe
  Information on the workstart pilots is being collected in three ways: routine management information; a database which will contain details of participants' characteristics and a survey of employers.

  A final report will be available in late 1996.

  Information Technology
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what studies have been commissioned by Her Majesty's Government into the impact on employment over the next decade from information technology; and if he will make a statement. [25984]

  Miss Widdecombe
  Several studies have been commissioned into the future impact on employment of information technology:The Government's technology foresight programme has examined a wide range of technology developments which will underpin improvements in the UK's wealth creating capacity. This has included the IT sector and developments of new IT-based businesses.
  Several Government Departments co-funded the "Britain in 2010" study which included an assessment of the impact of new technology on jobs.
  728
  The Department of Trade and Industry has commissioned a feasibility study into the impact of telecommunications and computer applications on the international mobility of jobs.
  A major study of teleworking, carried out for the Employment Department in 1992, highlighted the ways in which this new form of working can create employment opportunities.
  A recent study for the Department of Trade and Industry highlighted the potential of telework for increasing the competitiveness of British industry.

  Advances in IT play a key role in helping to increase productivity and enhance the competitiveness of British industry, contributing to employment growth and improving living standards. IT has facilitated the growth of new forms of working such as telework, which give more people the opportunity to participate in the labour force, help businesses to retain skilled workers and increase employment opportunities in remote areas.

  Allerton Outreach Team
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what further funding he has authorised to support two staff and running costs of the Allerton outreach team in Bradford; and if he will make a statement. [25987]

  Miss Widdecombe
  The original Employment Service source of funding for the Allerton outreach team has been absorbed into the single regeneration budget and the Employment Department no longer has a direct involvement in funding this project, which is managed by Bradford council.

  However, for 1995–96, the Bradford and district training and enterprise council has made available £10,000 towards the cost of an outreach worker. I understand that the balance of the cost is being met by Bradford council. The TEC has also arranged for up to £10,000 of guidance vouchers to be available for Allerton's residents. I do understand that a trainee under the training for work programme continues to provide a second team member. A full range of ED programmes are available to help unemployed people in Bradford including the residents of Allerton.

  Disabled People
  Mr. Alan Howarth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what response he received from the National Advisory Council on Employment of People with Disabilities to his consultation on Government measures to tackle discrimination against disabled people with regard to(a) the remit of the new advisory body proposed in the consultation document, (b) additional functions which the new advisory body might undertake, over and above those proposed in the consultation document, (c) infrastructure and resources for the new advisory body and (d) exclusion of small firms from the new statutory requirements proposed in the consultation document; and if he will place in the Library a copy of the response of the National Advisory Council on Employment of People with Disabilities. [26084]

  Miss Widdecombe
  The Government have published a full analysis of the responses to the consultation exercise entitled "A Consultation on Government Measures to Tackle Discrimination Against Disabled People: An Analysis of the Responses", and a copy of this has been placed in the Library. Our general policy is not to publish particular responses to the consultation document.
  729
  The National Advisory Council on Employment of People with Disabilities advised my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. The council's advice was sought on the employment and training implications of the consultation proposals. NACEPD's advice is provided direct to Ministers or to officials, and its views are subsequently made known publicly through periodic reports on its activities. Such a report is not due yet, so I have arranged for a copy of NACEPD's response to the consultation document to be placed in the Library.

  Public Bodies
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Employment which non-departmental public bodies within the responsibility of his Department are subject to scrutiny by(a) the ombudsmen, (b) the National Audit Office, (c) the Audit Commission and (d) other monitoring officers; which are covered by citizens charters; in which performance indicators apply; and in which members are liable to surcharge. [23969]

  Miss Widdecombe
  [holding answer 15 May 1995]: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Cannock and Burntwood (Dr. Wright) on 25 April 1995, Official Report, column 477. In addition to the executive non-departmental public bodies listed in that reply, the Department sponsors the following NDPBs:

  The National Advisory Council on the Employment of People with Disabilities;

  Committees for the Employment of Disabled People, around 60 local committees;

  Supported Employment Consultative Group;

  Race Relations Advisory Group.

  These advisory bodies are convened to advise the Department on the impact of Government employment policies on people with disabilities and ethnic minorities. They have no grant in aid are supported within the Department's running costs. None of them provides a service direct to the public. They are therefore all potentially subject to scrutiny by the National Audit Office but not by the Parliamentary Commissioner or the Audit Commission. None is covered by citizens charters or performance indicators. In none of the NDPBs for which the Department is responsible are the members liable to surcharge and none is subject to scrutiny by monitoring officers other than those referred to above and those carrying out normal audit functions.

SCOTLAND

  Former Ministers
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what rules and regulations are laid down by his office regarding former Ministers taking up appointments with companies with which they have been involved while Ministers. [23053]

  Mr. Lang
  No specific rules or regulations are laid down by my office. Existing guidance is contained in paragraph 105 of "Questions of Procedures for Ministers", a copy of which is available in the House of Commons Library.

  Departmental Property
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what have been the total capital and recurring costs of improvements and replacements in relation to the fabric, decoration, carpeting and facilities of(a) Dover house, (b) Bute house and (c) Alhambra house in each year since 1979. [24103]

  Mr. Lang
  The information available for each full financial year for which detailed records are held by the Scottish Office is as in the table. Works in previous years were carried out by the Property Services Agency and my Department does not hold information from which these buildings could be identified separately:

  Building

  Year

  Capital £

  Maintenance £

  Alhambra

  House

  1990–91

  90,778.31

  15,121.03

  1991–92

  76,349.69

  15,638.30

  1992–93

  6,685.10

  45,274.75

  1993–94

  13,616.11

  6,279.37

  1994–95

  4,059.52

  35,944.66

  Dover House

  1990–91

  100,056.43

  16,094.90

  1991–92

  107,643.96

  12,400.31

  1992–93

  184,779.49

  35,283.21

  1993–94

  64,555.14

  17,971.33

  1994–95

  80,186.26

  66,570.16

  Bute House

  1990–91

  21,828.12

  20,700.76

  1991–92

  19,347.71

  24,802.82

  1992–93

  8,407.70

  20,731.24

  1993–94

  14,153.23

  17,946.15

  1994–95

  7,490.65

  35,104.58

  Dover house and Bute house are both grade A listed buildings. Alhambra house was vacated by the Scottish Office in November 1994.

  Giant Hogweed
  Mr. McMaster
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what measures he plans to require the owners of land to which the public may have access to eradicate heracleum mantegazzianum; if he will give local authorities a duty to control heracleum mantegazzianum; and if he will make a statement about the dangers associated with this plant. [24083]

  Sir Hector Monro
  There are no plans to bring forward legislation to impose new duties in relation to heracleum mantegazzianum on landowners or local authorities. Heracleum mantegazzianum contains large amounts of sap whose toxins can cause painful blistering, and humans coming into contact with the plant may require medical treatment.

  Health Boards
  Mr. Galbraith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he has any plans to alter the boundaries of health boards; and if he will make a statement. [24975]

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  My noble and learned Friend the Minister of State is considering, in consultation with relevant interests, whether adjustments should be made in the small number of cases where the boundaries of the new local authorities intersect those of health boards.

  Retirements and Redundancies
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many staff of(a) the Scottish Office and (b) agencies for which the Scottish Office is responsible (i) took early retirement, (ii) took voluntary redundancy, (iii) took compulsory redundancy and (iv) were retired on medical grounds in (1) 1993–94 and (2) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25503]

  Mr. Lang
  The information requested is set out in the table below. Staff numbers for the Scottish Prison Service are shown separately.

  Projected

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1995–96

  (a) The Scottish Office

  (i) Early retirement

  35

  30

  25

  (ii) Voluntary redundancy

  47

  144

  100–200

  (iii) Compulsory redundancy

  —

  —

  —

  (iv) Medical grounds

  26

  19

  20

  (b) Agencies

  (i) Early retirement

  3

  4

  2

  (ii) Voluntary redundancy

  3

  12

  6

  (iii) Compulsory Redundancy

  1

  —

  1

  (iv) Medical grounds

  3

  31

  6

  (c) Scottish Prison Agency

  (i) Early retirement

  50

  160

  150

  (ii) Voluntary redundancy

  3

  3

  1—

  (iii) Compulsory Redundancy

  —

  —

  —

  (iv) Medical grounds

  80

  60

  60

  1 None expected.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the annual cost to his Department of staff leaving under redundancy/early retirement schemes to incorporate (i) added years lump sum payments, (ii) redundancy payments, (iii) pension payments, including enhancements and (iv) any other special arrangements for(a) 1993–94, (b) 1994–95, (c) projected for 1995–96 and (d) projected for 1996–97. [25470]

  Mr. Lang
  The costs to the Department of early retirement and redundancies are borne from the Department's running costs provision.

  A detailed breakdown of the various costs could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  The total costs borne on the Scottish Office running costs in 1993–94 and 1994–95 were £900,000 and £1.5 million respectively. For 1995–96 the amount is estimated at £1.6 million.

  For the Scottish Prison Service the total costs borne in 1993–94 and 1994–95 were £900,000 in each year and for 1995–96 the amount is estimated at £800,000.

  Projections for 1996–97 will be determined during the coming public expenditure survey.

  Consultants
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the level of expenditure on consultancy by(a) his Office and (b) agencies for which his Office is responsible for (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95 and (iii) projected for 1995–96. [25645]
  732
  Mr. Lang
  The information requested is currently not held centrally and is therefore not available. Steps are, however, being taken to establish a central record of such information. I shall write to the hon. Member with the information requested as soon as it becomes available and place a signed copy of the letter in the Library of the House.

  Contracting Out
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland for each piece of work subject to a bidding process under the auspices of(a) his Department and (b) agencies for which his Department is responsible (i) where work was contracted out, who were the successful bidders and (ii) where contracts were won by in-house bidders in (1) 1993–94, (2) 1994–95 and (3) 1995–96. [25656]

  Mr. Lang
  The information requested is as set out:

  (a) The Scottish Office core

  Activity

  Successful bidder(s)

  (1) 1993–94

  Superannuation

  Ministry of Defence

  Animal House Services

  Western General Hospital

  Audit of NHS Boards

  KPMG Peat Marwick; Coopers and Lybrand; Price Waterhouse

  Scottish Fire Service Training School Catering

  Gardner Merchant

  Design, Print and Publication Services

  HMSO

  Education, Social Work and Transport Statistics

  In-house teams

  Recruitment

  In-house teams

  Drawing Office

  In-house team

  Telecommunications Depots

  In-house team

  (2) 1994–95

  Additional typing services

  Carol Jones Recruitment Ltd.

  Data Preparation

  Saztec and AlphaNumeric

  Mainframe Applications Support

  FI Group plc

  Audit of second wave NHS Trusts

  KPMG Peat Marwick; Price Waterhouse; Ernst and Young

  Audit of third wave NHS trusts

  Ernst and Young; Scott Moncrieff; KPMG Peat Marwick; Price Waterhouse

  Facilities management and messengerial services at Victoria Quay

  Serco Services Ltd.

  Security at Victoria Quay

  In-house team

  (3) 1995–96

  Publications distribution and Sales

  HMSO

  Agencies

  Activity

  Successful bidder(s)

  (1) 1993–94

  Scottish Prison Service—Building and Electrical Maintenance Work atHM Prison, Barlinnie

  AMEC

  Scottish Prison Service—Building and Electrical Maintenance Work at three establishments (Perth, Shottsand Edinburgh)

  In-house team

  Scottish Prison Service, Central Stores

  In-house team

  733

  Agencies

  Activity

  Successful bidder(s)

  (2) 1994–95

  Scottish Prison Service—Building and Electrical Maintenance Work at six establishments (Longriggend, Aberdeen, Peterhead, Corntonvale,Polmont, Glenochil)

  In-house team

  Security at the Scottish Agricultural Science Agency

  Burns Security

  Scottish Office Pensions Agency—Development, Supply and Maintenance of Pensions Administration Systems

  McDonnel Information Systems

  Prison-based Education, Scottish Prison Service

  Motherwell College, Stoke College, James Watt College, Falkirk College, Aberdeen College, Angus College, Coatbridge College, Highland Regional Council

  Historic Scotland, Patrolmen at Edinburgh Castle

  Pinkerton Security Services

  Historic Scotland—Gardening and Grounds maintenance work at Palace of Holyroodhouse and Holyrood Park

  In-house team

  Typing and clerical support at Registers of Scotland

  In-house team

  No external contracts have yet been awarded during 1995–96 in respect of agencies for which my Department is responsible.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what work has been contracted out(a) by his Department and (b) by agencies for which his Department is responsible in (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95 and (iii) projected for 1995–96. [25659]

  Mr. Lang
  The information is as set out.

  (a) The Scottish Office

  (i) 1993–94

  Superannuation

  Animal House Services

  Audit of NHS Boards

  Scottish Fire Service Training School Catering

  Design, Print and Publication Services

  (ii) 1994–95

  Additional typing services

  Data Preparation

  Mainframe Applications Support

  Audit of 2nd wave NHS trusts

  Audit of 3rd wave NHS trust

  Facilities management and messengerial services at Victoria Quay

  (iii) 1995–96

  Publications distribution and sales

  (b)Agencies

  (i)1993–94

  Scottish Prison Service—Building and Electrical Maintenance and minor works at HMP Barlinnie.

  (ii) 1994–95

  Scottish Agricultural Science Agency—Security

  Scottish Office Pensions Agency—Development, Supply and Maintenance of Pensions Administration Systems

  Historic Scotland—Patrolmen at Edinburgh Castle

  Scottish Prison Service—Prison-based education

  734

  (iii) 1995–96

  Scottish Prison Service—Maintenance and minor works at Castle Huntly, Dumfries, Penninghame, Noranside, Friarton, Greenock, Inverness, Low Moss and Dungavel establishments. Registers of Scotland—Pre-application reports.

  Departmental Performance
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what performance indicators and performance targets there are for measuring the performance of his Department in(a) answering letters from members of the public and (b) answering telephone calls from members of the public; how performance is monitored; and what are the latest figures for performance measured against the target set. [26232]

  Mr. Lang
  Where members of the public write to Ministers and the reply is made on their behalf by departmental officials, there is a target of 20 days for doing so. In 1994, 14,846 such replies were issued—76 per cent, within the target of 20 days.

  Where members of the public write direct to departmental officials, the setting of targets for the issue of replies is a matter for individual divisions and units. There is no centrally laid down target and no central collection of performance figures by individual divisions and units.

  The target for answering telephone calls to the Scottish Office central inquiry unit is an average of 10 seconds. Weekly performance is monitored electronically. During a recent 10-day period, 14,208 calls were handled. The average response time was 11 seconds.

  Complaints
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what policy and procedure exist for dealing with complaints against his Department by members of the public; when his Department last updated its policy; what time limit and target for dealing with such complaints his Department has; and what follow-up procedure exists where complainants are not satisfied with his Department's response to a complaint. [26216]

  Mr. Lang
  My Department provides a wide range of services to the public. A single department-wide complaints procedure would not be appropriate. Our complaints procedures are tailored to the particular circumstances of the service provided and the needs of the users. A comprehensive review of our complaints procedures was carried out in 1992. Time limits for dealing with complaints were introduced. They vary from service to service. Most of our complaints procedures provide for complainants to refer their complaint to a more senior level if they are dissatisfied. If the matter is not resolved to the complainant's satisfaction he or she can ask a Member of Parliament to refer the matter to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration.

  Belvidere Hospital
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will publish the names of all the bodies which have any responsibility for all or part of the services provided at Belvidere hospital, Parkhead, Glasgow; and to which organisation the hospital belongs. [26186]
  735
  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  The Glasgow Royal Infirmary University NHS trust, The Southern General Hospital NHS trust and the West Glasgow Hospitals University NHS trust have responsibility for the services provided at Belvidere hospital.

  Greater Glasgow health board is in discussion with the Glasgow Royal Infirmary University NHS trust over the transfer of the assets of the hospital to that trust.

  Glasgow City Council
  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the electorate for each of the new unitary authority wards in the Glasgow city council area as at 6 April. [26187]

  Mr. Kynoch
  The electorate for each of the new unitary authority wards for the city of Glasgow council at the latest available date, 15 February 1995, are given in the table:

  Electoral ward

  Total electorate

  1. Drumry

  5,997

  2. Summerhill

  5,821

  3. Blairdardie

  5,309

  4. Knightswood Park

  6,502

  5. Knightswood South

  5,556

  6. Yoker

  6,048

  7. Anniesland

  6,081

  8. Jordanhill

  5,813

  9. Kelvindale

  6,326

  10. Scotstoun

  5,812

  11. Victoria Park

  5,898

  12. Broomhill

  6,348

  13. Hyndland

  7,272

  14. Hillhead

  6,197

  15. Partick

  7,064

  16. Kelvin

  7,242

  17. Firhill

  5,916

  18. Woodlands

  6,532

  19. Kelvingrove

  5,699

  20. Anderston

  5,232

  21. Merchant City

  6,044

  22. Milton

  5,680

  23. Possil

  5,258

  24. Keppochhill

  5,643

  25. Summerston

  5,797

  26. Maryhill

  5,493

  27. Wyndford

  5,521

  28. Robroyston

  4,989

  29. Gartcraig

  6,211

  30. Carntyne

  5,870

  31. Royston

  6,299

  32. Milnbank

  6,350

  33. Dennistoun

  5,626

  34. Springburn

  6,038

  35. Cowlairs

  6,099

  36. Wallacewell

  6,027

  37. Calton

  4,780

  38. Bridgeton

  5,610

  39. Dalmarnock

  5,112

  40. Queenslie

  5,367

  41. Greenfield

  6,029

  42. Barlanark

  5,851

  43. Tollcross Park

  5,198

  44. Braidfauld

  5,176

  45. Shettleston

  6,132

  46. Mount Vernon

  6,606

  47. Garrowhill

  5,988

  48. Baillieston

  6,494

  49. Garthamlock

  4,694

  50. Wellhouse

  5.579

  51. Easterhouse

  5,466

  736

  Electoral ward

  Total electorate

  52 Drumoyne

  5,804

  53. Govan

  5,121

  54. Ibrox

  5,755

  55. Kingston

  5,109

  56. Pollokshields East

  5,784

  57. Maxwell park

  5,506

  58. Penilee

  6,034

  59. Craigton

  6,972

  60. Cardonald

  5,376

  61. Pollok

  5,145

  62. Mosspark

  6,693

  63. Crookston

  5,563

  64. South Pollok

  5,034

  65. Arden

  4,217

  66. Levernholm

  5,582

  67. Carnwadric

  5,964

  68. Newlands

  6,211

  69. Cathcart

  5,957

  70. Pollokshaws

  5,633

  71. Strathbungo

  6,153

  72. Langside

  5,355

  73. Hutchesontown

  4,418

  74. Oatlands

  5,807

  75. Govanhill

  6,415

  76. Battlefield

  6,832

  77. Mount Florida

  5,274

  78. Aitkenhead

  5,642

  79. Carmunock

  5,007

  80. Castlemilk

  5,393

  81. Glenwood

  4,203

  82. Toryglen

  4,689

  83. King's Park

  3,650

  474,990

  NHS Numbers
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give an undertaking that the new NHS number will be used only with respect to the provision of health-related services; and if he will make a statement. [26399]

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  There are no proposals to reissue the NHS number in Scotland where a community health index number has been in use for many years. We have no plans to use the community health index number for anything other than health-related purposes.

  Local Government Finance
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when his Department will issue the new Scottish unitary authorities with their indicative budgets for 1995–96. [25332]

  Mr. Kynoch
  [holding answer 23 May J995]: My right hon. Friend intends to lay a report before the House, in accordance with section 24 of the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Act 1994, in the autumn specifying the amounts which he will use as the baseline for considering capping action in 1996–97. However, in recognition of the shadow councils' need to have early knowledge of the amounts for the purpose of beginning to prepare budgets for 1996–97, my right hon. Friend hopes to be able to issue his proposed figures by about the end of June.

  The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities is being fully consulted about the preparation of the figures and those existing local authorities which are being disaggregated have agreed to have discussions with

  737
  relevant shadow councils about the appointment of their 1995–96 budgets to the new council areas.

  NHS Trusts
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the number of(a) applications for trust status which have been turned down by the Scottish Office, (b) applicants involved and (c) amounts of money spent by the national health service management executive in supporting these unsuccessful applicants for each year since 1991–92. [25329]

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 23 May 1995]: Four applications for trust status have been rejected. These were as follows:

  Princess Margaret Rose Orthopaedic Hospital

  Lothian College of Nursing and Midwifery

  Forth Valley Healthcare

  Western Isles Health Unit

  The costs incurred by the NHS in supporting these applications amounted to:

  1991–92: £50,000

  1992–93: £69,730

  1993–94: £195,000

  The application made by Forth Valley Healthcare was subsequently re-submitted and accepted as a conjoint application with the Royal Scottish National Hospital and Community NHS trust to form Central Scotland Healthcare NHS trust.

  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list the correspondence addresses and the names of the executive and non-executive directors of the NHS trusts established in April. [25345]

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 23 May 1995]: The executive and non-executive directors of the NHS trusts established in April are as follows:

  Argyll and Bute NHS Trust (Aros, Lochgilphead, Argyll PA31)

  Non-executive directors

  Executive directors

  Mrs. Hester Gardiner

  Chief Executive: Mr. Jonathan R. Best

  Dr. J. Stewart Moffat

  Medical Director: Dr. Angus MacKay

  Mr. John Wilson

  Nursing Director: Mr. Rob Brown

  Miss Catherine Pollock

  Finance Director: Mr. Graeme Oram

  Mr. Ian Smyth

  Human Resources Director: Mr. John McCormick Business and Operations Director: Mr. Steven Gallagher

  Borders Community Health Services NHS Trust (Dingleton Hospital, Melrose, TD6 9HN)

  Non-Executive Directors

  Executive Directors

  Dr. Daniel Jones

  Chief Executive:

  Mrs. Marie Mackie

  Mr. John Turner

  Dr. Andrew Simpson

  Medical Director:

  Mrs. Marni Lamb

  Dr. Bruce Low

  Mr. Angus Davidson

  Nursing Director:

  Mr. Paul Martin

  Finance Director:

  Mr. Robert Kemp

  Human Resources Director:

  Miss Janet Kyle

  Mental Health Director:

  738

  Borders Community Health Services NHS Trust (Dingleton Hospital, Melrose, TD6 9HN)

  Non-Executive Directors

  Executive Directors

  Mr. Hector Christic

  Clinical Services Director:

  Mrs. Irene Morris

  Estate Director:

  Mr. Bill Wilkie

  Borders General Hospital NHS Trust (Borders General Hospital, Melrose, Roxburghshire TD6 9BS)

  Non-Executive Directors

  Executive Directors

  Mrs. Ann Bryce

  Acting Chief Executive:

  Mr. Allistair Matheson

  Professor Kenneth Fowler

  Medical Director:

  Dr. Peter Buchan

  Mr. George Finlay

  Nursing Director:

  Vacant

  Mrs. Elspeth Bruce

  Finance Director:

  Mr. Allistair Matheson

  Mr. Graham Watt

  Human Resources Director:

  Mr. Simon Crouch

  Dumfries and Galloway Community Services NHS Trust (Crichton Hall, Crichton Royal Hospital, Glencapple Road, Dumfries DG1 4TF)

  Non-Executive Directors

  Executive Directors

  Dr. Robert Grieve

  Chief Executive:

  Dr. Tom Shearer

  Mr. Alexander Scott

  Medical Director:

  Dr. John Waterhouse

  Mr. Ronald Percy

  Nursing Director:

  Mr. Richard Swift

  Mr. William Alexander

  Finance Director:

  Mr. Keith Stephenson

  Mrs. Janette Richardson

  Human Resources Director:

  Miss Dorothy Elsey

  Glasgow Dental Hospital and School NHS Trust (378 Sauchiehall Street, Glasgow G2 3JZ)

  Non-executive directors

  Executive directors

  Rev. Malcolm Cuthbertson

  Chief Executive:

  Dr. Doreen Steele

  Mrs. Elspeth Farmer

  Dental Director:

  Vacant

  Sir David Mason

  Nursing Director:

  Ms Teresa Kemp

  Mr. John Bannon

  Finance Director:

  Mr. Colin Brown

  Mrs. Joy Travers

  Human Resources Director:

  Dr. Doreen Steele

  Research Director:

  Vacant

  Lanarkshire Healthcare NHS Trust (Strathclyde Hospital, Airbles Road, Motherwell ML1 3BW)

  Non-executive directors

  Executive directors

  Mrs. Peggy Murphy

  Chief Executive:

  Mr. David Parr

  Mrs. Winifred Sherry

  Medical Director:

  Dr. Allan Sinclair

  Ver Rev. Dr. Hugh Wyllie

  Nursing Director:

  Mrs. Helen Scott

  739

  Lanarkshire Healthcare NHS Trust (Strathclyde Hospital, Airbles Road, Motherwell ML1 3BW)

  Non-executive directors

  Executive directors

  Mrs. Mary Smith

  Finance Director:

  Miss Elaine Ramage

  Mr. Robert Thomson

  Human Resources Director:

  Mr. Kenny Small

  Planning and Contracts Director:

  Mr. Kenny Small

  Director of Estates:

  Mr. Leslie Lambert

  Lomond Healthcare NHS Trust (Vale of Leven District General Hospital, Alexandria, Dunbartonshire, G83 OUA)

  Non-executive directors

  Executive directors

  Mrs. Eileen Gorie

  Chief Executive: Mr. Stephen Hayes

  Rev. Ian Miller

  Medical Director: Mr. Eric W. Taylor

  Mrs. Elizabeth McHard

  Nursing Director: Vacant

  Mr. Archibald Mackenzie

  Finance Director: Mr. Ross Arbuckle

  Mr. David Morrell

  Human Resources Director:

  Mrs. Francine G. Ewen

  Scottish Ambulance Service NHS Trst (National Headquarters, Tipperlinn Road, Edinburgh EH 10 5UU)

  Non-Executive Directors

  Executive Directors

  Mr. William Campbell

  Chief Executive: Mr. Andrew

  Freemantle

  Mr Greer Johnston

  Medical Director: Mr. Andrew

  Marsden

  Mr. Neil Menzies

  Finance Director: Mr. Brian J. Roy

  Dr. David Cormack

  Human Resources Director: Mr. John

  Bateman

  Miss Ann Foster

  Logistics Director: Mr. Clive Wooller

  Dental Services
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many dental patients were registered at 31 March in each health board area in Scotland. [25350]

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 23 May 1995]: The number of patients registered with a dentist at 31 March in each health board area in Scotland is shown in the table.

  Dental patients registered at 31 March 1995—by Health Board area in Scotland

  Health board

  Patients registered

  Scotland

  2,473,758

  Argyll and Clyde

  204,708

  Ayrshire and Arran

  192,382

  Borders

  55,105

  Dumfries and Galloway

  65,869

  Fife

  170,247

  Forth Valley

  132,150

  Grampian

  256,628

  Greater Glasgow

  458,436

  Highland

  82,613

  Lanarkshire

  241,947

  Lothian

  375,991

  Orkney

  4,766

  Shetland

  6,822

  Tayside

  217,007

  Western Isles

  9,087

  Non-domestic Rates
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how much the Scottish Office estimates will be raised through the imposition of non-domestic rates charges on empty properties during the financial year 1995–96. [25338]

  Mr. Kynoch
  [holding answer 23 May 1995]: It is estiamted that the additional rates income due to changes in unoccupied property relief will be £23.5 million in 1995–96. This was taken fully into account in determining the level of the unified business rate for 1995–96, so there is no additional burden on business ratepayers in aggregate as a result of this measure.

  Official Visits
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many official visits on ministerial business each Minister in his Department undertook during the last 12 months to each parliamentary constituency in Scotland. [25339]

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 23 May 1995]: To list visits made to each Scottish constituency in the last 12 months would involve disproportionate costs. However, since 20 May 1994, Scottish Office Ministers have made a total of 313 visits to Scottish constituencies.

  Planning Applications
  Mr. Donohoe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was(a) the number of planning application refusals considered by the Scottish Office and (b) the number of planning application refusals which were overturned by the Scottish Office for each year since 1979–80 and for each planning authority. [25342]

  Mr. Kynoch
  [holding answer 23 May 1995]: This information is available only by calendar year. The answer to part (a) of the question is as set out. The answer to part (b) regarding the number of planning applications which were overturned by the Scottish Office for each year since 1979 is also set out, but it is not possible to break this down for each planning authority.

  Calendar year

  Planning appeals decided

  Planning appeals allowed

  1979

  319

  68

  1980

  320

  75

  1981

  415

  117

  1982

  409

  136

  1983

  445

  144

  1984

  396

  149

  1985

  508

  166

  1986

  542

  193

  1987

  589

  223

  1988

  636

  233

  1989

  702

  247

  1990

  960

  348

  1991

  923

  313

  1992

  886

  294

  1993

  765

  267

  1994

  643

  177

  Residential Homes
  Mr. Foulkes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what was the total income in 1993–94 of each
  741
  local authority and in total from placements of old people in (a) registered and (b) unregistered independent residential care and nursing homes, inside and outside the local authority area and from placements in local authority homes for older people; and if he will break down by income from (i) government grants, inside aggregate

  Local Authority Income relating to fully staffed residential homes for older people: 1993–94 (Provisional)

  £ thousands

  Income source

  Borders

  Central

  Dumfries and Galloway

  Fife

  Grampian

  Highland

  (i)Government grants

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  (ii) Sales

  —

  —

  —

  59

  —

  42

  (iii) Rents, fees and charges

  1,522

  1,701

  1,013

  1,453

  3,525

  1,337

  (iv) Other accounts and authorities1

  —

  257

  5

  —

  —

  6

  (v) Other incomes

  —

  —

  —

  6

  280

  —

  Total income

  1,522

  1,958

  1,018

  1,518

  3,805

  1,385

  Notes:

  (1) Includes income for other accounts in the same local authority and from other local authorities.

  Source:

  Local financial returns made by local authorities to Scottish Office.

  £ thousands

  Income source

  Lothian

  Strathclyde

  Tayside

  Orkney

  Shetland

  W Isles

  Scotland

  (i) Government grants

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  45

  45

  (ii)Sales

  20

  47

  —

  —

  76

  —

  244

  (iii)Rents, Fees and charges

  4,482

  10,230

  2,689

  242

  296

  399

  28,889

  (iv)Other accounts and authorities1

  2

  173

  —

  —

  —

  —

  443

  (v)Other income

  —

  1

  10

  5

  4

  —

  306

  Total income

  4,504

  10,451

  2,699

  247

  376

  444

  29,927

  Notes:

  1 Includes income for other accounts in the same local authority and from other local authorities.

  Source:

  Local financial returns made by local authorities to Scottish Office.

  Nursing Homes
  Mr. Hood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the procedures that operate in the Lanarkshire health board area for inspecting nursing homes; and if he will make a statement. [25484]

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: The Nursing Homes Registration (Scotland) Act 1938, as amended, places the responsibility for the registration and inspection of nursing homes on the local health board. The Scottish Office Home and Health Department has issued model guidelines for the registration and inspection of nursing homes for elderly people, for people with dementia, for people with a learning disability and for homes providing acute services. All health boards are expected to follow this national guidance.

  Mr. Hood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will visit Orchard house nursing home to assess the quality of care provided for the elderly residents at that home. [25486]

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: My right hon. Friend understands that an inquiry by Lanarkshire health board into the standards of care at Orchard house nursing home has been under way for some months, and is expected to report to the board in early June.
  742
  external finance and outside aggregate external finance, (ii) sales, (iii) fees and charges, (iv) other income and (v) joint arrangements. [25394]

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 23 May 1995]: The available information is shown in the following table:

  Lanarkshire Health Board
  Mr. Hood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will give details as to the length of service, salary and qualifications of the Lanarkshire health board's senior nursing officer. [25483]

  Lord James Douglas-Hamilton
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: Such information is not held centrally. The hon. Member may therefore wish to pursue his query with Lanarkshire health board.

  Forestry Commission
  Mr. Tipping
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list by English county and Scottish region Forestry Commission woodland currently offered for sale, under offer or proposed for sale within the next six months; and if he will state for each piece of woodland its size and the steps which have been taken to ensure that public access on foot is permitted after any sale takes place. [24619]

  Sir Hector Monro
  [holding answer 18 May 1995]: The information is as follows:

  County/Region

  Name of property

  Area (hectares)

  Continued public access

  WOODLAND CURRENTLY FOR SALE ON THE OPEN MARKET

  England

  Cambridgeshire

  Langley High Wood

  49

  d

  Cornwall

  Hay Wood

  54

  d

  743

  County/Region

  Name of property

  Area (hectares)

  Continued public access

  Port Elliot, Pathada,

  95

  d

  Perdredda

  Treworgey Wood

  17

  d

  Cumbria

  Black Knors

  25

  b

  Derbyshire

  Moorhall Wood

  8

  d

  Devon

  Bedpark

  8

  d

  Hawkmoor

  22

  b

  Durham

  Campville

  30

  b

  Stanley Wood Cottages

  31

  c

  Essex

  Audley End Estate

  57

  d

  Humberside

  Greenwickdale Wood

  37

  d

  Leicestershire

  Bolt Wood

  27

  d

  Lincolnshire

  Hurn Wood

  9

  d

  Shropshire

  Coed Detton

  14

  b

  Somerset

  Higher Bitcombe

  30

  d

  South Yorkshire

  Greensprings Wood

  12

  a

  Old Park Wood

  41

  c

  Owston and Duck Holt

  66

  d

  Woods

  Scotland

  Borders

  Edgarhope

  143

  d

  Spottiswoode

  191

  b

  Dumfries and Galloway

  Glaik

  62

  b

  Grampian

  Aquharney

  128

  a

  Auchinroath

  62

  b

  Glenbuchat

  539

  d

  Greenness

  115

  d

  Longhill (part)

  120

  b

  New Pitsligo

  42

  e

  Highland

  Abriachan

  865

  b

  Achrugan

  559

  a

  Ardelve

  26

  b

  Cuidrach

  58

  b

  Duisky

  89

  d

  Garvan, North

  112

  d

  Garvan, South

  183

  d

  Loch Ashie

  437

  d

  Lundavra

  148

  a

  New Kelso

  43

  d

  Tote

  421

  b

  Uig

  40

  b

  Strathclyde

  Daljarrock

  51

  b

  Docherneil

  83

  b

  Glenmard

  56

  b

  Tayside

  Camusericht

  295

  d

  Upper Glenprosen

  230

  d

  WOODLANDS CURRENTLY UNDER OFFER

  England

  Berkshire

  Lot Wood (part)

  6

  d

  Cambridgeshire

  West Wood

  30

  d

  Cornwall

  Branchecombe

  2

  d

  Coldgear

  4

  d

  Cutmere and Bara

  4

  d

  Moor/Scullop

  3

  d

  Cumbria

  Foulshaw Big Belt

  13

  b

  Warriners Wood

  4

  b

  Isle of Wight

  Timber Copse

  8

  a

  Kent

  Post Wood

  26

  a

  Lancashire

  Long Ellers Wood

  2

  d

  Lincolnshire

  Halstead Wood

  26

  d

  Somerset

  Frys Wood

  25

  e

  South Yorkshire

  Walkers Wood

  6

  b

  Suffolk

  Wrights Wood

  5

  d

  Scotland

  Borders

  Fruid, land at

  62

  b

  Gala Blocks

  153

  a

  Central

  Stronvar

  2

  b

  Fife

  Kirkton Barns

  26

  d

  Grampian

  Lenabo

  332

  a

  Moreseat of Hatton

  38

  d

  Oldtown Belt

  3

  c

  White Cow Wood

  448

  a

  Wood of Wrae

  50

  a

  Highland

  Clava and Craggie

  34

  d

  Craskie Woods

  49

  b

  Eilean Darach and

  110

  b

  Dundonnel

  Faichem Wood

  7

  b

  744

  County/Region

  Name of property

  Area (hectares)

  Continued public access

  Garbole Forest

  699

  b

  Glencannich Wood

  70

  b

  Lochlait Wood

  90

  a

  Muchrachd Wood

  29

  b

  Rebeg

  77

  b

  Strathclyde

  Kirnan Wood

  222

  d

  Tayside

  Claysykes

  17

  b

  a. Access agreement has been concluded.

  b. Local authority declined to enter an access agreement.

  c. Local authority is considering whether to enter an access agreement.

  d. A third party with an interest has declined to enter an access agreement or restrictions in the Commission's title prevented the offer of an access agreement.

  e. Sale commenced before the introduction of the arrangements for access agreements.

  Advance notification of areas being considered for sale is given in the "Estates Gazette" in respect of all woodlands of more than five hectares, together with any other land having a known conservation, recreation or amenity interest. Copies of the "Estates Gazette" are held in the Library of the House.

  Entrepreneurship
  Mr. Stewart
  To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on his policy for the encouragement of entrepreneurship in Scotland; and what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of this policy. [22651]

  Mr. Lang
  [holding answer 9 May 1995]: Entrepreneurship is essential to the continued competitiveness of the Scottish economy. The Government have in place a range of initiatives aimed at encouraging young people to consider a career in business, supporting such careers with an appropriate training infrastructure and providing assistance and advice on the creation and development of small businesses. Specific initiatives include the recent publication of a new framework for action for the development of improved education/industry links; the business birth rate strategy operated by Scottish Enterprise, which is aimed at increasing the number of business start-ups in Scotland; and the promotion by Scottish Enterprise of 1995 as "The Year of the Entrepreneur"—a concept which acts as a framework for a series of events and presentations aimed specifically at encouraging entrepreneurship. More generally, all local enterprise companies are pursuing policies aimed at promoting business activity and entrepreneurship throughout Scotland. The effectiveness of this policy is evidenced by the continuing success of the Scottish economy, both domestically and in terms of its export performance.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

  Roger Levitt
  Mr. John Marshall
  To ask the Attorney-General (1) what discussions he has had about the Roger Levitt case since 21 May; [26281]

  (2) when plea bargaining began in the case of Roger Levitt. [26246]
  745
  The Attorney-General
  Since 21 May, I have discussed the case with officials simply for the purpose of preparing answers to parliamentary questions. I refer my hon. Friend to my earlier written answers on the 9 December 1993, and 17 December 1993 at columns 332–33 and 1045–46 respectively, which explained the events that led up to Mr. Levitt's plea.

  Butte Mining
  Mr. Morgan
  To ask the Attorney-General what consultations he has had with the director of the Serious Fraud Office concerning the investigation into the company affairs of Butte Mining. [26592]

  The Attorney-General
  I frequently meet the director of the Serious Fraud Office for discussions about matters of departmental interest, including casework. It is my policy not to divulge the subject matter of such meetings or operational details of current investigations.

  "Tomorrow's Job" Investigation
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Attorney-General how many reports have been referred by the Metropolitan police to the Crown Prosecution Service from the "Tomorrow's Job" investigation; how many have been referred to him by the Crown Prosecution Service; and what action he has taken. [25986]

  The Attorney-General
  The police have forwarded one interim report to the Crown Prosecution Service which specifically arises out of their inquiries concerning "Tomorrow's Job". The Crown Prosecution Service is considering this report and will submit it to me if it concludes that proceedings may be justified against any person for an offence requiring my consent.

  Crown Prosecution Service Report
  Mr. Madden
  To ask Mr. Attorney General on what date the Crown Prosecution Service referred to him a report, concerning a printer, received by the Crown Prosecution Service last August from the Metropolitan police; and what action he is taking in this matter. [25988]

  The Attorney-General
  Papers relating to the case to which the hon. Member refers were submitted to me by the Crown Prosecution Service on 13 April 1995. I requested and am awaiting a more detailed analysis of the relevant material.

  "Red Watch"
  Mr. Madden
  To ask Mr. Attorney General when the Crown Prosecution Service received from the Metropolitan Police the third issue of "Red Watch"; and what action has been taken by the Crown Prosecution Service. [25989]

  The Attorney-General
  The publication "Red Watch" is a part of the "Combat 18" magazine issue No. 3. The Metropolitan police supplied the Crown Prosecution Service with a copy of that magazine on 20 January 1995, for information only. A police report and the evidence gathered in the investigation into the publication of "Combat 18" magazine issue No. 3 has been delivered to the Crown Prosecution Service on 6 April 1995 and a prosecution is under consideration.

  Disciplinary Proceedings
  Mr. Straw
  To ask the Attorney-General how many solicitors employed by the Crown Prosecution Service since 1987 have been the subject of disciplinary proceedings by the Law Society(a) before their employment with the Crown Prosecution Service commenced and (b) during their employment with the Crown Prosecution Service. [25994]

  The Attorney-General
  The information sought by the hon. Member could be definitively obtained only by a trawl of the personal files relating to all solicitors currently employed, as well as those previously employed. That exercise would involve disproportionate costs.

  A review by the Department, with the assistance of the Law Society had identified (a) three solicitors who were the subject of disciplinary proceedings before their employment commenced with the Crown Prosecution Service, whom one remains in the employment of the Crown Prosecution Service, with the agreement of the Law Society. The other two ceased to be employed in 1989. The answer to (b) is that two solicitors have been the subject of disciplinary proceedings during their employment with the Crown Prosecution Service, but neither has had their practising certificate withdrawn. Both are still employed by the Crown Prosecution Service.

OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION

  Global Environment Facility
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs who is Her Majesty's Government's representative on the council of the global environment facility; and what arrangements have been made for his or her accountability to Parliament. [24724]

  Mr. Baldry
  The executive director for the United Kingdom's constituency in the council of the Global Environment Facility is Mr. David Turner, head of environment policy department in the Overseas Development Administration. The Government are accountable to Parliament for expenditures under the global environmental assistance programme through the Minister for Overseas Development.

  Countdown 2000
  Sir David Steel
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans the Overseas Development Administration has to assist the Leprosy Mission for the Countdown 2000 campaign. [25876]

  Mr. Baldry
  The Overseas Development Administration is not directly involved in the Countdown 2000 campaign, but has supported the Leprosy Mission's work in developing countries for some years and will continue to do so. Current funding involves programmes in Bangladesh, Indonesia and Chad.

  Family Planning
  Mr. Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the amounts spent by the Overseas Development Administration in the overall sum spent on family planning on(a) advertising and information, (b) abortion and abortifacients,

  747
  (c) barrier methods of contraception, (d) chemical methods of contraception and (e) sterilisation. [25310]

  Mr. Baldry
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: The table lists the relevant bilateral commitments in 1994:

  £ million

  Family planning component

  1994 Commitment

  Abortion and abortifacients

  nil

  Barrier methods (condoms)

  3.339

  Chemical (hormonal) methods

  7.12

  Notes:

  1. Support for voluntary surgical contraception, as one of a variety of methods of contraception available, has been an element of commitments for projects in previous years. There were no such commitments in 1994.

  2. All the projects in question provide information about family planning and the range of contraceptive methods available. Such information is provided as part of an overall service to clients and is not separately costed.

  Mr. David Alton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what records his Department keeps of instances or reports of coercive family planning overseas. [25304]

  Mr. Baldry
  [holding answer 22 May 1995]: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave him on 23 May at column 514.

NORTHERN IRELAND

  Waste Disposal
  Mr. William O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the future provision for waste disposal in Northern Ireland. [24631]

  Sir John Wheeler
  Arrangements for the disposal of waste will be determined by district councils, taking into account the specific needs of their areas, the costs to the community and the requirement for proper environmental safeguards.

  Bodies (Information)
  Mr. Barnes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he raised with the Sinn Fein delegation in his bilateral talks the question of the fate of those killed by the Provisional IRA who are still unburied; and if he will make a statement. [24632]

  Mr. Acnram
  Yes. During yesterday's meeting in exploratory dialogue with Sinn Fein I raised this important issue and called upon it to use its influence to ensure that the families of the bereaved were given such information as the IRA had about their fate and the whereabouts of their bodies.

  Peace Process
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what progress has been made by the Secretary of State in his discussions with the Dublin Government on the peace process. [24633]

  Mr. Ancram
  My right hon. and learned Friend last met the Tanaiste at the intergovernmental conference in 748
  Dublin on 28 April; the Prime Minister and the Taoiseach met in the margins of the VE ceremonies in Moscow. On both occasions, the progress of the peace process and the right ways of advancing it were discussed.

  Mr. Hunter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a further statement on the progress of the exploratory dialogue and substantive talks which he is conducting with political parties in Northern Ireland. [24637]

  Mr. Ancram
  Exploratory dialogue with the loyalists and Sinn Fein continue on the basis set out in the reply I gave the hon. Members for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick) for Pendle (Mr. Prentice) and for Falkirk, West (Mr. Canavan) earlier today.

  As for substantive talks, my right hon. and learned Friend has invited the four main parties to discuss with him bilaterally the issues on which there would need to be agreement if there is to be a comprehensive settlement. So far, a meeting has been held with the Ulster Unionist party, and meetings with the alliance and SDLP are currently being arranged. The DUP has regrettably not responded formally to my right hon. and learned Friend's invitation—at least not at this stage.

  Mr. Hain
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement about latest progress in the peace negotiations. [24639]

  Mr. Ancram
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave the hon. Members for Walsall, North, (Mr. Winnick) for Pendle (Mr. Prentice) and for Falkirk, West (Mr. Canavan) earlier today.

  Irish Medium Schools
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what new proposals he has to improve the work of Irish medium schools. [24635]

  Mr. Ancram
  Improvements in the work of Irish medium schools are primarily a matter for their boards of governors. All grant-aided Irish medium schools can avail themselves of the extensive curriculum advisory and support services provided by the education and library boards.

  Northern Ireland-Scotland Co-operation
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he last met the Secretary of State for Scotland to promote trade, tourism and greater co-operation between Northern Ireland and Scotland. [24636]

  Sir John Wheeler
  My right hon. and learned Friend meets the Secretary of State for Scotland frequently to discuss matters of common interest.

  Private Lee Clegg
  Sir Michael Neubert
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what representations he has received
  749
  about the case of Private Clegg in the last three months; and what response he has made to them. [24638]

  Sir John Wheeler
  Private Clegg's case has generated very great interest, including a number of petitions and over 4,000 individual letters from the public. Approximately half the correspondents have been sent replies.

  Royal Ulster Constabulary
  Mr. Corbyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what plans he has to restructure the Royal Ulster Constabulary. [24640]

  Sir John Wheeler
  None at present. The Government published proposals for reform of the tripartite structure in 1994. The Police Authority and the RUC are currently conducting public consultations on policing services. The RUC is engaged in a detailed consultation process, both within the force and externally, which will identify future policing strategy. Any change to the structure of the RUC will be based on careful professional evaluation of policing needs, and take into account the consultation processes.

  Terrorist Disarmament
  Mr. Cyril D. Townsend
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what progress is being made over the handing over and destruction of terrorist arms and explosives in Northern Ireland. [24641]

  Sir John Wheeler
  I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave earlier today to my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton).

  Abortion
  Mrs. Ann Winterton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many right hon. and hon. Members representing Northern Ireland constituencies have made representatives(a) supporting and (b) opposing extension to the Province of the Abortion Act 1967. [24642]

  Mr. Ancram
  In the last three years, no Northern Ireland Member has made representations supporting the extension of the Abortion Act 1967 to Northern Ireland. Seven Northern Ireland Members have made representations to Ministers expressing their opposition to the extension of the Act.

  Police (Seat Belts)
  Mr. Peter Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if police officers will now wear seat belts in cars. [24643]

  Sir John Wheeler
  The Royal Ulster Constabulary will keep its policy on the wearing of seat belts under review, but it must continue to be a matter of judgment as to whether or not a police officer wears a seat belt according to the prevailing circumstances and assessment of the security risk.

  Benefit Applications
  Mr. Clifford Forsythe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what steps are taken to apply the parity of treatment arrangement between Northern 750
  Ireland and Great Britain to ensure equality of treatment between identical social security benefit applicants residing in Northern Ireland and Great Britain. [24644]

  Mr. Ancram
  Although social security benefits are available in Northern Ireland on the same basis as they are in Great Britain, Northern Ireland has its own social security legislation and the independent adjudication authorities are obliged to apply this in deciding on applications for benefit having regard to the particular circumstances of the applicant only. The statutory appeal procedures can be invoked if the applicant is dissatisfied with the decision in their case.

  Inward Investment
  Mr. Spring
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what effort are being made to attract inward investment into the Province. [24645]

  Mr. Ancram
  The Industrial Development Board for Northern Ireland acting through the Department of Economic Development has overall responsibility for attracting inward investment to Northern Ireland. It has representative offices in Great Britain, Germany, the United States and Asia. In light of a more positive business climate in Northern Ireland, the IDB plans substantially to increase its overseas representation. Already, an office has been opened in Atlanta, Georgia and a person has been appointed in Singapore to research and to identify foreign investment potential.

  Mr. Simon Coombs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the level of inward investment in Northern Ireland since the ceasefires. [24646]

  Mr. Ancram
  Investment inquiries have risen dramatically since the ceasefires to 743 in the six months ended 31 March compared to 189 in the corresponding period last year. First-time visits also rose from 146 in 1993–94 to 163 in 1994–95. However, because of the long lead time on decisions by companies about their internationally mobile investments, it will be some time before the practical benefits of the ceasefires are seen in terms of much needed additional jobs on the ground.

  Industrial Disputes
  Mr. John Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement about the number of days lost in industrial disputes in Northern Ireland. [24647]

  Sir John Wheeler
  In Northern Ireland the number of days lost due to industrial disputes has fallen significantly in recent years. It fell to a record low of nine days per 1,000 employees in 1994 from an average of 76 days over the previous 10-year period.

  Irish Constitution
  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he last met the Taoiseach to discuss articles of the Irish constitution. [24648]

  Mr. Ancram
  My right hon. and learned Friend last met the Taoiseach at a memorial ceremony at Islandbridge on 28 April. The purpose of the ceremony was to pay tribute to those Irish people who fought and died in the British forces in the last war.
  751
  The Irish constitution and any possible changes to it are a matter for the Irish Government, Parliament and people. "A New Framework for Agreement" sets out the Irish Government's commitment to remove any jurisdictional or territorial claim of legal right over the territory of Northern Ireland contrary to the will of its people.

  Mr. Peter Robinson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will seek to persuade the Government of Ireland to declare that they have no selfish, political economic or strategic interest in Northern Ireland. [25954]

  Mr. Ancram
  The Irish Government have made it clear that, as part of a wider agreement, they will introduce and support changes in the Irish constitution. The Taoiseach has said that those changes would remove any jurisdictional or territorial claim of legal right over the territory of Northern Ireland contrary to the will of its people.

  Energy Costs
  Mr. Foulkes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he next expects to meet the Northern Ireland Chamber of Commerce to discuss energy costs in the Province. [24649]

  Sir John Wheeler
  There are no plans for such a meeting.

  Police Complaints
  Mr. Butler
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he will lay before Parliament copies of the annual report of the Independent Commission for Police Complaints for Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement.

  Mr. Patrick Mayhew
  The commission's report for 1994, which is the seventh annual report to be produced by the commission since its establishment in 1988, was laid before Parliament on 26 April. The report sets out the purpose and values of the commission. It provides details of the commission's work during the year in supervising the investigation of complaints against the police and of its role in disciplinary proceedings.

  The report shows clearly the valuable work which is carried out by the commission in ensuring that complaints against the police are dealt with independently and in effective manner.

  I am grateful to the chairman and members of the commission for the important work they do to sustain and increase public confidence in the police complaints system.

  Tape-recorded Interviews
  Mr. Mullin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he last discussed the tape recording of interviews with suspects with the Chief Constable of the RUC; and what plans he has to bring practice in Northern Ireland into line with that elsewhere in the UK. [24634]

  Sir John Wheeler
  My right hon. and learned Friend and I have regular meetings with the Chief Constable.

  Tape recording of interviews under the Police and Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 follows guidelines similar to the English PACE codes. I intend to replace these guidelines in a revised set of codes for Northern Ireland in early 1996.

  Housing Executive
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list the existing Housing Executive developments which have been transferred for management purposes to housing associations. [25923]

  Mr. Ancram
  A number of housing executive properties in the streets listed have been transferred to housing associations for management purposes:

  South Region (Portadown)

  Corcain park

  Millington park

  Moeran park

  North-east Region (Coleraine)

  Glenvarra drive

  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list the Housing Executive new build schemes which will be transferred to housing associations for implementation and management. [25924]

  Mr. Ancram
  The new build schemes, which it has been agreed will transfer from the Housing Executive to housing associations for implementation and management, are as follows:

  Maphoner road, Mullaghbawn, phase 2, Co Armagh

  Ballygowan road, phase 2, Banbridge, Co Down

  Bowtown road, phase 5, Newtownards, Co Down

  Camphill, Newtownbutler, phase 6, Co Fermanagh

  Ballyekelly, phase 1, Co Londonderry

  Burnside road, Coleraine, Co Londonderry

  2–20 Charleville street, Belfast

  Market Testing
  Mr. Spellar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what considerations underlay the requirements on health authorities to submit quarterly reports on competitive tendering; and what consideration was given to adopting the English model of an annual report. [25239]

  Mr. Ancram
  The White Paper "Competing for Quality" requires all UK health Departments to monitor and report annually on progress by their agent bodies in market testing. The Department of Health and Social Services has therefore adopted this process. In addition, the Department has asked for the co-operation of boards and trusts in providing interim quarterly updates of the same information as is contained in the annual returns, to assist in responses to inquiries and to meet the reporting requirements of the efficiency unit.

  Mr. Spellar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what instructions his Department has issued to health boards and health trusts regarding competitive tendering. [25236]

  Mr. Ancram
  Health and social services boards and trusts have been advised that they must implement Government policy set out in the White Paper "Competing for Quality". In addition, and in keeping with the NHS in Great Britain, there is a management requirement to market test the specific services of domestic, laundry and catering.

  RUC Drug Squad
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what was the average number of officers of the Royal Ulster Constabulary in the drug squad in each of the past 10 years; and if he will make a statement
  753
  about the presence of illegal drugs in Northern Ireland. [24957]

  Sir John Wheeler
  Every operational RUC officer is aware of the drugs issue and is a resource in combating drugs offences within Northern Ireland. At sub-divisional level, there are some 70 officers operating within 30 drugs liaison units whose sole responsibility is to address the problems of drug offences at a local level.

  The headquarters drugs squad itself over the past 10 years has had on average 36 officers, arising from 34 in 1985 to a present strength of 44 officers, including the recent upgrading to Detective Superintendent of the post of head of drugs squad.

  Northern Ireland, like other parts of the UK and Europe, does have an identifiable problem in the availability of illegal drugs, although it does not yet suffer the widespread abuse of drugs found elsewhere. One indicator of the availability of illegal drugs is the rate of seizures by the RUC; the Chief Constable's report for 1994 gives full details of drug seizures by the RUC and other agencies, which show a clear upward trend.

  The Government, together with the RUC and other agencies, both statutory and voluntary, are committed to a robust multi-agency approach to tackle effectively all aspects of the drugs problem in Northern Ireland.

  Sheep Subsidy
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many farmers receive the subsidy of £39.80 per head for sheep which are neither kept for breeding lambs nor for having their wool shorn; and if he will make a statement on the practice of keeping non-productive sheep for the purpose of collecting the sheep subsidy. [24958]

  Mr. Ancram
  To be eligible for sheep annual premium, animals need only be females at least 12 months of age or have given birth to a lamb. Northern Ireland statistics on this scheme do not identify the purposes for which eligible animals are kept.

  Retirements and Redundancies
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what is the annual cost of his Department of staff leaving under redundancy/early retirement schemes to incorporate (i) added years lump sum payments, (ii) redundancy payments, (iii) pension payments, including enhancements and (iv) any other special arrangements for(a) 1993–94, (b) 1994–95, (c) projected for 1995–96 and (d) projected for 1996–97. [25469]

  Sir John Wheeler
  For staff leaving the Northern Ireland Office and other Northern Ireland Departments these costs are accounted for as non-departmental running costs, exempt, until 31 March 1994. From 1 April 1994, these costs are accounted for as departmental running costs as in the home civil service.

  A detailed breakdown of the various costs could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  The total costs in respect of officers leaving the Northern Ireland Office and the other Northern Ireland Departments in 1993–94 and 1994–95 were £10,900,000 and £7,082,000 respectively.

  The planning of early retirements which will take place in 1995–96 are still at an early stage, and for this reason it is not possible to provide projected costs although there
  754
  is estimates provision for £3,000,000 expenditure at this time. Projections for 1996–97 will be determined during the coming public expenditure survey.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, how many staff of(a) the Northern Ireland Office and (b) agencies for which the Northern Ireland Office is responsible (i) took early retirement, (ii) took voluntary redundancy (iii) took compulsory redundancy and (iv) were retired on medical grounds in (1) 1993–94 and (2) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25501]

  Sir John Wheeler
  The information is as follows:

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1995–96

  (i) Took early retirement

  NIO (excluding agencies)

  2

  1

  0

  Agencies

  1

  0

  0

  (ii) Took voluntary redundancy

  NIO (excluding agencies)

  13

  12

  0

  Agencies

  0

  0

  15

  (iii) Took compulsory redundancy

  NIO (excluding agencies)

  0

  0

  0

  Agencies

  0

  0

  0

  (iv) Were retired on medical grounds

  NIO (excluding agencies)

  11

  15

  n/a

  Agencies

  1

  2

  n/a

  It is not possible to forecast the number of retirements on medical grounds.

  Belvoir Park Hospital
  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (1) what hospital costs and what increase in revenue costs have been anticipated as a result of the decision by the Eastern area health board to remove the infectious diseases service from Belvoir Park hospital; [24963]

  (2) if the fixed costs of the infectious diseases service at Belvoir Park hospital, following its closure, will be transferred to the other service at Belvoir hospital; what will be the consequences for all area boards and general practitioner fundholders who purchase cancer treatment services at Belvoir hospital; and to what extent these consequences were taken into consideration by the Eastern area health board prior to its decision to close down the infectious diseases service at Belvoir hospital; [24966]

  (3) if he will make available the option appraisals and business case which identified benefits against the costs involved in the transfer of the infectious diseases service from Belvoir Park hospital; [24968]

  (4) if the Eastern area health board consulted with the Northern and Southern area health boards prior to the decision by the Eastern board to close the infectious diseases service at Belvoir Park hospital; what representations he has received from the Northern and Southern health boards; and to what extent these area health boards presently use the infectious diseases service at Belvoir Park hospital; [24964]

  (5) to which hospital the infectious diseases service at Belvoir Park hospital will be transferred; and what is the target date for completion of this transfer. [24967]
  755
  Mr. Ancram
  The Eastern health and social services board's original proposal concerning the transfer of the infectious diseases service was incorporated in its acute hospital services strategy, published in November 1993 after consultation with wide range of groups and individuals including the other three boards. The Under-Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridgeshire, North-East (Mr. Moss), has not had any representations from any of these boards about this proposal. The latest figures available show that in 1993— 94 354 patients from the Northern board and 336 from the Southern board used this service at Belvoir Park.

  My noble Friend Baroness Denton approved the board's strategy in March 1994. After detailed investigation and further consideration of the proposal for infectious diseases the board has now decided that the service should be split and that it should be provided by the Royal Group of Hospitals trust and the Ulster, North Down and Ards Hospital trust. A steering group is to be established to take this forward and to complete the transfer by June 1996. It is hoped to do so on a revenue neutral basis. Any capital requirements linked to the transfer will be for the two trusts to meet, within available resources, and in the face of competing priorities.

  With regard to fixed costs, when a service is transferred from one provider to another, the original provider is expected to reduce so far as possible any fixed costs associated with that service over a reasonable period of time.

  Finally, any option appraisal and business case in support of the decision are a matter for the Eastern board and the chairman has been asked to write to the right hon. Gentleman.

  Mr. John D. Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many cases of infectious diseases used the service at Belvoir Park hospital in each of the past 10 years; and how many of these cases each year had to be sent to an intensive care facility at another location. [24965]

  Mr. Ancram
  The table shows the number of cases treated in the infectious diseases speciality in Belvoir Park hospital in the last 10 years. Information on the number of cases transferred to an intensive care facility at another location is not available.

  Number

  1984

  1,988

  1985

  2,259

  1986

  2,018

  1987

  2,090

  1988–89

  1,889

  1989–90

  2,253

  1990–91

  2,241

  1991–92

  2,048

  1992–93

  2,079

  1993–94

  2,295

  Government Cleaning Contracts
  Mr. Spellar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if Government cleaning remains on the approved list for tenders for contracts in the health sector in Northern Ireland. [25237]

  Mr. Ancram
  The health and personal social services in Northern Ireland do not operate an approved list system.

  Housing, South Down
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (1) what steps have been taken to replace the remaining Orlit dwellings in the constituency of South Down; [25325]

  (2) how many Orlit dwellings have been replaced with new build in the constituency of South Down since 1 April 1987 to 31 March 1995; and how many have still to be replaced. [25326]

  Mr. Ancram
  These are matters for the Northern Ireland Housing Executive, but I have been advised by the chief executive that 163 Orlit dwellings have been replaced in the period 1 April 1987 to 31 March 1995 in the South Down constituency. A further 42 Orlit dwellings remain in Housing Executive ownership. The replacement of these dwellings at the end of their useful economic lives depends on a number of factors including housing need in the areas where the dwellings are sited. The Housing Executive has programmed for eight of these dwellings to be replaced in 1996–97.

  Police Body Armour
  Mrs. Roche
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what plans he has to ensure that all police officers are supplied with body armour. [25144]

  Sir John Wheeler
  The Royal Ulster Constabulary has provided body armour for its members since 1972. It is on issue at every station and is available to all officers.

  Job Displacement Criteria
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will ensure that the same rules are applied with regard to job displacement criteria when industrial development grants are paid to create additional manufacturing capacity in Northern Ireland, as are applied to projects in Wales, Scotland and England; and if he will make a statement. [25004]

  Mr. Ancram
  The rules applied in Northern Ireland regarding job displacement criteria are exactly the same as those applied in all other parts of the United Kingdom.

  International Fund for Ireland
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what representations he has made to the United States Government about the importance of Congress(a) maintaining and (b) increasing support to the International Fund for Ireland. [25728]
  757
  Sir John Wheeler
  The Government are very supportive and appreciative of the work of the International Fund for Ireland. Ministers use every opportunity, both at home and abroad, to express the Government's appreciation of the generous international contributions to the fund, in particular the donations made by the United States. We are most grateful to President Clinton for his continuing support and look forward to Congress ratifying an increased US donation of $30 million in 1996 and 1997.

  Environmentally Sensitive Areas
  Dr. Strang
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many farms(a) are eligible to have land entered into each environmentally sensitive area in Northern Ireland and (b) have had land entered into each environmentally sensitive area in Northern Ireland. [25792]

  Mr. Ancram
  The information is as follows:

  ESA

  Eligible farms

  Under agreement (25 April 1995)

  Antrim Coast, Glens and Rathlin

  1,200

  229

  Slieve Gullion

  808

  1

  Mourne Mountains and Slieve Croob

  1,846

  321

  West Fermanagh and Erne Lakeland

  2,815

  303

  Sperrins

  2,170

  37

  Roads, South Down
  Mr. McGrady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what plans he has to improve the roads infrastructure within the constituency of South Down. [25748]

  Mr. Ancram
  In addition to a substantial programme of maintenance work, a number of minor improvement schemes will be carried out on the A2, A7, A22, A25, A50, B1, B2, B7 and B8 routes in the 1995–96 and 1996–97 financial years. Work on the Church street/Scotch street scheme in Downpatrick is programmed to start in the current financial year subject to the completion of the statutory processes.

  Ambulance Response Times
  Mr. Trimble
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many emergency calls for ambulances there have been in(a) Craigavon, (b) Newry and Mourne, and (d) Down districts from January 1995 to 30 April 1995; what has been the (i) longest, (ii) shortest and (iii) average time before the dispatch of an ambulance; and what has been the (1) longest, (2) shortest and (3) average time between the receipt of the call and the arrival of the patient at hospital. [24500]

  Sir John Wheeler
  This information is not available in the format requested. The table shows how many emergency calls were received by the Eastern ambulance trust and the Southern health and social services board during the quarter 1 January 1995 to 31 March 1995.758
  Activation times, defined as the time from receipt of an ermgency call until an ambulance is on its way, and response times, defined as the time from receipt of an emergency call until the arrival of an ambulance with the patient, are also shown. Information on the time from the receipt of an emergency call to the arrival of the patient at hospital is not collected centrally.

  Total number of emergency calls responded to within

  Board/trust

  Total number of emergency calls received

  Total number of emergency calls activated within 3 minutes

  8 mins

  18/21 mins

  Eastern

  6,819

  5,726

  3,355

  6,493

  Southern

  1,345

  1,168

  1667

  11,255

  Notes:

  Information is not collected centrally below board/trust level.

  Abortive calls have been excluded.

  1 The response time was not recorded for one emergency call.

  Race Relations
  Mr. Worthington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on his proposals for race relations legislation and his proposals for consultation thereon. [24600]

  Mr. Ancram
  Following a period of public consultation, in response to a question from the hon. Member for Torfaen (Mr. Murphy) on 27 April 1995,Official Report, column 705, my right hon. and learned Friend made clear his intention to introduce race relations legislation to Northern Ireland by means of an Order in Council.

  A draft proposal for an Order in Council will be published and comments sought in due course.

HEALTH

  Staff
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many posts were lost in(a) the Department of Health and (b) agencies for which the Department of Health is responsible, listing the total lost posts agency by agency in (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95; and how many posts are proposed to be lost in 1995–96; [25077]

  (2) what changes there have been in the numbers of staff employed by (a) the Department of Health and (b) agencies for which the Department of Health is responsible, listing the number of staff agency by agency in (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95; and what changes are projected for 1995–96; [25065]

  (3) what changes there have been in the numbers of staff in employment by grade in (a) her Department and (b) each agency for which her Department is responsible in (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96; [25630]

  (4) how many staff of (a) the Department of Health and (b) for which the DOH is responsible were employed on

  759
  a casual or short-term basis in (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95; and what are the projected figures for 1995–96. [25421]

  Mr. Sackville
  The number of permanent and casual staff employed by my Department and each of its executive agencies in 1993–94, projected outturn for 1994–95, and plans for 1995–96 are published in my Department's annual report, a copy of which is in the Library. No projections broken down by grade are available.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many staff of(a) the Department of Health and (b) agencies for which the Department of Health is responsible (i) took early retirement, (ii) took voluntary redundancy, (iii) took compulsory redundancy and (iv) were retired on medical grounds in (1) 1993–94 and (2) 1994–95; and what were the projected figures for 1995–96. [25516]

  Mr. Sackville
  The information is shown in the table.

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1995–96

  Department of Health

  Early retirement

  105

  33

  137

  Voluntary redundancy

  0

  104

  237

  Compulsory redundancy

  0

  54

  0

  Retired on medical grounds

  38

  37

  0

  Medicines Control Agency

  Early retirement

  5

  5

  2

  Voluntary redundancy

  0

  3

  0

  Compulsory redundancy

  0

  0

  0

  Retired on medical grounds

  1

  2

  1

  National Health Service Estates

  Early retirement

  6

  1

  7

  Voluntary redundancy

  0

  3

  9

  Compulsory redundancy

  0

  1

  0

  Retired on medical grounds

  0

  0

  1

  National Health Service Pension Agency

  Early retirement

  15

  6

  37

  Voluntary redundancy

  0

  4

  24

  Compulsory redundancy

  0

  0

  0

  Retired on medical grounds

  0

  0

  5

  Medical Devices Agency

  Early retirement

  0

  0

  16

  Voluntary redundancy

  0

  3

  7

  Compulsory redundancy

  0

  0

  0

  Retired on medical grounds

  0

  0

  0

  Notes:

  The Medical Devices Agency did not become an Agency until 27 September 1994 and the figures quoted for it represent the numbers leaving from that date. Figures relating to staff leaving prior to the Agency launch are included in the figures for the Department of Health.

  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the annual cost to the Department of staff leaving under redundancy/early retirement schemes to incorporate (i) added years lump sum payments for (ii) redundancy 760
  payments, (iii) pension payments including enhancements and (iv) any other special arrangements for (a) 1993–94, (b) 1994–95 and projected for (c) 1995–96 and (d) 1996–97. [25639]

  Mr. Sackville
  The costs to the Department of early retirement and redundancies are borne from the Department's running costs provision.

  A detailed breakdown of the various costs could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  The total costs borne on the Department's running costs in 1993–94 and 1994–95 were £4.51 million and £6.51 million respectively. For 1995–96, the amount is estimated at £2.73 million. Projections for 1996–97 will be determined during the coming public expenditure survey.

  Notes:

  1. Figures include ongoing costs of redundancies/early retirements from previous years.

  2. Costs shown for 1993–94 and 1994–95 include moneys paid to paymaster to offset costs of redundancies/early retirements in future years.

  3. Costs take into account Treasury contribution, from 1 October 1994 to 31 March 1997, of 80 per cent, of costs of reducing staff numbers in that period.

  Hospital providers
  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much as a percentage and in real terms hospital provider prices have changed in each of the last two years for providers serving Warwickshire residents, identifying each hospital provider's individual price change. [25206]

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not available centrally.

  Mental Disorder
  Sir Andrew Bowden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what contribution she expects her Department to make to the committee of specialists recently appointed by the Committee of Ministers to the Council of Europe to consider revision of Committee of Ministers' recommendation No. R(83)2 on the legal protection of persons suffering from mental disorder placed as involuntary patients following recommendation 1235(1994) of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe; and if she will make a statement. [25327]

  Mr. Bowis
  I understand that the members of this committee have not yet been appointed. We are currently considering how we can most effectively contribute to its work.

  Contracting Out
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) for each piece of work subject to a bidding process under the auspices of(a) her Department and (b) agencies for which her Department is responsible (i) where work was contracted out, who were the successful bidders and (ii) which contracts were won by in-house bidders in (1) 1993–94, (2) 1994–95 and (3) 1995–96; [25652]
  761
  (2) what work has been contracted out (a) by her Department and (b) by agencies for which the Department is responsible in (i) 1993–94, (ii) 1994–95 and (iii) projected for 1995–96. [25527]

  Mr. Sackville
  Available information of all contracts awarded, as part of the Department's "Competing For Quality" market-testing programme, will be placed in the Library.

  Detailed information of contract awards can be found in the "Market Testing Bulletin". This is issued monthly, and copies are available in the Library.

  Medicines Commission
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the occasion in the last five years upon which the Medicines Commission has reviewed the functions of the Committee on the Safety of Medicines and of the Medicines Control Agency; and if she will publish the findings of the reviews. [25608]

  Mr. Sackville
  The Committee on the Safety of Medicines, together with all other committees established under section 4 of the Medicines Act 1968, reports with respect to the performance of its functions to the Medicines Commission on an annual basis. These reports are available in the Library.

  The functions of the Medicines Control Agency are not within the remit of the Medicines Commission.

  General Dental Service: percentage of children aged 0–10 years with permanent teeth which are actively decayed, filled or missing due to decay

  England

  Age

  Tooth condition

  5

  6

  7

  8

  9

  10

  Actively decayed

  1—

  3

  8

  11

  13

  14

  Filled (otherwise sound)

  2—

  1

  4

  7

  14

  16

  Missing due to decay

  1—

  1—

  1

  1

  1

  3

  Source:

  Children's dental health survey OPCS.

  1 Indicates a proportion of less than 0.5 per cent.

  2 Indicates zero value.

  General Dental Service: average number of permanent teeth for children aged 0–10 years which are actively decayed, filled or missing due to decay

  England

  Age

  Tooth condition

  5

  6

  7

  8

  9

  10

  Actively decayed

  1

  1

  0.1

  0.2

  0.2

  0.3

  Filled (otherwise sound)

  2—

  1

  1

  0.1

  0.2

  0.3

  Missing due to decay

  1

  0.1

  0.2

  0.3

  0.5

  0.6

  Source:

  Children's dental health survey OPCS.

  1 Indicates a proportion of less than 0.5 per cent.

  2 Indicates zero value.

  Dental Services
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what is the estimated percentage of the population with tooth decay, giving the figures for(a) the total United Kingdom population and (b) those aged one to 10 years; [25365]

  (2) what is the estimated number of cases amongst those aged one to 10 years of (a) tooth decay and (b) tooth extraction due to tooth decay. [23569]

  Mr. Malone
  The table shows the proportion of children in England aged from 0 to 10 years with permanent teeth which are actively decayed, filled or missing due to decay. In young children, it is difficult to establish whether a tooth has been lost naturally or through decay. The Office of Population Censuses and Surveys adult dental survey, 1988, shows that in England, 43 per cent, of dentate adults in the survey had decayed or unsound teeth. For further explanation of decay in primary teeth and levels of adult tooth decay, I refer the hon. Member to the following OPCS publications—"Adult Dental Survey (1988)" and "Children's Dental Health in the United Kingdom (1993)". These publications are held in the Library. Information relating to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are matters for my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Scotland and for Wales and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.
  763
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many cases of tooth decay were treated in the United Kingdom in(a) 1994–95 and (b) 1990 to 1995; [23566]

  (2) what is the estimated cost of treating tooth decay for (a) the NHS and (b) patients for (i) 1994–95 and (ii) 1990 to 1995. [23568]

  Mr. Malone
  Information is not available about the cost of treating tooth decay or the number of cases. The

  General Dental Service: number of adult courses of treatment and cost1

  England

  Year

  Number of adult courses of treatment

  Total NHS gross expenditure (millions) £

  Cost of the GDS borne by the Exchequer (millions) £

  Cost borne by patient (millions) £

  1990–91

  22,558,739

  1,039.996

  660.267

  379.729

  1991–92

  24,273,099

  1,245.970

  842.000

  403.970

  1992–93

  25,141,300

  1,305.879

  911.092

  394.787

  1993–94

  24,847,648

  1,221.719

  854.695

  367.024

  1994–95

  24,913,096

  1,282.294

  897.266

  385.028

  1 The cost of figures for 1994–95 are provisional.

  Mrs. Beckett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients have been deregistered from NHS dental treatment; and how many NHS dentists have given up NHS dental work entirely since July 1992. [26292]

  Mr. Malone
  Since July 1992, 891,554 patients have been deregistered by their dentists for reasons other than retirement. In the same period, a total number of 426 dentists removed their names completely from the dental list for reasons other than retirement. The number of dentists contracted to provide national health service general dental services has, however, increased in the period by over 2 per cent.—15,745 on 31 March 1995 compared with 15,426 on 30 June 1992—and, over the same period, there have been some 33 million additions to NHS dentists' lists. These additions include patients moving from one dentist to another and patients re-registering with the same dentist after a gap.

  Heart Disease
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many(a) cases of heart disease and (b) deaths due to heart disease were recorded for (i) 1994–95 and (ii) 1990 to 1995. [23567]

  Mr. Sackville
  The number of finished consultant episodes for hospital in-patients suffering from heart diseases is published in "Hospital Episode Statistics" which are available from 1988–89 to 1993–94. Copies of the publications are available in the Library.

  The table shows the number of deaths due to heart disease—ICD1 codes 390–429—in England and Wales, 1990–93.

  1990: 173,453

  1991: 174,447

  1992: 169,539

  1993: 178,963

  This information is not yet available for 1994 and 1995.

  1 International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision.
  764
  total costs of the general dental service in England and the total number of adult courses of treatments are shown in the table. Since 1990, the majority of treatment for children has been paid for on a capitation basis and courses of treatment are not separately identifiable. Information relating to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are matters for my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Scotland and for Wales and my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the estimated cost to the NHS of treating heart disease for(a) 1994–95 and (b) 1990 to 1995. [23570]

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not available centrally.

  Yellow Card Scheme
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is her Department's latest estimate of the percentage of adverse drug reactions which are reported by general practitioners via the yellow card system. [25520]

  Mr. Sackville
  The percentage of all adverse drug reactions reported by general practitioners is not known, as there is no means of knowing the total number of adverse drug reactions. A recent survey found that 77 per cent, of general practitioners have used the yellow card reporting scheme. Of 17,635 reports received in 1994 through the scheme, approximately 63 per cent, originated from general practitioners. Most of the remainder were reported by hospital doctors and pharmaceutical companies.

  Committee on the Safety of Medicines
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will consider inviting a consumer representative to sit on the Committee on the Safety of Medicine to complement the medical experts. [26243]

  Mr. Sackville
  The Committee on the Safety of Medicines is an expert scientific advisory body, and as such members need to have relevant and appropriate expertise. Members do not represent organisations, but contribute by their individual expertise and judgment to the advice given by the body to the licensing authority.

  Chelation Therapy
  Mr. David Atkinson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what research has been undertaken into chelation therapy; what consideration has been made to make it available within the national health service on a non-discretionary basis; and if she will make a statement. [25591]

  Mr. Sackville
  None.

  As with all other forms of treatment, it is for local purchasers to decide in the light of available resources and competing priorities, on the purchase of the most appropriate forms of treatment to meet the assessed health needs of their population.

  GP Fundholding
  Mrs. Beckett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what research she has commissioned to evaluate general practitioner fundholding against joint commissioning; [25920]

  (2) what evidence she has evaluated to the effect that general practitioner fundholding is more cost effective than joint commissioning. [25921]

  Mr. Malone
  As independent studies have shown, general practitioner fundholding has been a major success since 1991 in improving services for patients. Over 41 per cent, of the population is now registered with a fundholding GP. Joint commissioning is a subsequent development which involves both fundholding and non-fundholding general practitioners working in partnership with health authorities to plan and purchase services. We will be developing our research programme to assess these developments, including the full evaluation of the 51 total purchasing sites, over the coming months.

  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many general practitioner fundholding practices per family health service authority are currently in dispute, arbitration or subject to appeal over one or more of their budgets; and if she will make a statement. [25932]

  Mr. Malone
  This information is not available centrally.

  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many first, second, third and fourth wave fundholders have since left the scheme. [26199]

  Mr. Malone
  This information is not available centrally. Indications are that the small number of fundholders who have left the scheme have done so largely because of changes in the practice partnership.

  Hospital Closures
  Mrs. Beckett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list all hospitals with overnight beds closed in each year since 1979. [25922]

  Mr. Malone
  Information on closures of hospitals has never been collected centrally in the form requested.

  Special Hospitals
  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans there are to grant trust status to Ashworth hospital on Merseyside, Broadmoor hospital in Berkshire and Rampton hospital in Nottinghamshire; and if she will make a statement. [26200]
  766
  Mr. Bowis
  I expect to be making a statement shortly about future management arrangements for the special hospitals.

  Mental Health
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what guidelines are in place for the management and multi-agency response to the initial onset of an acute psychiatric emergency occurring in the community; and if she will make a statement. [25931]

  Mr. Bowis
  The Mental Health act code of practice provides guidance to practitioners on the steps to be taken if a patient requires emergency psychiatric assessment in the community. Copies of the code are available in the Library.

  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if her Department has, within the past year, made strategic recommendations on how best to allocate mental health expenditure in relation to needs for services. [26075]

  Mr. Bowis
  The annual priorities and planning guidance for the national health service sets the broad direction for the planning and delivery of health services for the coming year. The guidance for 1995–96 identifies mental health as a priority for the medium term. It is the responsibility of district health authorities to prepare local health strategies and purchasing plans to address the national priorities whilst also taking full account of local health needs. A copy of the guidance for 1995–96— EL(94)55—is available in the Library.

  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the organisations that were involved in her Department's consultation process prior to the publication of the Mental Health (Patients in the Community) Bill. [26019]

  Mr. Bowis
  The information will be placed in the Library.

  Local Pay
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many local pay offers from NHS trusts to nurses, midwives and professions allied to medicine have been connected to changes in employment and working conditions in the current pay round; and if she will make a statement. [25937]

  Mr. Malone
  This information is not available centrally. Terms of local pay offers are a matter for employers.

  Ethnic Minorities
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what measures are in place to address the specific health needs of different ethnic minority groups; and if she will make a statement. [25938]

  Mr. Sackville
  We are totally committed to ensuring that people from ethnic minorities should benefit fully from the national health service. The reforms we have introduced into the NHS require health authorities to assess the health needs of their local population and to deliver the services to meet these needs. To improve information about the use of health services by people from ethnic minorities from 1 April 1995 it is mandatory to record the ethnic group of patients who use in-patient or day-case services. This data will enable purchasers and
  767
  providers to examine the uptake of services, monitor standards and identify any gaps in service provision.

  Since 1989, we have made available £3 million to provide funding for projects to improve access to health services and information for ethnic minorities. The projects are now related specifically to "The Health of the Nation" key areas and to the rights and standards outlined in the patients charter. The patients charter is available in 11 ethnic languages and has been widely distributed.

  We have also established the ethnic health unit as part of the NHS Executive. The aim of the unit is to promote good practice in the NHS, support managers in developing links with local communities and to build ethnic health into the mainstream work of the NHS. The unit has funded many local initiatives to improve services to ethnic minorities.

  Child Abuse
  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when the social services departmental inspectorate last inspected Newcastle city council social services department; when it next intends to do so; what specific advice has been given to Newcastle social services department in respect of the issues raised in the Hunt report into a multiple child abuse case in Newcastle; and what assessment she has made of the adequacy of remedial action taken to deal with the shortcomings identified by the Hunt report. [26206]

  Mr. Bowis
  The social services inspectorate has undertaken a number of inspections relating to different services provided by Newcastle city council's social services department, the most recent in January this year.

  Mr. Hunt's report following his independent inquiry into multiple abuse of children in nursery classes raised issues for several local authority departments and the area child protection committee as well as the Newcastle city council social services department. I am advised that the recommendations requiring immediate action have now been implemented and inspectors from my social services inspectorate are continuing to monitor progress.

  Oculogenital Clinic, Moorfields Eye Hospital
  Mr. Chris Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if statutory consultation requirements were met in relation to the decision by Moorfields Eye hospital to close its oculogenital clinic. [25962]

  Mr. Sackville
  The decision on whether to consult is a matter for the local health authority. The hon. Member may wish to contact Mr. Roland Everington, chairman of Camden and Islington health authority, for details.

  Air Pollution
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what consultations she has had in the last year with other Ministers and Departments concerning combating the levels of air pollution and its effect on health; and if she will make a statement. [25960]

  Mr. Sackville
  Ministers in the Department of Health hold frequent meetings with other Ministers to discuss a variety of matters, which will sometimes include the effects of air pollutants upon health. On this issue we are advised in particular by the Committee on the Medical Aspects of Air Pollution Episodes.

  Mr. Watson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will specify the air-borne pollution most damaging 768
  to health as indicated by Her Department's research into the causes of asthma and links with air pollution. [26602]

  Mr. Sackville
  Levels of air pollution vary considerably from place to place and at different times, and there is no one pollutant which is consistently the most damaging. The effects on individuals are determined by the duration of exposure as well as the level of pollution, and sensitivity to pollutants may also vary between individuals. The Department of the Environment's air quality information line—0800 556677—provides information on the levels of pollutants.

  Sex Change Operations
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the cost to public funds of a sex change operation carried out on the NHS. [26017]

  Mr. Sackville
  As there are a wide range of patient conditions and particular treatment needs, it is not possible to state, with certainty, how much a sex change operation costs.

  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the current waiting list for sex change operations. [26016]

  Mr. Sackville
  For waiting list purposes, sex change operations are included in the plastic surgery speciality. It is not possible to identify sex change operations data separately.

  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many sex change operations(a) from male to female and (b) from female to male, have been carried out under the national health service in each year since 1990. [26018]

  Mr. Sackville
  Data on sex change operations data are not recorded separately from data on other plastic surgery operations.

  GP Lists
  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans her Department has to ensure that general practitioners tell patients the reason why they have been struck off family doctor lists. [26079]

  Mr. Malone
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Stockport (Mrs. Coffey) on 2 March, column 647.

  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans her Department has to overhaul the rules regarding the deregistration of patient from general practitioners' practice lists. [26070]

  Mr. Malone
  None.

  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to her answer of 16 March,Official Report, column 707, when she will publish data for 1993 on patients removed from general practitioner lists. [26083]

  Mr. Malone
  It is planned to include the available information in the health service indicators package due to be published later this year.

  Remedial Training for Doctors
  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much money was spent on remedial training of(a) general practitioners and (b) hospital doctors in each regional health authority in each of the last 10 years. [26208]
  769
  Mr. Malone
  Remedial training is not separately identified within the overall cost of postgraduate and continuing medical education in the national health service.

  Residential Care
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in England aged over 64 years live in(a) private residential homes, (b) private nursing homes, (c) local authority part III homes and (d) national health service nursing homes; and, of these, how many have the cost of their care paid wholly or partly by (i) their local authority, (ii) their health authority, and (iii) the Department of Social Security; and how many pay for their care wholly from private sources. [25971]

  Mr. Bowis
  At 31 March 1994, there were 142,000 and 53,600 long-stay residents aged over 64 in private residential homes and local authority part III homes respectively. A further 37,000 people were in residential homes provided by the voluntary sector. An estimated 132,000 beds were occupied by people over 64 years in nursing homes registered under section 23 of the Registered Homes Act 1984. Information on national health service nursing homes is not available centrally.

  The numbers of long-stay residents aged over 64 in residential or nursing homes whose costs are met wholly or in part by the local authority are shown in the table.

  No information is available centrally on the numbers of people whose costs are met wholly or in part by their health authority nor on numbers who pay for their care wholly from private sources. Information on numbers supported wholly or in part by the Department of Social Security is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Social Security.

  Long-stay residents aged over 64 in residential or nursing homes whose costs are met wholly or in part by their local authority England at 31 March 1994.

  Numbers

  Sector

  Residential homes

  Nursing homes

  Private

  21,900

  20,600

  Local authority

  51,500

  —

  Voluntary

  6,800

  1,100

  Source:

  Department of Health return SRI.

  In Vitro Fertilisation
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has to ensure that in vitro fertilisation treatment is provided on the NHS by the Cornwall health authority. [26161]

  Mr. Sackville
  It is the responsibility of each individual health authority to determine its provision of infertility treatment in the light of local needs and the availability of resources. The hon. Member may wish to contact Dr. Stanley Dennison, chairman of the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly health authority for details.

  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has to ensure that in vitro fertilisation treatment is provided on the NHS by every health authority. [26162]

  Mr. Sackville
  Local health authorities are responsible for the provision of local health services, including the provision of infertility services. Decisions about the 770
  resources to be made available for these services must be left to individual health authorities as they are in the best position to determine priorities in the light of local needs and circumstances.

  Departmental Performance
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what performance indicators and performance targets there are for measuring the performance of her Department in(a) answering letters from members of the public and (b) answering telephone calls from members of the public; how performance is monitored; and what are the latest figures for performance measured against the target set. [26235]

  Mr. Sackville
  The Department has an explicit aim to answer all letters from members of the public within 28 days. This is included in departmental business plans, and monitored as part of local management responsibilities.

  The majority of telephone calls received from members of the public relate to the national health service and are passed initially through the Department's public inquiry office. Questions that cannot be answered by the inquiry office are passed to relevant parts of the Department for reply. As with written communications, performance targets are set internally and achievement against those targets monitored by local management.

  Asthma
  Mr. Alex Carlile
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is her estimate of the number of people currently diagnosed as asthmatic. [25955]

  Mr. Sackville
  There are no comprehensive data on the number of people with a diagnosis of asthma. However, it has been estimated that the prevalence of asthma sufficiently severe to require regular medical supervision is from 4 to 6 per cent, in children and about 4 per cent, in adults. More information is given in "Asthma: An Epidemiological Overview", published on 22 March, copies of which are available in the Library.

  Preventive Medicine
  Sir Irvine Patnick
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make a statement outlining her Department's latest initiatives in preventive medicine. [26014]

  Mr. Sackville
  The Government launched "The Health of the Nation" strategy in July 1992 as a long-term strategy emphasising disease prevention and health promotion. The strategy involves a wide range of partners both within and outside Government. Already, we are seeing results. For 19 of the 24 targets where data are available, movement is in the right direction.

  Psychiatric Beds
  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many(a) long-stay and (b) acute psychiatric beds there were in each regional health authority and district health authority in (i) 1979, (ii) 1990 and (iii) the last year for which figures are available. [26080]

  Mr. Bowis
  Information is not available in the form requested. The available information for 1979 has been published in "SH3 National and Regional Summaries (DHSS Hospital Statistics) 1979" and for later years in "Bed availability in England", copies of which are available in the Library. Because of changes in the
  771
  classifications of beds and health authority boundaries over the period, figures are not strictly comparable.

  Complaints
  Ms Hodge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what policy and procedures exist for dealing with complaints against her Department by members of the public; when the policy was last updated; what time limit and target for dealing with such complaints her Department has; and what follow-up procedure exists where complainants are not satisfied with her Department's response to a complaint. [26219]

  Mr. Sackville
  The majority of complaints received by the Department from members of the public relate to the national health service.

  Complaints relating specifically to the Department are handled as any other correspondence, and are subject to performance targets set and monitored by local departmental management.

  Any member of the public who is dissatisfied with how the Department has dealt with his complaint may ask a Member of Parliament to submit the complaint to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration for investigation and review.

  Residential Homes
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in England aged over 64 years and living in(a) private residential homes, (b) private nursing homes, (c) local authority residential homes and (d) national health service nursing homes have spouse living elsewhere. [25972]

  Mr. Bowis
  This information is not available centrally.

  Malaria Prophylaxis
  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has to make all malaria prophylaxis available over the counter in United Kingdom pharmacies. [26076]

  Mr. Malone
  There are no plans to change the status of those malaria prophylactics which are prescription-only medicines.

  University College Hospital
  Mrs. Beckett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many beds of each type will be lost under the proposed reorganisation of University College London hospital. [26315]

  Mr. Malone
  Camden and Islington health authority is consulting on those proposals. Details are set out in the public consultation document issued on 24 April.

  Swindon Health Care
  Mr. Illsley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what steps he is taking to ensure sufficient in-patient accommodation will be available for Swindon and district between the closure of the Princess Alexandra hospital in 1996 and the refurbishment of the Princess Margaret hospital; [26305]

  (2) what steps she is taking to ensure the health care needs of Swindon and district are met following the closure of the Princess Alexandra hospital 1996. [273071

  Mr. Sackville
  These are matters for the Wiltshire and Bath health authority. The hon. Member may wish to 772
  contact the chairman, Mr. Alastair Service CBE, for details.

  Minor Injury Units
  Mrs. Beckett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what evidence she has of the effect of the replacement of accident and emergency centres with trauma centres and minor injuries units on the level of deaths. [26309]

  Mr. Sackville
  We set up a pilot trauma centre at the North Staffordshire Hospitals NHS trust in 1990. This followed a report from the Royal College of Surgeons on the management of patients with major injuries that found that one in every five deaths from major trauma was potentially preventable. The pilot has been evaluated by the medical care research unit at the university of Sheffield and we expect to receive its findings in the summer.

  There is, however, a considerable body of scientific evidence showing that patients with major injuries receive more effective care in large, appropriately staffed, accident and emergency centres, backed up by the main hospital specialties. A review of the literature on the relationship between the size of accident and emergency departments and clinical outcomes prepared by my Department is available in the Library.

  Studies of minor injury units have shown them to be effective in treating patients with minor conditions. The studies also found that nearly all patients use minor injury units appropriately.

  Fluoridation
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which water companies add fluoride to the water supply; and which have chosen not to do so. [26572]

  Mr. Malone
  United Kingdom companies which are currently operating—or have at some point operated— fluoridation plant include:

  Severn Trent Water

  South Staffordshire Water

  East Worcestershire Waterworks Company (now part of severn Trent)

  North East Water

  North West Water

  Welsh Water

  Yorkshire Water

  Anglian Water

  Colne Valley Water Company

  It is for a health authority, following extensive public consultation, to submit a request to the water undertakers to fluoridate the water supply on behalf of the local population. Yorkshire Water decided recently not to agree to fluoridate the regions's water supply. The fluoridation of water supplies accords with Government policy and underpins the objectives of the oral health strategy.

  Blood-lead Levels
  Mr. Watson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what continuous monitoring of blood-lead levels in children is carried out by her Department; if she will publish the results for the last three years for which such information is available; and if she will make a statement; [26591]

  (2) what evidence she has evaluated to indicate that blood-lead levels in children have reached levels (a)

  773
  potentially affecting the central nervous system and (b) causing other effects damaging to health; and if she will make a statement; [26606]

  (3) if she will publish the latest available figures her Department has evaluated on the contribution of air-borne lead to children's blood-lead levels; [26604]

  (4) if she will list the latest available figures her Department has evaluated on the contribution to children's blood-lead levels caused by (a) petrol, (b) food and (c) lead water pipes. [26607]

  Mr. Sackville
  Since 1974, it has been the policy of successive Governments to contain and reduce exposure to lead wherever practicable, particularly in those circumstances where people are most exposed.

  Monitoring programmes have shown a continuing fall in blood-lead levels in children and adults since the early 1970s as controls on sources of lead exposure have been introduced. Since action has been taken to reduce exposure from a wide range of sources including petrol, drinking water, air, food, industrial emissions, paint, cosmetics, ceramic glazes and toys, the contribution made to blood-lead levels by any one source is difficult to estimate and will vary with location and age of the person.

  Continuous monitoring of children's blood-lead levels is not carried out in the United Kingdom. However, lead will be determined in blood samples collected for the 1995 health survey for England from a sample of adults and children aged 11 and over.

  Meals on Wheels
  Mr. Hinchliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much was spent on meals on wheels by each authority in each of the last 10 years, expressed in 1995 prices. [25764]

  Mr. Bowis
  The information, expressed in 1994–95 prices, will be placed in the Library. The figures should be treated with caution as local authorities differ from year to year in their respective treatment of administrative and other overhead costs. Year-on-year variations may also relied changes in type or method of meal service and changes of contract. New guidelines for future social services accounting have been drawn up by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accounting and the local authorities, which should result in greater consistency.

  North Tees NHS Trust
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health is she will provide details of the early retirement package given to Mr. Belton, the former chief executive of North Tees NHS trust. [26185]

  Mr. Malone
  Mr. Belton is still employed as chief executive of North Tees NHS trust.

  Medical Records
  Mr. Ron Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what guidance she issues as to the grounds on which a health authority may restrict an individual's access to their own medical records; [25948]

  (2) what is her Department's policy on procedure when individuals request their medical records; [25949]

  (3) what guidelines her Department offers to health authorities on how to respond when patients request their medical records. [25950]
  774
  Mr. Sackville
  Patients have a legal right to see their own health records. For records kept on paper and compiled on or after 1 November 1991, access is provided for by the Access to Health Records Act 1990. For records held on computer, access is provided for by the Data Protection Act 1984. Access may be denied to all or part of the record if disclosure of any information in it might cause serious harm to the physical or mental health of the patient. Access may also be denied if it contains information which would identify a third party, other than a health professional, unless that person has consented to the disclosure. The Access to Health Records Act also permits access to be withheld to protect the health of another person.

  Guidance on the Access to Health Records Act 1990 was issued to the National Health Service in England in August 1991. Guidance on the Data Protection Act 1984 was issued to the NHS in England in 1987 and 1989. Guidance was also issued to the NHS in Wales. A revised handbook, "Introduction to Data Protection in the NHS" was issued in July 1994. All guidance contains advice on procedures to enable patients to see their records. Copies of the guidance are available in the Library.

  Breast Cancer Screening
  Ms Lynne
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many women(a) in England and (b) in the United Kingdom aged (i) 50 to 54, (ii) 55 to 59 (iii) 60 to 64, (iv) 65 and, (v) 66 years or over were screened for breast cancer following an invitation from the national health service breast screening programme in each of the last five years; [26021]

  (2) what percentage of women aged 65 years or over (a) in England and (b) in the United Kingdom were screened for breast cancer through the national health service breast screening programme at their own request or the request of their general practitioner, excluding women who are screened through the diagnostic service, in the latest year for which figures are available; [26023]

  (3) how many women (a) in England and (b) in the United Kingdom aged: (i) 50 to 54, (ii) 55 to 59, (iii) 60 to 64, (iv) 65 to 69, (v) 70 to 74, (vi) 75 to 79, (vii) 80 to 84 (viii) 85 years or over were screened for breast cancer through the national health service breast screening programme at their own request or the request of their general practitioner, excluding women who are screened through the diagnostic service, in each of the last five years. [26022]

  Mr. Sackville
  This information is not available centrally in the form requested. The available information is shown in the tables.

  Breast cancer screening—number of women tested or screened as a result of self or CP referral

  Age

  1992–93

  1993–941

  50–54

  7,393

  7,068

  55–59

  6,405

  6,893

  60–64

  5,220

  5,652

  65–69

  11,136

  12,828

  70–74

  3.194

  4,635

  75 and over

  636

  892

  1 Provisional data only.

  775

  Breast cancer screening—number of women tested or screened as a result of first invitation, or routine recall

  Age

  1992–93

  1993–941

  50–54

  310,028

  324,239

  55–59

  302,167

  314,387

  60–64

  279,605

  291,090

  65–69

  28,700

  29,922

  70–74

  1,053

  187

  75 and over

  56

  10

  1 Provisional data only.

  Percentage of women aged 65 and over tested or screened as a result of a GP or self referral

  1992–93

  1993–941

  Percentage

  0.33

  0.44

  1 Provisional data only.

  Ms Lynne
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is the average cost per person screened on the national health service breast screening programme. [26025]

  Mr. Sackville
  The estimated average cost per person screened under the national health service breast screening programme in England in 1993–94 was £27.

  Ms Lynne
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what amount the national health service breast screening programme spends on screening women 65 years or over; and what percentage of the total budget this is. [26024]

  Mr. Sackville
  It is estimated that in 1993–94 in England, about £1.4 million, representing 5 per cent, of the total breast cancer screening budget, was spent on testing women aged 65 years or over for breast cancer.

  Capital Underspending
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to her answer of 23 January,Official Report, columns 13–14, if she will provide 1994–95 information on regional health authority capital underspending. [26088]

  Mr. Sackville
  Details of underspending on regional health authority capital cash limits will not be available until all authorities have completed their annual accounts for 1994–95.

  Staff Cars
  Mrs. Beckett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much was expended on cars for staff by(a) trusts and (b) in total in each of the last five years. [26288]

  Mr. Sackville
  I refer the right hon. Member to the replies I gave to the hon. Member for Wakefield (Mr. Hinchliffe) on 19 December 1994, column 990; the hon. Member for Sheffield, Brightside (Mr. Blunkett) on 24 October 1994, column 450; the reply my right hon. Friend the then Minister for Health gave the hon. Member for Lewisham, East (Mrs. Prentice) on 1 March 1994, columns 678–79; and the reply I gave the hon. Member for Brightside on 6 December 1993, columns 70–71.

  GP Vacancies
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many general practitioner posts were(a) filled and (b) vacant in each health region in each year since 1988. [26087]
  776
  Mr. Malone
  The information is not available centrally.

  Private Patients
  Mrs. Beckett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many bed days of finished episodes have been provided for private patients treated in NHS hospitals in total and by regional health authority in each of the last five years. [26289]

  Mr. Sackville
  The information requested is detailed in "Hospital Episode Statistics Volume 1", copies of which are available in the Library.

  Vacant Medical Posts
  Mr. Milburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list the number of(a) consultant, (b) senior registrar, (c) registrar and (d) senior house officer posts that were vacant in each region, by speciality, in each year since 1988. [26085]

  Mr. Malone
  The available information has been placed in the Library in crown copyright table R5 of the Department's census of the medical and dental work force. As these relate to a single date each year, they may not fairly reflect the trend for the number of vacancies in the stated grades over the year as a whole.

  Cardiac Services, Plymouth
  Mrs. Beckett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what cardiac services are available to patients in the Plymouth area. [26286]

  Mr. Sackville
  This is a matter for the South and West Devon health commission. The right hon. Member may wish to contact Mrs. Judy Leverton, chairman of the health commission, for details.

ENVIRONMENT

  Local Government Finance
  Mr. Clifton-Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those local authorities which are considered to be debt free; and what are the Government guidelines on debt to equity ratio for local authorities.

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  [pursuant to his reply, 4 April 1995, c. 1049–50]: the list of local authorities which were debt free as at 30 September 1994 given in that answer was incomplete and should have included Wansdyke. The complete list should therefore read:

  Dorset

  Bedford

  Bracknell

  Breckland

  Broadland

  Chiltern

  Christchurch

  Corby

  Dacorum

  Daventry

  East Cambridgeshire

  East Devon

  East Dorset

  Epsom and Ewell

  Hambleton

  Hertsmere

  777

  Leominster

  Medina

  Mid Bedfordshire

  Mid Sussex

  Newbury

  Rochester upon Medway

  Ryedale

  St. Edmundsbury

  South Bucks

  South Northampton

  South Shropshire

  South Wight

  Suffolk Coastal

  Surrey Heath

  Swale

  Tonbridge and Malling

  Tunbridge Wells

  Wansdyke

  West Sussex

  Barking and Dagenham

  City of London

  Housing Corporation Allocations 1990–91—1995–96 to West Midlands an Birmingham

  Year

  Rent (new build) £ million

  Rent (rehab) £ million

  Total rent £ million

  Percent. of total rent

  Sale (new build) £ million

  Sale (rehab) £ million

  Total sale £ million

  Percent. of total sale

  DIYSO £ million

  Total £ million

  Percent. of total £ million

  Regional cash limit £ million

  1990–91

  Birmingham

  10.45

  5.19

  15.64

  41.2

  0.31

  0.00

  0.31

  23.5

  0.00

  15.95

  40.6

  —

  West Midlands Metropolitan Area (excl. Birmingham)

  10.33

  2.46

  12.79

  33.7

  0.47

  0.00

  0.47

  35.6

  0.00

  13.26

  33.7

  —

  Rest of West Midlands Region

  8.93

  0.64

  9.57

  25.2

  0.54

  0

  0.54

  40.9

  0.00

  10.11

  25.7

  —

  West Midlands (HC Regions)

  29.71

  8.29

  38.00

  100.0

  1.32

  0.00

  1.32

  100.0

  0.00

  39.32

  100.0

  101.77

  1991–92

  Birmingham

  30.77

  6.97

  37.74

  33.6

  2.03

  1.07

  3.10

  33.0

  0.05

  40.89

  33.5

  —

  West Midlands Metropolitan Area (excl. Birmingham)

  26.09

  4.83

  30.92

  27.5

  1.49

  0.34

  1.83

  19.5

  0.16

  32.91

  27.0

  —

  Rest of West Midlands Region

  37.6

  6.08

  43.679

  38.9

  4.47

  0

  4.47

  47.6

  0.07

  48.22

  39.5

  —

  West Midlands (HC Region)

  94.46

  17.88

  112.34

  100.0

  7.99

  1.41

  9.40

  100.0

  0.28

  122.02

  100.0

  140.37

  1992–93

  Birmingham

  29.83

  6.83

  36.66

  27.0

  1.14

  0.84

  1.98

  20.3

  1.76

  40.40

  26.8

  —

  West Midlands Metropolitan Area (cxcl. Birmingham)

  32.28

  11.13

  43.41

  32.0

  3.86

  0.75

  4.61

  47.3

  1.23

  49.25

  32.7

  —

  Rest of West Midlands Region

  49.25

  6.32

  55.57

  41.0

  2.77

  0

  3.16

  32.4

  2.24

  60.97

  40.5

  —

  West Midlands (HC Region)

  111.36

  24.28

  135.64

  100.0

  7.77

  1.98

  9.75

  100.0

  5.23

  150.62

  100.0

  154.82

  1993–94

  Birmingham

  32.49

  12.38

  44.87

  35.1

  3.13

  0.41

  3.54

  31.9

  4.55

  52.96

  34.9

  —

  West Midlands Metropolitan Area (cxcl. Birmingham)

  34.24

  4.11

  38.35

  30.0

  3.28

  0.15

  3.43

  30.9

  3.62

  45.40

  29.9

  —

  Rest of West Midlands Region

  39.03

  5.47

  44.5

  34.8

  4.13

  0

  4.14

  37.3

  4.69

  53.33

  35.2

  —

  West Midlands (HC Region)

  105.76

  21.96

  127.72

  100.0

  10.54

  0.57

  11.11

  100.0

  12.86

  151.69

  100.0

  162.03

  1994–95

  Birmingham

  23.53

  12.61

  36.14

  35.8

  1.41

  0.40

  1.81

  25.1

  3.27

  41.22

  34.7

  —

  West Midlands Metropolitan Area (cxcl. Birmingham)

  21.30

  7.89

  29.19

  28.9

  1.40

  0.85

  2.25

  31.2

  3.47

  34.91

  29.4

  —

  Rest,of West Midlands Region

  29.37

  6.33

  35.7

  35.3

  2.37

  0

  3.16

  43.8

  3.74

  42.6

  35.9

  —

  West Midlands (HC Region)

  74.20

  26.83

  101.03

  100.0

  5.18

  2.04

  7.22

  100.0

  10.48

  118.73

  100.0

  134.21

  1995–96

  Birmingham

  6.93

  4.89

  11.82

  36.0

  1.04

  0.29

  1.33

  39.8

  3.62

  16.77

  36.7

  —

  West Midlands Metropolitan Area (cxcl. Birmingham)

  5.67

  3.26

  8.93

  27.2

  0.86

  0.27

  1.13

  33.8

  2.83

  12.89

  28.2

  —

  Rest of West Midlands Region

  9.25

  2.83

  12.08

  36.8

  0.68

  0

  0.88

  26.3

  3.05

  16.01

  35.1

  —

  West Midlands (HC Region)

  21.85

  10.98

  32.83

  100.0

  2.58

  0.76

  3.34

  100.0

  9.50

  45.67

  100.0

  103.15

  Union Flag
  Mr. David Young
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what guidelines his Department issued to local authorities in respect of the flying of flags on(a) VE day and (b) VJ day; and to what extent local authorities are free to determine their own policy. [25328]

  Sir Paul Beresford
  My Department issued no guidelines to local authorities about flying the Union Flag

  West Midlands Housing Corporation
  Dr. Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the West Midlands housing corporation cash allocations for 1995–96 and each of the previous five years broken down into(a) regional cash limit, (b) new rent allocations, (c) new sale allocations, (d) new do-it-yourself sale allocations and (e) rehabilitation-renovation with an indication as to the proportion of these allocations that are within (i) the west midlands metropolitan area and (ii) Birmingham. [24593]

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  The table shows the housing corporation allocations in 1995–96 and each of the previous five years, by the headings requested, for the corporation's west midlands region; and how much of these were allocated to Birmingham and the west midlands metropolitan area, which has been taken to be Coventry, Dudley, Sandwell, Solihull, Walsall and Wolverhampton. The allocations represent housing corporation resources going into new housing association scheme starts whilst the cash limit represents expenditure on new and existing schemes.

  on VE or VJ Day. Local authorities are completely free to determine their own policy in this respect.

  HM Inspectorate of Pollution
  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many scientists employed by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution are specialists in air pollution. [25690]

  Mr. Atkins
  Under HMIP's integrated structure, work on air pollution is undertaken by staff working in multi-disciplinary teams where individuals address all
  779
  aspects of the inspectorate's responsibilities for pollution regulation and control.

  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the current starting salary for a

  £

  Salary minimum

  Grade

  Location

  1 January 1990

  1 August 1990

  1 April 1991

  1 August 1991

  1 August 1992

  1 August 1993

  1 April 1994

  Assistant Pollution Inspector

  London

  —

  18,194

  18,194

  19,377

  20,961

  21,275

  21,275

  National

  —

  18,194

  18,194

  19,377

  20,152

  20,454

  20,454

  Pollution Inspector

  London

  18,488

  20,059

  21,905

  24,379

  25,330

  25,330

  25,837

  National

  18,488

  20,059

  21,905

  23,329

  24,239

  24,239

  24,724

  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many times Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution has had to re-advertise to fill vacancies in professional posts since 1990. [25689]

  Mr. Atkins
  Since 1990, seven recruitment campaigns have been held to increase the number of inspectors in line with the progressive growth in HMIP's complement over this period.

  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many of the professional posts at Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution are currently vacant. [25691]

  Mr Atkins
  Three.

  Mr. Battle
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many people holding professional posts with Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution have resigned since 1990. [25687]

  Mr. Atkins
  Nine.

  Environment Bill
  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has, following the House of Lords' decision on 17 November 1994, in support of the Yorkshire Water Company against the National Rivers Authority under section 107 of the Water Act 1989, to bring forward amendments to the Act of the Environment Bill currently before Parliament. [25906]

  Mr. Atkins
  We have no such plans. Our views on this issue were fully set out by my hon. Friend, Viscount Ullswater, during consideration of the Environment Bill in another place.

  Water Pollution
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) how many of the cases of water pollution due to agriculture, recorded in 1994 occurred as a result of(a) pesticides on crops, (b) silage and (c) fertilizers; [25853]

  (2) what was the number of recorded cases of water pollution caused by agricultural practice in 1994. [25854]

  Mr. Atkins
  The National Rivers Authority publishes a detailed annual statistical report on water pollution incidents in England and Wales. The report for 1994 will be published this summer. However, on the basis of the information currently available which is still being validated, the NRA estimates that there were 3,329 pollution incidents arising from agriculture in 1994, of which 26 can be attributed to pesticides, 259 to silage and 780
  professional at Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution now; and what it was in each of the years since 1990. [25686]

  Mr. Atkins
  The information is as follows:

  17 to solid and liquid fertilizers. In addition, eight can be attributed to sheep dip.

  Mr. Colvin
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many prosecutions there have been in each of the last five years of water companies for illegally breaching consents to discharge treated sewage. [25905]

  Mr. Atkins
  I understand that there have been 58 such prosecutions of water companies since 1989–90. The annual figures are:

  1989–90: 4

  1991: 17

  1992: 17

  1993: 11

  1994: 9

  Mrs. Helen Jackson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many court actions were taken in each of the last three years in total and in each region by the National Rivers Authority; at what gross and net cost to the authority; how many court actions were taken in each of the last three years in total and against each of the water and sewerage companies by the National Rivers Authority; at what gross and net costs; how many of the court actions taken by the National Rivers Authority in each of the last three years in each region resulted in the polluter being prosecuted; and what were the total fines imposed by the National Rivers Authority on(a) polluters and (b) statutory water undertakers in each of the last three years in each region. [25777]

  Mr. Atkins
  [holding answer 23 May 1995]: The National Rivers Authority publishes an annual statistical report on water pollution incidents in England and Wales. The report for 1994 will be published later this year but the latest estimates for that year are included in the tables. In some cases the information is not available in exactly the form requested. As regards the cost of court actions, the NRA does not keep records of its costs categorised annually for individual regions or water and sewerage companies. The average cost to the NRA of bringing a prosecution—reflecting a wide range of prosecutions—is £660. Costs imposed by the courts can vary widely and can rarely be compared with the actual cost of taking a prosecution.

  Total court actions (in respect of incidents occurring in the relevant calendar year and heard by the end of the relevant financial year)

  Region

  1992

  1993

  1994

  Anglian

  34

  45

  45

  Northumbria and Yorkshire

  22

  26

  13

  781

  Total court actions (in respect of incidents occurring in the relevant calendar year and heard by the end of the relevant financial year)

  Region

  1992

  1993

  1994

  North West

  61

  61

  49

  Severn-Trent

  72

  56

  32

  Southern

  5

  5

  9

  South Western

  37

  26

  29

  Thames

  32

  31

  32

  Welsh

  34

  36

  28

  Totals

  297

  286

  237

  Court actions against water and sewerage companies

  Company

  1992

  1993

  1994

  Southern Water

  4

  1

  1

  Severn Trent Water

  1

  4

  2

  South West Water

  2

  —

  —

  Wessex Water

  2

  4

  1

  Northumbria Water

  3

  —

  —

  Yorkshire Water

  1

  11

  1

  Anglian Water

  7

  1

  2

  Thames Water

  5

  7

  4

  North West Water

  4

  6

  13

  Welsh Water

  11

  2

  1

  Total

  40

  36

  25

  Fines against water and sewerage undertakers

  £

  Company

  1992

  1993

  1994

  Total

  Southern Water

  4,800

  5,000

  4,000

  13,800

  Severn Trent Water

  2,000

  8,750

  11,000

  21,750

  South West Water

  6,000

  —

  —

  6,000

  Wessex Water

  4,500

  6,700

  —

  11,200

  Northumbria Water

  6,750

  —

  —

  6,750

  Yorkshire Water

  6,000

  101,000

  5,000

  112,000

  Anglian Water

  30,750

  4,000

  2,500

  37,250

  Thames Water

  20,000

  23,500

  15,000

  58,500

  North West Water

  34,000

  33,000

  56,500

  123,500

  Welsh Water

  39,600

  9,000

  20,000

  68,600

  Totals

  154,900

  190,950

  114,000

  459,350

  Enforcement Successful prosecutions (all polluters) (in respect of incidents occurring in the relevant calendar year)

  Region

  1992

  1993

  1994

  Anglian

  34

  42

  45

  Northumbria and Yorkshire

  22

  24

  13

  North West

  60

  60

  46

  Severn Trent

  72

  56

  31

  Southern

  4

  5

  5

  South Western

  36

  25

  27

  Thames

  30

  29

  28

  Welsh

  32

  36

  27

  Total

  290

  277

  222

  Total fines (all polluters)

  £

  Region

  1992–93

  1993–94

  Northumbria and Yorkshire

  144,150

  176,100

  North West

  167,700

  256,600

  Welsh

  91,775

  74,050

  Severn Trent

  139,550

  172,440

  782

  Total fines (all polluters)

  £

  Region

  1992–93

  1993–94

  Anglian

  164,850

  168,650

  Thames

  202,000

  111,000

  Southern

  80,540

  32,500

  South Western

  100,460

  97,280

  Total

  1,091,025

  1,088,580

  Recycling
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what action his Department has taken to encourage the use of remanufactured goods; [26163]

  (2) what plans he has to encourage investment and expansion in the remanufactured products industry. [26164]

  Mr. Atkins
  The draft "Waste Strategy for England and Wales", published for consultation in January 1995, has opened up a wide debate to identify ways in which all of our waste can be managed in a more sustainable way including the promotion of recycling and manufacture using waste materials. Recycling rates reflect market forces including the costs of recyclate against virgin material, consumer preference and the way in which business buying specifications are set out. Several of the Government's policies set out in the strategy will help secure significant increases in recycling rates, and in particular the producer responsibility initiative which gives an incentive to businesses to increase the amount of recyclate which re-enters the productive loop.

  Air Pollution
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what assessment he has made of the effects on(a) public health, (b) asthma sufferers, (c) the elderly and (d) pregnant women, when ground level ozone reaches 90PPB. [26171]

  Mr. Atkins
  Within Government, the Department of Health takes the lead in assessing the health effects of air pollutants, including advice from its Committee on the Medical Aspects of Air Pollutants. The effects of exposure to ozone depend on the duration of the exposure as well as on the level of the pollutant. The main effects are on the respiratory system and vary considerably from individual to individual. In 1991, the expert advisory group on the medical aspects of air pollution episodes published a report on ozone. A copy is in the Library of the House.

  Nuclear Waste
  Mr. Allen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether any landfill sites within the parliamentary constituency of Nottingham, North will be used for the disposal of nuclear waste. [26244]

  Mr. Atkins
  At the present moment, there are no proposals for the disposal of radioactive waste from nuclear sites to Nottingham, North. My Department has no knowledge of any future plans in this regard.

  Members' Interests
  Mr. Nicholas Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what proposals he has to regulate possible conflicts of interest arising when an elected member of a local authority or appointed member of other public bodies acts in a professional capacity for individual employees of the same authority where the employee faces serious disciplinary action. [26204]

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  We have no proposals to add to the existing legislation and guidance about members' interests.

  Uniform Business Rate
  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) how many appeals against uniform business rate valuations were received from businesses in(a) York and (b) north Yorkshire following the 1987 revaluation; how long on average these appeals took to resolve; and on what date the last of these appeals was resolved; [25965]

  (2) how many appeals against uniform business rate valuations were received from businesses in (a) York and (b) north Yorkshire following the 1992 revaluation; how long on average these appeals are taking to resolve; and how many currently are outstanding. [25966]

  Mr. Curry
  I take it that the hon. Member is referring to the revaluations which took effect on 1 April 1990 and 1 April 1995. A total of 3,677 proposals to alter the 1990 rating list had been received in York and 21,899 in north Yorkshire by 30 April 1995, of which 903 and 4,616 respectively were outstanding at that date. Proposals to alter this list can still be made in some circumstances up to 31 March 1996. One hundred and forty proposals to alter the 1995 rating list had been received in York and 991 in north Yorkshire by 30 April 1995. None have yet been resolved.

  Mr. Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what percentage of uniform business rate charged in each local authority in England is allocated, according to the uniform business rate distribution formula, to the business ratepayers own authorities. [25968]

  Mr. Curry
  National non-domestic rates—business rates—are collected by billing authorities during the year and paid into the NNDR pool. Funds from the pool, the "distributable amount" are re-distributed on a population basis to all classes of authority in line with the formula set out in the local government finance report. This includes distribution to police and fire and civil defence authorities which do not all operate within the boundary of a single billing authority.

  Billing authorities may make adjustments during the year of the sums contributed to the pool, in line with their collection rates. No adjustments are made in year to the distributed amount.

  It is not therefore possible to calculate the final amount of NDR charged by each billing authority until after the end of the relevant financial year.

  As the distributable amount is calculated on a population basis for each year and the amount collected in that year is not known until the following year, the information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost in the form requested.

  Toner Cartridges
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what percentage of toner cartridges have been recycled or remanufactured in each year for the last five years. [26164]

  Mr. Atkins
  My Department does not hold this information, but I understand that the United Kingdom Cartridge Recyclers Association, established in March 1993 to promote the use of remanufactured toner cartridges, may be able to supply industry estimates of the current levels of toner cartridges remanufactured.

  North Sea
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what research his Department has carried out into the levels of hydrocarbons in the North sea; [26167]

  (2) if he will list the research work sponsored by his Department into the effects of oil-based drilling muds in the North sea; [126169]

  (3) what estimates he has made of (a) the average level of hydrocarbons in the North sea and (b) the level of hydrocarbons in the 8 km radius of oil drilling platforms; [26168]

  (4) what assessment his Department has made of contamination around oil drilling platforms in the North sea; [26166]

  (5) what assessment his Department has made of the effects of oil-based drilling muds on the North sea. [26170]

  Mr. Atkins
  Marine laboratories of the fisheries departments carry out research into this area and relevant data are compiled by the Oslo and Paris Commission from information provided by all North sea states involved in offshore activities. This information was reported in the 1993 "North Sea Quality Status" report and its associated sub-regional reports, copies of which are in the House Library.

  In the North sea as a whole, oil concentrations in water are generally low. These reports state that levels of oil may be higher close to production platforms than elsewhere in the North sea. Such concentrations influence the sea floor community in the immediate vicinity and some effects may persist up to several kilometres from the drilling site.

  Going for Green Initiative
  Mr. Dafis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what have been the results so far of the going for green, initiative. [24725]

  Sir Paul Beresford
  On 6 February 1995, the going for green national committee launched its campaign to catalyse people's interest in the environment, inform their understanding of the consequences of the choices they make as consumers, and endorse actions to improve their environment, whether through managing resources better, reducing pollution or cultivating the local environment. Going for green is currently preparing a business plan which includes a strategy for a national campaign, the sustainable communities pilot project and the further development of the eco-schools programme.

  Tinsley, Sheffield
  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) if he will make available to the National Audit Office, all agreements relating to the building of an airport at Tinsley, Sheffield. [25868]

  (2) if he will make available to the National Audit Office all agreements relating to opencasting at Tinsley, Sheffield. [25869]

  Sir Paul Beresford
  No request has been received from the NAO for information relating to the building of an airport or the opencasting at Tinsley, Sheffield.

  Mr. Clive Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) if he will place in the Library all agreements relating to the operating at Tinsley, Sheffield; [25870]

  (2) if he will place in the Library all the agreements relating to the building of an airport at Tinsley, Sheffield; [25871]

  (3) if he will place in the Library such information held by Sheffield development corporation in respect of opencasting at Tinsley, Sheffield as would have been publicly available if the opencasting had been the responsibility of a local authority; [25872]

  (4) if he will place in the Library information in respect of Tinsley airport such as would have been publicly available had the development been the responsibility of a local authority. [25873]

  Sir Paul Beresford
  Documentation relating to the planning decisions for the open casting and the building of an airport at Tinsley is available for inspection at the offices of Sheffield city council and Sheffield development corporation.

  Documentation relating to the development, rather than the planning decisions, at Tinsley is commercially confidential and is not publically available.

  Mr. Clive Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will undertake an investigation to determine if the land at Tinsley, Sheffield being prepared for building an airport runway has been properly compacted following opencasting. [25874]

  Sir Paul Beresford
  It is for Sheffield development corporation as landowner and local planning authority to be satisfied that the land at Tinsley has been properly compacted in accordance with the planning conditions.

  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment which body currently has responsibility for defects resulting from compaction work on the opencast site at Tinsley, Sheffield. [25875]

  Sir Paul Beresford
  British Coal retains responsibility to deal with defects resulting from the compaction of the site.

  Allerton Outreach Team
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what further funding to support two staff and running costs of the Allerton Outreach team in Bradford has been secured; and if he will make a statement. [25981]

  Sir Paul Beresford
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given today by my hon. Friend the Minister of State for Employment.

  Lister Mills
  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how much public money, including the cost of official time, he estimates has been spent to date on the re-development of Lister mills in Bradford, with particular reference to the establishment of a northern branch of the Victoria and Albert museum. [26136]

  Sir Paul Beresford
  My Department contributed £18,500 towards a feasibility study funded jointly with Bradford metropolitan district council and Listers plc in 1989. Information on the cost of the official time spent by public organisations on the wide range of proposals under consideration since 1988 is not recorded.

  Mr. Madden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what indication he has given formally or informally to Millview Developments, owners of Lister Mills in Bradford, that public financial support from his Department will be available to pay for redevelopment at the mills; and if he will make a statement. [26367]

  Sir Paul Beresford
  My Department has given no formal or informal indication to Millview Developments that public financial support will be available to pay for development at Lister Mills, Bradford.

  Drinking Water
  Mrs. Helen Jackson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are the limits of chlorine and chlorinated substances imposed by the current European Council drinking water regulations. [26394]

  Mr. Atkins
  The EC drinking water directive— 80/778/EEC—does not include a maximum admissible concentration for chlorine. Persistent organochlorine insecticides, polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls are included within the pesticides and related products parameter and maximum admissible concentrations of 0.1 and 0.5 microgram per litre apply for individual and total substances respectively. There are no maximum admissible concentrations for other organochlorine compounds although there is a comment that haloform—trihalomethanes— concentrations must be as low as possible.

  The Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 1989 set standards of 100 microgram per litre for total trihalomethanes and 3, 30 and 10 microgram per litre for the chlorinated solvents tetrachloromethane, trichloroethene and tetrachloroethane respectively in addition to those required by the EC directive.

  Dry Stone Walls
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the cost of rebuilding a derelict dry stone wall for any length for which figures are available. [26450]

  Mr. Atkins
  My Department has not carried out specific research into the costs of rebuilding dry stone walls. The costs in particular cases are likely to be subject to considerable variation depending on a number of factors including a wall's design, height and width, the extent of dereliction, the availability of stone and the nature of the terrain.

  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he is taking, following the Countryside Commission's national survey of the condition of dry stone walls, to ensure that walls which have major signs of advancing or potential deterioration
  787
  or are in early stages of dereliction are rebuilt or otherwise repaired. [26436]

  Mr. Atkins
  The Government already offer payments for the repair and restoration of stone walls in landscapes eligible for support under the countryside stewardship scheme, the farm and conservation grant scheme and in environmentally sensitive areas. Proposals for the integration and focus of environmental land management schemes in England were published on 18 May by my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State and the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Copies of the consultation document have been placed in the Library of the House.

  Fire Authorities
  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to extend the discretionary powers of fire authorities in county council offices to metropolitan fire authorities under section 137 of the Local Government Act 1972. [26313]

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  There are no plans to extend the provisions of section 137 of the Local Government Act 1972 to apply to metropolitan fire authorities.

  1994–95 revenue support grant

  £ per head of population

  Pendle

  Ribble Valley

  Westminster

  Wandsworth

  City of London

  District, etc

  43

  19

  760

  507

  13,105

  County council

  308

  308

  —

  —

  —

  Police authority

  —

  —

  38

  38

  —

  Fire authority

  —

  —

  22

  22

  22

  1995–96 revenue support grant

  £ per head of population

  Pendle

  Ribble Valley

  Westminster

  Wandsworth

  City of London

  District, etc.

  40

  15

  804

  501

  12,166

  County council

  282

  282

  —

  —

  —

  Police authority

  23

  23

  61

  61

  —

  Fire authority

  —

  —

  22

  22

  22

  North Sea Conference
  Mrs. Helen Jackson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what policy on toxic discharges into the North sea Her Majesty's Government will advance at the fourth North sea Ministers Conference in Esbjerg; and if he will make a statement. [26395]

  Mr. Atkins
  The Secretary of State announced on 16 May, columns 183–84 the United Kingdom's priorities for the North sea conference including that relating to toxic discharges. A note on our objectives was placed in the Library of the House.

  Housing (Elderly and Disabled People)
  Mr. Sheerman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many specialist housing schemes and associations providing care and support for vulnerable residents and those at risk there are in the United Kingdom. [26539]

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  Research published last year by the Department1 found that there were a total of 14,206 units of very sheltered accommodation for elderly and disabled people provided in England by local authorities, registered housing associations, Abbeyfield societies and almshouses in 1990.

  Leaseholders
  Mr. Denham
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will publish his proposals to assist local authority leaseholders to sell their flats. [26525]

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  We plan to announce a package of measures in the next few weeks.

  Revenue Support Grant
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the level of revenue support grant per head in(a) Pendle, (b) Ribble valley, (c) the City of Westminster, (d) Wandsworth and (e) the City of London for 1994–95 and 1995–96. [26565]

  Mr. Curry
  The revenue support grant per head of these authorities is shown in the first row of figures in each of the tables. The tables also show the revenue support grant per head of the other types of authority which serve these areas, since the division of responsibilities for services between types of authorities is different in Lancashire, inner London and the City of London. In particular, in Pendle and Ribble valley, Lancashire county council provides major services which, in London, are provided by the borough and city authorities.

  There were a further 52,679 supported units provided for non-elderly vulnerable residents in England through the Housing Corporation in 1994–95. The Housing Corporation supported a total of 317 housing associations providing care and support to their tenants.

  1 Living Independently—A study of the Housing Needs of elderly and disabled people, HMSO 1994.

  Nuclear Waste
  Mr. Ashton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give undertaking that no nuclear industry waste will be disposed of inside the boundary of the Bassetlaw constituency or the boundary of the Bassetlaw district council in north Nottinghamshire.

  Mr. Atkins
  There are no sites in the Bassetlaw constituency or the boundary of Bassetlaw district council which are authorised by Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution for the disposal of waste from nuclear licensed sites. The Government's overall policy in this area will be set out this summer when the conclusions to its review of radioactive waste management are published.

  Nitrate Consultation
  Mr. Stephen
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made on the Government's response to last year's consultation on proposed nitrate vulnerable zones under the EC nitrate directive; and if he will make a statement. [26621]

  Mr. Atkins
  My right hon. Friends the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, the Secretary of State for Wales and I issued today our response to last year's consultation. As with the original consultation document, the response document is being sent to farmers in parishes and communities containing a proposed nitrate vulnerable zone, and to other interested groups.

  A major purpose of the consultation was to confirm the accuracy of the proposed zones, using farmers' local knowledge, before their formal designation. Over 500 sets of written comments were received, in the main from farmers in the proposed zones, and in each case an individual response has been sent out. In addition many points have been addressed directly at a local level by the National Rivers Authority and the Agricultural Development and Advisory Service.

  The response document indicates how the Government propose to proceed with designations in the light of comments received. In all, the proposed boundaries for 31 of the 72 zones have been altered and it is proposed that two small groundwater zones should be deferred for further consideration. Maps of the revised zones are available free from MAFF regional services centres and WOAD divisional offices.

  As foreshadowed in last year's consultation document, we have set up an independent review panel, chaired by Mr. Terence Etherton QC and assisted by Dr. Richard Downing and Mr. Alastair Allcock. The panel will assess whether the Government's published methodology has been correctly and consistently applied in drawing up the boundaries in those cases where consultees are dissatisfied with the amended boundaries as set out in the response document. In addition, because of the uniqueness of the proposed surface water zone at Nayland, we have asked the independent review panel to consider the case for and against its designation.

  I am placing copies of the response document in the Library.

  Environment Agency
  Mr. Jacques Arnold
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps are being taken to appoint senior directors of the proposed environment agency. [26620]

  Mr. Atkins
  I have informed the environment agency advisory committee that it may commence the recruitment of senior directors of the proposed environment agency. Approval has already been given for the recruitment of the chief executive, as announced in my reply of 21 April to my hon. Friend the Member for Wyre Forest (Mr. Coombs), columns 288–89.

  Parliamentary approval to this new service will be sought in a summer supplementary estimate for the Department of the Environment's environmental protection and water vote, class VII, vote 3. Pending that approval, urgent expenditure estimated at £135,000 will be met by repayable advances from the contingencies fund.
  790
  This expenditure is required to meet the cost of recruiting up to six directors. Its urgency reflects the need to have directors in place as soon as possible after Royal Assent, so that they can support the chief executive in planning for the agency to take over its functions from predecessor bodies on 1 April 1996. The successful candidates will not be formally appointed as directors until after the Bill has received Royal Assent.

  Packaging
  Mr. Dicks
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on his proposals for producer responsibility for packaging. [26622]

  Mr. Gummer
  When my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and I launched the producer responsibility challenge on 17 July 1993, we took the view that only industry could provide the leadership and know-how necessary to achieve a successful UK initiative on recycling and recovery of packaging waste. Nearly two years later, that industry-led approach has enabled us to meet many of our key objectives. The producer responsibility group of leading businesses involved in packaging has achieved widespread industry support for its plan to secure the recovery and recycling of 58 per cent. of United Kingdom packaging waste and create close to home recycling facilities for eight out of 10 households by the year 2000. After extensive negotiation, in which the UK played a leading part, the European Community has adopted a packaging and packaging waste directive which we now need to implement.

  A major challenge remains. In its first report, the producer responsibility group made it very clear that the initiative could not be successful without legislative underpinning to deter "free riders". Enabling powers to provide that legislative underpinning are included in the Environment Bill, now being considered by Parliament. But we need to specify precisely who in business will be subject to a legal obligation and what action is required to satisfy it. Such an obligation must be simple and clear if it is to be effective and enforceable—in industry's interests as much as Government's. It must also be consistent with wider Government policies, for example on ensuring competition and minimising burdens on business.

  The Government are today publishing, "Producer Responsibility for Packaging Waste—a Consultation Paper", which sets out a variety of options on how such a legal obligation might work and includes a compliance cost assessment. Copies are being placed in the Library. These options have been the subject of lengthy and detailed deliberation by different industry groups in the light of the legislative tests set out in the answer given by my hon. Friend the Minster of State to my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton (Mr. Streeter) on 2 February, Official Report, columns 763–64.

  Several of the options have been put forward by the VALPAK—working representative advisory group— V—WRAG—the industry body which has succeeded PRG and which will continue to be a focus for discussions. Alternative approaches may emerge in consultation but they will need to demonstrate that they have been widely publicised in industry and tested against the same criteria as the options in this paper. The Government will need to make a decision to adopt

  791
  a proposal based on one of these approaches and are keen to have the views of all sectors of industry and commerce, and others who will be involved in achieving our aims, including local authorities and consumers.

  What is most needed now is further work by the proponents of different approaches to help build a consensus behind the best option. The Government would prefer to proceed on the basis of a board consensus on an approach which best meetws the test we have published. We invite all those involved in the production, distribution and use of packaging to meet this challenge.

  Housing
  Mr. Hinchcliffe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his estimate of the number of housing association homes for rent which could have been constructed at funding levels announced in the 1992 autumn statement. [25396]

  Mr. Robert B. Jones
  [holding answer 24 May 1995]: Such estimates depend on the assumptions made. But if allocations and unit costs had been on the same basis as for the current programme, the Housing Corporation estimates that the 1995–96 approved development programme would have provided some 35,900 new build homes for rent if funding levels in the 1992 autumn statement had been maintained.

Preamble
The House met at eleven of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of St. Edmundsbury and Ipswich.

National Air Traffic Services
Lord Clinton-Davis Lord Clinton-Davis asked Her Majesty's Government:
What are their plans for the privatisation of the National Air Traffic Services.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Transport (Viscount Goschen): My Lords, the Secretary of State for Transport announced in November 1994 that the Government continue to favour privatisation of the National Air Traffic Services in principle but that further work was needed on a number of important issues before any final decision could be made on whether or not to proceed with privatisation. We are currently considering the further work that has been done and will make an announcement soon.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, is it not clear that the Government have made a complete U-turn on this matter? Is it not clear also that, following consultation, their proposals have found little or no favour with air carriers, pilots, air traffic controllers and anyone else who has an interest in the matter? Is it not also bizarre that the Government should even have entertained the idea when no other country in the world, including the United States which has rejected the concept of privatisation of the service, follows that course?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, I do not see how the noble Lord could have gleaned any of that from my full Answer. The party opposite continues to refuse to acknowledge the benefits of privatisation, which we have seen in a number of organisations which have developed efficiencies, introduced new management techniques and found new sources of investment. Privatisation is a very useful tool.
Lord Boyd-Carpenter: My Lords, as one who fully shares the view of my noble friend about privatisation, may I ask him whether in this particular case there are any real advantages to be obtained from it?
Viscount Goschen: Yes, my Lords. Privatisation of an organisation such as NATS can bring efficiencies, reductions in charges and a more efficient service to airlines and hence to the users of airlines, the passengers.
Lord Harris of Greenwich: My Lords, is the noble Viscount indicating that there will certainly be reductions in charges if the privatisation is carried through?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, I am indicating that the possibility arises.
Lord Clark of Kempston: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that in 1979 British taxpayers were losing £50 million per week in the nationalised industries whereas now, under privatisation, the Exchequer receives £50 million per week? Is that not proof positive that privatisation works?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, I could not agree more with my noble friend.
Lord Marsh: My Lords, does not the Minister agree that there is a faint danger that the Government may be entrapped by a sort of Clause 4 in reverse?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, I am grateful for the noble Lord's concern. As ever, the Government will be able to make their position absolutely clear.
Lord Merlyn-Rees: My Lords, does the Minister agree that there are arguments for privatisation in terms of efficiency, greater profits and investment, but air traffic control depends on safety? Can we have an absolute assurance that nothing will ever be done that will weaken the safety record of air traffic control in this country?
Viscount Goschen: Yes, my Lords, I can give that firm assurance.
Lord Craig of Radley: My Lords, can the Minister reassure the House that if NATS were to be privatised the essential training needs of the Armed Forces and the allocation of airspace in and around the UK would continue to be met?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, our proposals fully take into account the needs of the Ministry of Defence.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the enthusiasm that he portrayed for this proposal seemed a little restrained this morning? He asked me how I gleaned my information. Is he aware that the White Paper on competitiveness (which I think should be more appropriately called Forging Behind) contains no reference to the privatisation of NATS, in contrast with the 1994 White Paper which was full of it? That seems— does it not?—to be sufficient evidence of the Government's intentions.
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, I set out the Government's position very fully in my original Answer.
Lord Marlesford: My Lords, can my noble friend explain why considerations of safety in air traffic control seem somehow to inhibit the consideration of privatisation of that service when in the case of airlines, where safety is just as important, that does not seem to be a factor?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, that is an extremely important point. With the privatisation of British Airways and the British Airports Authority, which are entirely safety critical, we have seen two businesses which have an excellent safety record combined with a very good financial performance.

National Lottery: Proceeds
11.12 a.m.
Lord Donoughue Lord Donoughue asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether and in what ways it is proposed to improve the arrangements for distributing the proceeds of the National Lottery to good causes.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of National Heritage (Viscount Astor): My Lords, the National Lottery has raised £524 million so far for good causes. The distribution of those proceeds has only just begun, with £69 million being allocated by the 11 distributing bodies for 284 worthwhile projects.
Lord Donoughue: My Lords, nothing is perfect, not even the present Government—
Lord Graham of Edmonton: That is a bit strong!
Lord Donoughue: Yes, my Lords. Is the Minister aware that there are already concerns about the arrangements for distributing the proceeds of the lottery? There are concerns about the priorities that have been established as regards the distributions to charities. There are also concerns about the criteria for the millennium distribution and about the presentation of the heritage distributions. Above all there are concerns about how much is being retained—currently, it is probably 9 to 11 per cent.—by the managers, Camelot. Will the Minister ask his right honourable friend the Secretary of State to reconsider some of these matters? Above all, will he look at whether Camelot should be required to publish every month the amount it is retaining from this huge revenue?
Viscount Astor: My Lords, we have to remember that the lottery funds only started to flow into the distributing bodies in November. So far 284 schemes in our sports heritage have been approved. We expect at least 1,000 projects to be approved by the end of the year. These are early days. Of course I appreciate the noble Lord's concerns as regards how the distributing bodies manage their task but, as I say, these are early days and we must let them get on with the job that was set by Parliament under the Act. As regards Camelot's profit, it is worth emphasising that over the course of Camelot's seven year licence its take-out to cover both operating costs and profit will be just 5 per cent. That will be the average over the period of the licence. As the turnover increases, so does the amount that goes to the good causes, and Camelot's percentage share goes down. Therefore, the more successful the lottery, the more money that will flow to the good causes.
Lord Donoughue: My Lords, before the Minster sits down, does he not agree that although Camelot retains an average of 5 per cent. over a long period, it is currently retaining a figure that is about double that? It has retained that money early in the proceedings, and that is done at the cost of less distribution to the good causes. That is not what we anticipated when we discussed and supported the lottery in this House.
Viscount Astor: My Lords, the percentage retained by Camelot to date is about 9 per cent. which is higher than the overall forecast figure and reflects its higher investment and start-up costs. However, the main point is
1042
that over time the figure will reduce to just over 5 percent. over the course of the whole licence. Therefore, it will average out. The gearing effect of a licence means that Camelot's share will be a lower percentage as the turnover increases. Therefore the figures will balance. I remind the noble Lord, Lord Donoughue, that the licence under which Camelot operates, which is awarded by OFLOT, is available in the Library of your Lordships' House.
The Viscount of Falkland: My Lords, is it safe to assume that there is some kind of a fast track for funds to be distributed from the lottery, to judge from the decision to keep the Churchill papers in this country? If there is such a fast track, how does one get on to it? For example, the folk heritage of this country, which comprises a multi-media collection of videos and films, is now likely—according to a report in the Observer last Sunday—to go to the United States because of lack of funding here. How could that heritage be put onto a fast track?
Viscount Astor: My Lords, there is no fast track as such. Applications are a matter for the distributing bodies. As the noble Viscount said, the Churchill papers have been saved for the nation. That decision was made by the National Heritage Memorial Fund; it clearly fits in with its published criteria for assessing applications. It is for the distributing bodies to assess applications and I believe they are doing so. They have had many applications and are dealing with them as fast as they are able.
Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone: My Lords, would it not clarify the atmosphere of civilised discussion which characterises this House if we avoided analogies from the motorway? We have already had a U-turn and a fast track. Should we not return to the Queen's English?
Viscount Astor: My Lords, that is a laudable ambition. Perhaps if my noble and learned friend can find a way of turning that into an application for lottery funds, he might find some advantage.
Lord Howell: My Lords, are the Government aware of the increasing concern as regards the distribution side? Charities in this country are losing much income as a result of the National Lottery but they have not yet had a penny distributed to them. In spite of the fact that £104 million has been allocated to charities, they will not receive any money at all until next November. Now we learn that the committee distributing money to charities is to set up 13 regional offices to advise them about that. Is that not a totally wrong use of lottery money which ought to go exclusively to charities and not be spent on bureaucracy? Furthermore, is the Minister aware that voluntary sports clubs, especially in the cities, are having great difficulty raising the 35 per cent. sum that is needed to submit a claim whereas bodies involved in the arts only have to raise 10 per cent. to qualify for a grant? Will the Minister examine that terrible discrepancy which is affecting money for sports provision?
Viscount Astor: My Lords, perhaps I may answer the noble Lord's last question first. The grants made by the Sports Council for lottery applications are a matter for that council. It has only just started distributing lottery funds and it will obviously have to take many factors into account.

1043
As regards the National Lottery Charities Board, I remind the noble Lord that the arrangement for regional boards is part of the National Lottery. It was debated in this House. The setting up of the boards is part of the legislative procedure on which the Government gave their assurance. It is important that the National Lottery Charities Board gets it right; it will probably receive more applications than any other body. It has decided that its primary aim for first grants will be to improve the quality of life of people in communities in this country who are disadvantaged by poverty. The board will look at further applications this autumn.
Lord Nathan: My Lords, can the Minister assist us as regards the concentration of power in the hands of those responsible for distribution? I am thinking particularly of the charities. Is a consequence of this that an industry will develop of consultants on how best to approach the matter? Does that situation arise?
Viscount Astor: No, my Lords, I do not think it does. It is for the charities boards and sub-boards to take decisions on applications for lottery funds.
Lord Annan: My Lords, does the Minister agree that we should give the bodies which distribute the moneys a fair run before we begin criticising every decision that is made? Should we not remember how often great works of art have left the country because, perfectly understandably, the government of the time thought that the taxpayer could not afford the amounts requested? Here we have a marvellous chance to retain works of art in this country. I say that with reference to the Churchill papers and many items which will come up in the future. I would greatly regret it if each donation became a target for envy.
Viscount Astor: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Annan, puts the case very well. It is extremely important that at a time when the distributing bodies have only just started receiving applications for grants we resist the temptation to tinker with the system just to keep a few people happy. We must give those bodies a chance to get going and operate properly.

Breast Cancer
11.22 a.m.
Lord Dubs Lord Dubs asked Her Majesty's Government:
What proposals they have to improve the treatment of women suffering from breast cancer.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Baroness Cumberlege): My Lords, our proposals are contained in A Policy Framework for Commissioning Cancer Services, the report of the Chief Medical Officers for England and Wales Expert Advisory Group on Cancer which was published on 24th April.
Lord Dubs: My Lords, while we accept that progress has been made, is it not unthinkable that the Royal Marsden Hospital in Fulham—widely acknowledged to be Europe's centre of excellence in the treatment of cancer, particularly breast cancer—should be under threat
1044
of closure or at least has an uncertain future? The consequence is that the hospital has a lesser ability to attract high quality staff and there is a disastrous effect on the attitude of patients who have gone to the hospital for its high quality of treatment. That hospital, unlike others, treats patients as human beings.
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, I absolutely agree with the noble Lord that the Royal Marsden Hospital is a place of excellence, with a world-wide reputation. As your Lordships will be aware, it has become a trust and I am sure that health authorities will recognise that and will continue to use it.
Lord Ironside: My Lords, as the Question points to the considerable public unease about the quality of breast cancer services, I welcome the steps that my noble friend has taken to improve them. Will she say what steps she is taking to provide for the clinical treatment services and needs of a large number of women who have been permanently and adversely affected and injured by radiotherapy treatment? The Minister has already given me assurances that the clinical outcomes group in her department is considering this month, during May, the recommendations of the Royal College of Radiology to manage the treatment services which are needed. Can she say whether the clinical outcomes group has given its approval, and if not why not? There is a crying need for the services.
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, I should like to pay tribute to my noble friend for the work that he has done in the field, especially concerned with the organisation RAGE. The NHS Executive is at the moment considering ways of disseminating the guidance that has been prepared by the Royal College of Radiologists. That will shortly go out to the service.
Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, is the Minister aware that many noble Lords will welcome the assurance that she has given in response to my noble friend, so far as it goes? If closure of the Royal Marsden came to be envisaged, will the Government actively step in and prevent the closure? May we have a guarantee of that?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, if there is a change in service and if it is opposed by the local community health council, then the matter has to go for determination to the Secretary of State. It would be wrong for me to give any assurances at this time with regard to a single institution because we know the enormously rapid change in medical science, in the way that services are provided, and in the needs of the population. So although I know it would be a great comfort to many of your Lordships in this House to give some kind of cast iron assurance, I am afraid that I am unable to do so.
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, has my noble friend had time this morning to read the Daily Express newspaper? In it there is a report of American research suggesting that wearing a brassiere for more than 12 hours a day will increase the incidence of breast cancer by 11 per cent. Has any comparable research been done in this country or is it likely that the suggestion will become the medical flavour of the month, with imported, unchecked

1045
American research? Will we forget about it in a few years' time as we have done with butter and many other substances?
Lord Lyell: Do you wear them?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, I heard a Member of your Lordships' House asking whether I wear them. This is a very grown up question. The answer is that I am still trying to think of ways of abandoning my liberty bodice!
I have no knowledge of any research in this country in that field. I suspect that it is an example of a newspaper anxious to fill its pages.
The Viscount of Falkland: My Lords, can the noble Baroness tell the House how the treatment of breast cancer, particularly for women between the ages of 50 and 65, compares in quality with that of other developed countries?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, there has been a recent report comparing the survival rates in Europe with those in this country. In fact, we are suspicious of some of that research. In our country we have a comprehensive cancer registry system but only our country, Denmark and the Netherlands have a similar system. We also do not fully believe the basis of that research. When it was published there were qualifications made by the researchers that those who were taking part in the study were volunteers and therefore it was not a comprehensive study. It is an area which needs further research, but, as I have said, cancer registration is patchy in most of Europe.
Lord Campbell of Alloway: My Lords, does my noble friend's answer to the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, mean that the Royal Marsden is no longer under threat of closure?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, at the moment there is no intention of closing the Royal Marsden Hospital.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, is the Minister aware—there is no reason why she should be— that this morning I opened a conference of the Royal College of Midwives and the Health Visitors' Association, designed to promote breast feeding in this country? In that area there is substantial research which is neither in the Daily Express nor in any sense questionable that breast feeding can prevent breast cancer. In future, will the Government promote the link between those two as part of their health education campaign?
Baroness Cumberlege: Yes, my Lords. Indeed, we have put a huge investment into the current National Breast Feeding Awareness Week. We recognise that "breast is best". It is the designer food for babies, and we want to encourage women to breast-feed.
Lord Dubs: My Lords, will the Minister agree that when she says she is unable to give an assurance about the future of the Royal Marsden in Fulham, the truth is that the way in which her department is reorganising cancer care in London is likely to mean that the Royal Marsden's future is doomed? It is not part of one of the other teaching hospitals and therefore has no obvious catchment area. Is it not a rather sad day when a masterplan for the health
1046
service in London —dare I add, Soviet style?—is likely to lead to the closure of Britain's best hospital for treating cancer?
Baroness Cumberlege: My Lords, it is a very sorry day today, when the noble Lord puts such a question. It will raise a whole lot of fears that are totally unfounded. It is scaremongering. I have already told noble Lords that there is no question at this time of the Royal Marsden Hospital closing. The noble Lord will know as well as anyone that I cannot say that in 100 years, 150 years or whenever, this hospital will never, ever close. That would be a ridiculous statement for any Minister to make.

Channel Rail Link Bids: Compliance
11.31 a.m.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey Lord McIntosh of Haringey asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether any of the bids submitted for the Channel Tunnel rail link by the appointed deadline were not full bids on the basis of the reference specification; and if so, whether any such bid was subsequently accepted for consideration on the basis of information supplied after the deadline.
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, there was a large number of non-compliant elements in the bids submitted on 14th March. We have been seeking to rectify these in accordance with the rules of the competition which were set out in the competition overview document published last August.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the Minister replied in terms of defects in bids. However, does he agree that the rules for the process that were published last year require that all bidders must submit a full bid on the basis of the reference specification? Will he further agree that the tender adjudication group, while acknowledging deficiencies in all the tenders, said specifically that the tender for Eurorail did not include a reference specification? Is that not a far more serious breach of the rules than the other tender deficiencies?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, we had always anticipated a degree of non-compliance. That is why we set out very full rules in a public document published last August. I can assure the House that the department has acted entirely in accordance with those published procedures, and entirely even-handedly as between the four bidders.
Lord Peyton of Yeovil: My Lords, I wonder whether any of the applicants is likely to fulfil the Government's hope that it will have sufficient resources, and the will, to put the Grade I building at St. Pancras into an appropriate state of repair. Does my noble friend agree that it is quite clear that the British Rail Property Board has neither?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, I note of course my noble friend's interest in the St. Pancras building. It was rehearsed in another question earlier. I believe that my noble friend has tabled a further Question with regard to the St. Pancras building, and I shall be delighted to give him an Answer then.
Lord Peyton of Yeovil: My Lords, that is no answer to the question that I just asked. My question was about the present list of applicants.
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, the Question on the Order Paper relates to the bids submitted and whether they were compliant with the specification. As I said, we anticipated a degree of non-compliance; there was non-compliance in a number of areas in the bids. We have acted entirely in accordance with the rules as set out in the published document.
Lord Monkswell: My Lords, does the Minister agree that there seems to be a question about what the rules are? If they are published, and three applicants submit bids in accordance with the rules and one does not, why does the fourth applicant remain in the race? Is it a question of the rules being fit for the particular people involved? I gather that the bid that did not meet the initial rules involved a Member of this House on the Government side. Is that not a very curious way of applying the rules?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, I have already given the House a very straightforward assurance that we have acted entirely in accordance with the rules and in an even-handed fashion. If the noble Lord cares to go to the Library and look at the document, he will see in paragraph 11.3.1 the detailed procedure for processing bids, and the procedure where there is a degree of non-compliance. To read out the exact rules would take up too much of your Lordships' time. However, I believe that when the noble Lord examines the document he will be fully assured that the Government have acted properly.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the Minister again refers to "a degree of non-compliance". Will he acknowledge that my Question refers not to a degree of non-compliance—which is of course acceptable—but to a failure to meet the basic specification of the bid? Is it not the case that one of the four tenders—I have no interest in any of them—of which three are led by Conservative Peers, failed to meet the basic requirement to submit a full bid in terms of the reference specification? If that is the case, why is that bid still in the ring?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, without wishing to tax the patience of the House with somewhat repetitive answers, all I can do is repeat the assurance that I have already given that the bids contained a degree of non-compliance. That fell within the scope of the document that we published as to how to deal with this situation. We have not acted outside the rules as set out in the document entitled, Channel Tunnel Rail Link and European Passenger Services: Competition Overview.
Lord Richard: My Lords, I wonder whether the Minister can help me. I am a little lost. As I understand it, he is telling the House that in relation to the competition, the Government had rules with which they did not expect people to comply; and when people lived up to the Government's non-expectations and did not comply with the rules, the Government decided that somehow or other they would forgive the non-compliance. Were there any criteria in relation to the forgiveness? Were some of the sins considered graver than others? If so, can we be told on what basis the Government reached their conclusions?
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, the noble Lord has done a very good job in trying to confuse the House on this issue. I said earlier that I did not wish to try the patience of the House, but I feel that the moment has come. The document states:
"Bids received by the tender deadline will be checked for completeness and for compliance with the tender documentation. Where bids are found to be lacking in terms of the information necessary to enable proper evaluation, or where inconsistent information is presented, one of the following courses of action, which are not necessarily mutually exclusive alternatives, will be taken:
the information presented will be analysed and where necessary specific clarification sought from the Tenderer,
the response will be reviewed to determine the consistency and acceptability of the bid;
as a last resort"—
as a last resort, my Lords—
"the bid will be rejected".

Atomic Energy Authority Bill
11.37 a.m.
Earl Ferrers Earl Ferrers My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.
Moved, That it be an instruction to the Committee of the Whole House to whom the Atomic Energy Authority Bill has been committed that they consider the Bill in the following order:

Clause 1,

Schedule 1,

Clauses 2 to 6,

Schedule 2,

Clauses 7 and 8,

Schedule 3,

Clause 9,

Schedule 4,

Clauses 10 to 14.—(Earl Ferrers.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Commonwealth Development Corporation Bill
Read a third time, and passed.

Civil Evidence Bill [H.L.]
11.38 a.m.
The Lord Chancellor (Lord Mackay of Clashfern): My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time.
This is the fourth Bill I have introduced this Session to give effect to recommendations for law reform which have been put forward by the Law Commission. The Bills implement no fewer than seven of its reports. I am sure that noble Lords will join me again in thanking the Law Commission for their excellent work towards simplifying and modernising our laws.
Hearsay is a technical and complicated subject, and it is one which is in need of reform. Those of your Lordships who wish to go into greater detail about the current law,

1049
its defects and the recommendations will find it in the Law Commission's report No. 216, The Hearsay Rule in Civil Proceedings, which was published in September 1993. Notes on Clauses are also available for further details in the Printed Paper Office.
When Sam Weller remarked in the case of Bardell v. Pickwick that he had quite enough to get, "as the soldier said ven they ordered him 350 lashes", the judge said, "You must not tell us what the soldier, or any other man, said, sir. It's not evidence". That is the hearsay rule. More prosaically, it may be expressed in this way: an assertion other than one made by a person while giving oral evidence is inadmissible as proof of the facts asserted. In its usual application, the rule is concerned with statements made by persons other than the witness, like the soldier, but it also applies to the previous assertions of the witness himself. The origins of the rule are not entirely clear, but there appear to have been two principal reasons for it. The first was that it was doubted whether juries would be able to evaluate hearsay evidence adequately. The second was that the use of hearsay evidence by one side would prevent the other side from cross-examining the maker of the original statement. In civil cases, the first reason has now lost its force: since the 1930s very few types of civil case have been tried by juries.
Exceptions to the rule, both statutory and common law, have gradually developed and as a result of the Civil Evidence Act 1968 the position in civil proceedings in the High Court and county courts is that first-hand hearsay will usually be admissible, if the parties agree or if various conditions are met.
As a result of criticisms which were made to it about the hearsay rule, the Civil Justice Review Body recommended in 1988 that there be an inquiry into the usefulness of the rule; and I referred the matter to the Law Commission. Another significant development at that time was the abolition of the rule in Scotland by the Civil Evidence (Scotland) Act 1988.
As is its customary practice, the Law Commission first issued a consultation paper which made out the case for reform and provisionally suggested the abolition of the rule. It is important to emphasise the strong support which that consultation paper received. Among bodies which welcomed its proposals were the Council of Her Majesty's Circuit Judges, the Association of District Judges, the Magistrates' Association, the Law Society and the National Consumer Council.
Some notes of caution were, however, struck by a few consultees. Two points which were made were, first, that there is a need for the best evidence to be produced if at all possible; and, secondly, that there is a need for a party to be able to test the other side's evidence in cross-examination.
The Law Commission took those arguments into consideration when producing its final report, and the Government share their view that they can be met by the provision of various safeguards. Such safeguards were, indeed, felt necessary by most consultees. They relate to the giving of notice, the weighing of hearsay evidence and cross-examination.
1050
The commission's report confirmed the proposals in the consultation paper and recommended the abolition of the hearsay rule. The Government fully agree with the commission that the hearsay rule is difficult to understand and to explain to witnesses and litigants. The 1968 Act and rules of court made under it are complex, unwieldy and in some respects outmoded. The provisions on notice impose unrealistic requirements and have fallen into disuse, while those on records, especially on computer records, do not accord with business life today.
Reform is needed. It is not an acceptable argument against reform to say that the inconvenient provisions in the Act are ignored and that there are therefore few problems in practice. That is not the way to achieve comprehensible and workable laws which can command the respect of all who use them.
Nor would the best course be to make a few amendments to the 1968 Act. Although the effect of the Act is that hearsay evidence is generally admissible, the Act is still based on the rule that hearsay is inadmissible. The Government believe that it would be more sensible to abolish the rule itself.
The guiding principle must be that all relevant evidence should be admissible; it should then be for the court to decide what weight to give to the evidence. The concept of hearsay evidence will remain, and hearsay evidence may well be less reliable than direct evidence. But it should not be excluded altogether just because it is hearsay.
I turn now to the Bill. I should make it clear that it only applies to civil proceedings. The Law Commission is now looking at hearsay in criminal cases as well, following recommendations to that effect by the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice which the Government accepted. It will be publishing a consultation paper later this year.
It may also be helpful for your Lordships to know that there are no differences of substance between the draft Bill which was appended to the Law Commission's report and the Bill which has been introduced into your Lordships' House. One or two drafting changes have been made, for the sake of consistency or clarification, but the Government have accepted all the 18 recommendations set out in the report.
Clause 1 gives effect to the principal recommendation in the report. It abolishes the rule against the admission of hearsay in civil proceedings. Hearsay evidence which is already admissible by virtue of other statutes is not to be affected by the Bill.
Clause 2 requires parties, subject to rules of court and unless they agree otherwise, to give fair notice of their intention to adduce hearsay evidence. This will be enlarged on in rules of court, which I intend should be considerably simpler than the present rules. If a party fails to give reasonable notice, it will still be possible for him to introduce the evidence. That is in line with our object of moving away from arguments over admissibility. The court will, however, be able to take the failure to give notice into account when considering the weight to be given to the evidence or when it comes to making orders for costs.
Clause 3 provides for a power to call for cross-examination a person whose statement has been tendered as hearsay evidence but who has not been called

1051
to give oral evidence. This; clause is one of the safeguards which it was generally agreed to be necessary as a result of the abolition of the hearsay rule.
Clause 4 is another safeguard. It provides courts with statutory guidelines to assist them to assess the weight that they should attach to hearsay evidence. They are no more than guidelines and, indeed, they do little more than set out matters which courts already consider when assessing evidence. But I believe that it will be useful to have this provision in the Bill, particularly for magistrates' courts, which have not admitted hearsay evidence to the same extent as the higher civil courts. Among the factors that I should mention are the questions of whether it would have been reasonable or practicable to have called the maker of the original statement to give evidence, whether or not the statement is first-hand hearsay and when the statement was made.
Clauses 5 to 7 largely re-enact provisions in the Civil Evidence Act 1968, dealing with the competence and credibility of the makers of statements, previous consistent and inconsistent statements of witnesses who give oral evidence, and common law rules on hearsay; for example, in public documents and records.
Clause 8 provides for the proof of statements contained in documents and copies of documents. It also changes the existing law by permitting copies of copies to be received in evidence.
Clause 9 simplifies the rules on the manner of proving records of a business or a public authority. It is an important clause, partly because of what it leaves out. The complex and outmoded rules about computer evidence, which were one of the most criticised parts of the 1968 Act, have not been replaced. Again, this is not to say that computer evidence is always going to be reliable, but that no unnecessary barriers should be put in the way of adducing computer evidence in the first place; leaving it, of course, to the court to consider to what extent the evidence is useful.
Clauses 10 to 15 are general supplementary provisions, but there are several points in them to which I should draw your Lordships' attention. First, the Bill applies to all civil proceedings, before any court or tribunal, in relation to which the rules of evidence apply. It therefore applies to civil proceedings in magistrates' courts, to which the 1968 Act has not been extended. This will make for greater uniformity between civil courts. But the Bill does not apply in proceedings where the court is not bound by rules of evidence, such as small claims proceedings in county courts.
Secondly, the interpretation clause, Clause 12, gives a wide meaning to several words, such as "statement" and "document". The 1968 Act gives examples of documents, including films, tapes and photographs; the Bill simply says that a document is anything in which information of any description is recorded. I should add that in the consequential amendments in the first schedule, where an Act says at present that, for example, "document" has the same meaning as in the 1968 Act, the general provision is of a free-standing definition, like that in the Bill.
Next, if evidence is inadmissible both because it is hearsay and for some other reason, the abolition of the hearsay rule is not to affect the inadmissibility of the evidence for that other reason.
1052
Finally, the Bill is to apply only to proceedings begun after its commencement.
I believe that the Bill will benefit those who use the civil courts, both individuals and businesses. The National Consumer Council states that abolition of the hearsay rule will enhance public understanding of the law and therefore public confidence in it. On a more specific point, concern has been expressed by insurers that the present complex and out-of-date rules on computer evidence, which can lead to uncertainty as to the admissibility of such evidence, may discourage firms from coming to the City of London.
The Bill fits very well with current developments in the conduct of civil litigation which the Government have been pursuing and supporting, and which I hope my noble and learned friend Lord Woolf will shortly be taking further. These developments involve the admission of all relevant evidence, more openness between the parties, fewer procedural technicalities and greater procedural uniformity between courts. The Bill will, I believe, simplify the law and make it more comprehensible to all who use it. I have the greatest pleasure in commending the Bill to the House.
Moved, That the Bill be now read a second time.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
11.50 a.m.
Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone: My Lords, I congratulate my noble and learned friend on his introduction of the Bill. It underlines once more the valuable contribution which the Law Commission makes to the progress of law reform. It is a standing memorial to the memory of the Lord Chancellorship of the late Lord Gardiner, who immediately preceded me. We are in arrears with some of the reports and I am glad that my noble and learned friend persuaded his colleagues of the importance of finding room for those that appear in our legislative programme.
The history of our law of evidence is slightly ridiculous. We were so obsessed with the dangers of perjury in the presentation of a case that we chose to connect the law with the competence of witnesses and the types of evidence presented instead of giving consideration to their relative weight. In the modern system of justice that which is logically probative should be evaluated by the tribunal of fact and admitted, and only that which is not logically probative should be dismissed as irrelevant.
I have only one slight criticism of what my noble and learned friend said. I am sorry that the respect that we have for the rule against retrospection led us to say that the new law will only apply to proceedings begun after its enactment. Purely procedural and evidential changes in the law should apply as from the moment when the law is enacted to proceedings which are currently before the courts. Having said that, I have said everything I want to say and I hope the House will forgive me for taking up its time.
11.53 a.m.
Lord Mishcon: My Lords, we have just heard a delightful contribution by way of—according to the

1053
traditions of this House—hearsay evidence from the noble and learned Lord whose name did not appear on the speakers' list.
Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone: Sorry!
Lord Mishcon: I have no doubt that it is an invitation to this House to alter its rules. As I said, it is always a great pleasure to hear the noble and learned Lord express himself, especially when it is unexpected.
Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, if I may interrupt the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, I should say that I did ask my noble and learned friend whether he realised that he had been a naughty boy, and he said yes.
Lord Mishcon: My Lords, I entered my name on the speakers' list because it appeared to me that the voice of a solicitor as well as that of the cuckoo should be heard in the land. I did it for several reasons. The first was to follow the thoughtful words of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor in paying a tribute to one of his great predecessors, the late Lord Gardiner. He conceived the idea of the Law Commission. It has been left to his successors to see that its recommendations receive the greatest consideration and find their way, if they merit it, on to our statute book. No one has done more than the present noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor to see that those wishes are carried out. Not only have the recommendations given new life to our law; they have also given encouragement to the Law Commission which was somewhat disconsolate in years gone by to find that its hard work seemed to end up in a pigeon-hole in a department. The procedure that now exists in this House for speeding these Bills through is a great help. I know that the House appreciates the efforts of the noble and learned Lord in achieving a good record in regard to law reform.
The second reason I added my name to the speakers' list was to express the Law Society's gratitude for the degree of consultation that has taken place between it and the Lord Chancellor's Department. Those consultations have been of great use, not least in bringing to the fore the need for seeing that the timing of the notices which would have to be served under the Act, receives recognition in the rules that will subsequently appear. It is vital in the preparation of a case that there should be proper timing of the notice that hearsay evidence will be adduced. There must also be proper timing in regard to any notice to say that that intention is being abandoned. Otherwise we shall find a great deal of time taken up unnecessarily with confusion at the eventual trial.
I ask the noble and learned Lord to consider carefully the suggestion by the Law Society that another recommendation of the Law Commission should be implemented in the Bill. In September 1994 the Law Commission published its final report on structured settlements and interim and provisional damages (Command 2646, Law Commission Paper 224). The Lord Chancellor was good enough to indicate in a recent press notice that he approves of those recommendations. One hoped that a Bill would be introduced in the present Session of Parliament to implement them. Apparently that has not proved possible, though one of the recommendations found its way into the Finance Act.
1054
This is an important recommendation which comes within the question of evidence in civil proceedings. It relates to the fixing of damages in personal injury cases, which noble and learned Lords who have sat as judges of first instance in time far gone by, will remember as being a difficult matter in the trial of injury cases. Consideration of forecasts of the future finances of this country and the question of the future chances of employment in this country have to be worked out, which involves difficulty and guesstimates. In that context one has found that multipliers used by some judges are different from those used by other judges on more or less the same facts.
The recommendation of the Law Commission is that we introduce actuarial tables, which are available from government departments, in a way which will stop the use of guesstimates to a large extent and produce more consistency in the adjudication of damages. The Law Commission took the trouble to prepare a clause—clause 6 of its report—which would meet that case. Because of the need for such a provision in personal injury cases, one hoped that this Bill, dealing as it does with evidence in civil cases, would be able to incorporate that clause. I hope that the noble and learned Lord will be good enough to give the matter his consideration.
11.59 a.m.
Lord Meston: My Lords, I thank the noble and learned Lord for his introduction of the Bill and for the particularly helpful Notes on Clauses in which we find the object of the Bill succinctly summarised. The object of the Bill is to move away from a situation in which the admissibility of evidence is of importance to one in which what matters is the reliability and weight of the evidence.
It was 30 years ago, in the case of Myers v. DPP, that Lord Reid recommended reform of the hearsay rule by legislation following a wide survey of the whole field. This Bill follows such a survey by the Law Commission. It marks a further stage in the removal of what Sir Rupert Cross called "the superstitious awe about having any truck with evidence which involves A telling the court about what B said to him". Clients and witnesses in court are often quite bemused by the efforts of the judge and the lawyers to stop them uttering what they believe to be perfectly relevant and credible evidence. There remains much force in Henry Cecil's remark that,
"the laws of evidence often prevent a witness telling the whole truth".
The elaborate and confusing rules about hearsay evolved when juries tried many more cases and many more types of cases than they do today. That does not necessarily mean that now that only a very small proportion of civil cases are heard by juries a total abolition of the rule against hearsay is the only, or the obvious, reform. However, it seems to me that the experience which we now have of the working of the 1968 Act, of the orders made for the admissibility of hearsay under the Children Act and of the more relaxed rules of evidence in industrial tribunals all point the way to the reforms proposed in the Bill. Indeed, the other day I read a case report in which an industrial tribunal had actually been held to be wrong in excluding hearsay evidence, which is perhaps an indication of how far things have moved.

1055
It is also correct that it has long been possible to include first-hand hearsay in affidavits in interlocutory proceedings provided that the source of information is stated. I hope that that proviso will continue under the workings of the Bill. Indeed, one of the problems of the technicalities of the existing law is illustrated in medical negligence cases where there has to be an omnibus direction that doctors' notes and hospital notes should stand as evidence without further proof. The one thing the court and, I am afraid, legislation cannot do is to make a doctor's notes legible.
The emphasis in modern litigation on advance disclosure of witness statements means that the parties should not be disadvantaged by being confronted with hearsay evidence which cannot be tested by cross-examination and which may have been deliberately or innocently distorted by the witness relaying that hearsay. The reforms to be brought about by the Bill will not succeed in making hearsay evidence wholly respectable. All-important are the safeguards contained in Clauses 2, 3 and 4. Judicial discretion, assisted by the useful statutory guidelines as to the weight to be given to hearsay evidence, should ensure that a consistency of approach will quickly emerge. The rules of court will be of vital importance in ensuring that practical fairness is part of the legislation and the subordinate legislation which follows. I hope that the rules will be the product of wide consultation.
It is not clear from the Bill what classes of proceedings or evidence are to be exempt from the notice procedures. The requirement to give notice is already in place in the 1968 Act under rather more limited circumstances—that is now well understood—which should make the transition to the proposed new procedures fairly painless for practitioners. The Law Commission's criticism of the rule in the 1968 Act governing the admissibility of evidence from "beyond the seas" struck a chord with me at least. I once dismally failed to persuade a judge on the Isle of Wight that I could use it to put in a statement of a witness who had failed to turn up having missed the train in Liverpool. However, the provisions of the Bill will put yet a further emphasis on pre-trial preparation and on case management. An important part of the advice on evidence will be the decision whether to require leave under Clause 4 to bring a witness to court to be cross-examined.
The removal of undue technicalities relating to documentary evidence is another welcome improvement. I have recently been in a case in which there were substantial bundles of Civil Evidence Act notices to prove computer print-outs from a mortgage lender and other such uncontroversial material. I would only question whether the phrase in Clause 8(1), "authenticated in such manner as the court may approve",
is rather too vague and may allow for rather too much variation between different courts and different judges. In Scotland, the legislation is more precise, and I wonder whether perhaps more thought should be given to that aspect of the Bill. With that very limited proviso, I am sure that the Bill will have the general support of the House.
12.8 p.m.
Lord Wilberforce: My Lords, I venture to interpose a
1056
few words in, I hope, a regular manner in the gap, apologising, of course, for not having entered my name in the list of speakers.
First, I give a very hearty welcome to the Bill. It is a case in which very substantial research and consultation has been carried out by the Law Commission. It is very gratifying that in this case the result of such intensive research and consultation coincides completely with what one considers to be one's instinct in these matters, and has been so for a long time; namely, that the hearsay rule ought in substance to be done away with.
Having said that, I want to make one comment on the Bill as drafted. It is enormously elaborate. It runs to 14 pages and goes into a great number of details. I wish to comment particularly on the schedules which trawl through a great number of Acts of Parliament—the forces Acts, criminal Acts, the International Carriage of Perishable Foodstuffs Act 1976 and finance Acts—and which seem to have very little to do with the object of the Bill. I want to make two comments on that. First, the schedule introduces some changes in the criminal law of not insubstantial extent. If one looks at the Army Act, the Air Force Act and the Naval Discipline Act one finds that it introduces what I think is a new offence of a slightly wide and alarming character. Paragraph (d) of the proposed new Section 62 states:
"with intent to deceive, fails to make an entry in an official document",
In addition, the new section introduces a new definition of "document" in subsection (3):
"'document' means anything in which information of any description is recorded".
That seems to have the effect that, although what the soldier says is henceforth going to be evidence, it is going to be a crime if the soldier interferes in any way with a silicon chip. That may be a necessary step. I just wonder whether it is an appropriate subject for legislation in this Civil Evidence Bill, which, as the noble and learned Lord said, is concerned only with civil proceedings, to introduce these new or extended offences. It may be said that this is technically incorrect but it is convenient. If that is the answer, I am probably satisfied with it. But perhaps the noble and learned Lord would like to deal just with that aspect of the matter.
The other point I want to make is one of simplification. The general effect of the schedule is to extend the meaning of the word "document" to something in which information of any description is recorded. That is done in Clause 12 of the Bill, to which the noble and learned Lord referred:
"'document' means anything in which information of any description is recorded".
That is to give effect to technological developments such as computers, silicone chips, and so on. In effect, the schedule goes through all these Acts which have been trawled through and makes similar amendments to the word "document" as used in those Acts.
I wonder whether that might not have been achieved in a more simple manner. Perhaps the noble and learned Lord might care to consider with his draftsmen whether one should be able to have a simple clause, perhaps in the Interpretation Act or in this Bill, saying that a document means something in which any information is to be recorded; and consider whether it is necessary to go

1057
through all these Acts, one after another, instead of doing it through a general phrase which would have the advantage of picking up something which the draftsmen may have failed to notice. I do not expect the noble and learned Lord to deal with that point now. Perhaps he will consider some simpler referential clause which deals much more easily with this point. It is of importance and needs to be dealt with in this legislation. Subject to those two points I have great pleasure in commending the Bill to the House.
12.11 p.m.
Lord Irvine of Lairg: My Lords, we support this Bill, as we have supported the three other Bills introduced this Session by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack to give effect to some of the superb work of the Law Commission. It is refreshing that it has proved possible to identify a number of quite complex Bills which could be agreed not to be controversial in any party political sense so that they could attract an accelerated passage onto the statute book.
I join the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham, and my noble friend Lord Mishcon in acknowledging the energy of the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack in promoting these achievements. The standing of Parliament as a legislative machine is enhanced when much needed law reform can be implemented by lean and speedy procedures.
I shall not take up your Lordships' time by rehearsing the noble and learned Lord's explanation of the Bill. I agree with him that the central point is that all relevant evidence should be admissible; that the court must decide what weight to give each piece of evidence; and that it may well be appropriate to give less weight to hearsay evidence.
I particularly welcome Clause 3. It enables rules of court to be made to enable a party to call for cross-examination a person whose statement has been tendered as hearsay evidence by another party but who has not been called by that other party to give oral evidence in court where he can be tested on his evidence by cross-examination. In all our efforts to simplify and reduce the cost of court proceedings, we must never lose sight of the sad fact that parties and witnesses in contested litigation often have an interest to be untruthful or economical with the truth. The function of cross examination is to expose untruths.
A practice direction of 24th January of this year in the name of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chief Justice and the Vice-Chancellor, Sir Richard Scott, encourages judges in civil litigation to impose time limits on cross-examination. Unnecessarily lengthy or irrelevant cross-examination must always be prevented, but relevant and concise cross-examination, never—even if of unavoidable length—in order to get at the truth. There should be no arbitrary time limits on relevant and concise cross-examination for such limits can only operate in favour of the untruthful.
The modem practice of giving evidence-in-chief by way of a written witness statement—in practice drafted at great length by lawyers in a form in which it is
1058
inconceivable that it could conform to any oral evidence-in-chief that the witness would himself give in the traditional way from the witness box—increases rather than diminishes the need for thorough and relevant cross-examination. It is therefore welcome to see Clause 3 underlining the importance of cross-examination in our justice system.
In our search for simplified and economic procedures we must never overlook that a primary function of the justice system is to get at the truth. No doubt these are considerations which the noble and learned Lord, Lord Woolf, will address in his report which we eagerly await. I join the noble and learned Lord in commending the Bill to the House.
12.15 p.m.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, of course one of the provisions of this Bill is that notice requires to be given of the intention to use hearsay evidence, but that the ordinary rules of notice may, in some circumstances and if the situation requires it, be overlooked. I am sure that your Lordships welcome the intervention of my noble and learned friend Lord Hailsham even though it came perhaps at an unexpected part of our proceedings.
So far as commencement is concerned, that is a matter I wish to consider further. My recollection is that the Law Commission report was silent on that point. There is some need to be clear about precisely how that should operate in relation to cases which are presently in court and may be substantially prepared. One would need to be careful. It is on that basis that the present Bill has been framed.
I am grateful to all noble Lords who have spoken about the progress that has been made this Session with these Bills. It is quite important to remember that although Law Commission Bills may not be party politically contentious—that is the case with all the Bills which I have introduced this Session—nevertheless they may be very highly contentious on a technical level. All the Bills I have introduced have at least had some element of questions of that kind related to them. The degree has been less in some than others; for example, in the Law Reform (Succession) Bill there was very little of it and we were able to take it through in the ordinary way with very little time used on the Floor of your Lordships' House. On the other hand, the private international law Bill was the subject of a good deal of technical discussion. Not everyone was absolutely agreed even at the very end of that discussion, as your Lordships were reminded at the end of our proceedings here.
I believe that the proposals of my noble friend Lord Jellicoe, and accepted by the House, have enabled us to have a very suitable procedure for these matters to be thoroughly examined. Nobody wants Parliament to be a rubber stamp to the Law Commission when there are questions of a technical character that may require to be debated. The difficulty has been to get that kind of thing into the ordinary parliamentary programme when there is such competition for what I might very generally refer to as Bills involving political policy of a high order. Generally, these Bills do not have that except the political policy which is a consensus policy, of trying to simplify and improve our law generally. I believe that we now have

1059
very good machinery for examining these technical matters fully and enabling a view to be reached on them, as a result of the institution of the Jellicoe procedure.
I take this opportunity to say how grateful I am to so many Members of your Lordships' House who have participated in these committees, which tend to be somewhat time consuming and tend to involve a great deal of preparation, particularly by those who are not familiar with the field, in order to follow what is going on. In the nature of the matters they are technical. I am very grateful to all those from all sides of the House who have been willing to participate.
The noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, mentioned consultation with the Law Society. Obviously, I find such consultation extremely valuable and it is important to continue that in relation to the rules of court which have to be formulated to deal with such matters, including with the question of the extent to which exceptions from the notice required should be provided.
Like the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, I am very much in favour of seeking to incorporate in our statute law the Law Commission's proposals on structured settlements. As the noble Lord mentioned, they have already been recognised for tax purposes in the Finance Act as a result of agreement between parties across the political divide on the Bill which preceded the Finance Act. I am keen to do that. Indeed, I have been making preparations with a view to doing that at as early a date as I can achieve. If it were possible to do that in this Bill by consent, that date might be even earlier than I had anticipated. Perhaps we can look into that to see whether it is possible. My impression was that these are not "together" as subject matters; but perhaps we can devise some way of putting them together. I should not like to lose any opportunity to bring structured settlements into the law because I believe that they represent a considerable advance on the present situation.
The noble Lord, Lord Meston, referred to a matter which has caused much unnecessary writing in the past. I refer to medical records and their being accepted as evidence. It is now standard procedure to agree that they can be used, but it always takes a little time and effort to meet the technical requirements involved.
We shall want to consider in Committee the point that as been made about Clause 8(1). The intention was to leave the provisions open. They state:
"authenticated in such manner as the court may approve".
Perhaps we should consider making that a little tighter, as the noble Lord suggested. My impression was that the intent of the provisions was sufficiently clear as to make it a good practical proposition.
My noble and learned friend Lord Wilberforce asked two main questions. I turn first to the structure of Schedule 1. I have tried to limit the extent to which the user of a statute has to refer to another statute. That is why we have sought, where necessary, to include definitions which will not require the person using that legislation to have to read this Act. It may be that other considerations suggest another way of looking at that.
I turn now to the criminal law provisions. Given my noble and learned friend's observations, I shall want to look into this a little more fully, but my understanding is
1060
that they are simply consequential amendments to the existing provisions. Where the language used was that of the Civil Evidence Act 1968, we have substituted the language of this Bill. In a sense, that may alter the precise scope of the offence, but it does so in relation to the matter that is now in question, a record in relation to evidential matters.
The Bill is as simple as we have been able to devise. One way of looking at it is to recognise that it is about half the length of the 1968 Act. If we proceed at that rate of shortening, the statute book will soon be of agreeable proportions.
I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Irvine of Lairg, not only for his full support for the Bill, but for the help which he and his colleagues, along with the noble Lord, Lord Meston, and his colleagues, have given to the procedural aspects of getting such Bills into Parliament without undue delay.
I agree with the noble Lord that cross-examination is an important part of oral advocacy. The practice directions, handed down by my noble and learned friend the Lord Chief Justice and the Vice-Chancellor, and followed in somewhat similar terms by the President of the Family Division after a few days, are intended to give the court a clear indication that it has the power to control the time for which evidence is given. I am sure that I can speak for the President and for the Vice-Chancellor in saying that there is no intention of in any way limiting proper cross-examination. However, it is sometimes found that if the time is limited in order to ensure succinctness, that does not in any way detract from the effectiveness of the cross-examination. A short, well thought-out cross-examination is likely to be at least as effective in nailing lies as one which goes on, apparently relentlessly, for a time which appears to the judge and possibly to all those others who are independent observers, except the person conducting the cross-examination, to be unnecessarily long. That is the purpose of those powers. I am sure that they will be well and wisely used. They are intended to be brought to the attention of the judiciary; and I am sure that your Lordships will feel that in those hands they will indeed be wisely used.
I am grateful for the warm support which the Bill has received and it is therefore with confidence that I renew my Motion.
On Question, Bill read a second time and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

Family Homes and Domestic Violence Bill [H.L.]
12.27 p.m.
Report received.
Clause 2 [Associated persons]:
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 1:
Page 2, line 1, at end insert:
("(dd) they have agreed to marry one another (whether or not that agreement has been terminated),").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 1, I should like to speak also to the subject matters of Amendments Nos. 2 to 5.
Amendments Nos. 1 to 5 enable persons who have agreed to marry to be "associated persons" able to apply for remedies in the Bill in certain circumstances. The Law Commission recommended that persons who have agreed to marry should be "associated persons" for the purposes of the Bill. One of my concerns about that recommendation was that the whole purpose of proceedings in the Bill was to give quick and adequate remedies in particular circumstances. The last thing that I wanted to encourage was a long preliminary trial which had to do with entitlement, but which had nothing whatever to do with the substance of the matter with which the parties were seeking to deal. That is precisely what brings the law into difficulty and sometimes into disrepute. That can happen if there is a long preliminary inquiry which has nothing to do with the subject matter, so far as anybody can see, but which is embarked upon simply so that the person concerned is qualified to bring proceedings. So at first I was not happy to have such a category in the Bill.
As the evidence before the Committee developed, it seemed plain that there might be cases where it would be easy to prove that entitlement. It may have been a bit harsh, unnecessary and unwise to exclude those. If we could find some way of satisfactorily differentiating between the cases in which the entitlement could be proved readily and those in which it would take a great deal of time, that would be the best answer to the problem. We had some discussions about those issues in Committee and we have had some since.
The noble and learned Lord, Lord Archer of Sandwell, the noble Lord, Lord Meston, the noble Baroness, Lady David, and my noble friend Lord Butterworth produced an amendment addressing that concern before I produced mine. I believe we are all agreed that we want to provide a remedy in the cases falling within that category where it would be fairly easy to establish the title of the applicant as conforming to the description. The Government's amendment is intended to cover the whole subject matter of the other amendment and it does so except in one particular category. The second part of Amendment No. 2 refers to a new category of persons who,
"have undergone a ceremony of marriage in the presence of others assembled for the purpose of witnessing the ceremony whether or not such a ceremony creates a valid marriage".
I understand that that is intended to cover non-effective marriage ceremonies among certain groups. So far as I have been able to follow it up to now, I do not favour that amendment as it appears to have the effect of conferring, at least to some extent, recognition on marriages which do not satisfy the requirements of English law. The intention is not to confer the status of marriage but that part of the amendment would have the effect of conferring on the ceremony a validity for a purpose which is different from the purpose of the ceremony itself—the ceremony itself, as a ceremony of marriage, not satisfying the requirements of English law. That would create an anomaly and would not therefore be an improvement to the Bill. Obviously I am willing to hear what is said, but those are my thoughts.
Amendment No. 5 provides that three types of evidence will suffice to entitle an applicant to obtain a remedy under the Bill. The first is that the agreement is evidenced
1062
in writing. In seeking evidence in writing, I am not proposing to require that the agreement itself be in writing, because that would be unlikely in the majority of circumstances. Instead, I am proposing that this written evidence may take a variety of forms including correspondence between parties, newspaper announcements, made with the consent of both parties, invitations to an engagement party, and so forth. I believe that that will offer sufficient flexibility in the sort of evidence of the agreement which can be produced while at the same time greatly assisting the courts in dealing with any potential problems with the definition and proof of that category, which could seriously undermine the new domestic violence jurisdiction.
Secondly, the agreement can be evidenced by an engagement ring given by one party to the other in contemplation of their marriage. Engagement rings are still widely used and offer further evidence that an agreement to marry is in existence. Of course it would be a way of proving that an agreement had been entered into. The Bill does not contemplate the idea that the mere fact that one had an engagement ring from the other would necessarily constitute an agreement to marry, but it is a way in which the court could find that the agreement had been evidenced satisfactorily.
The third means of evidencing an agreement to marry is by a ceremony of betrothal in the presence of witnesses. That is intended to deal with the more formal cases. I had hoped that it might cover the types of case mentioned in relation to at least some of the ethnic minorities where problems might arise. That is a method by which clear proof of an intention to marry could be evidenced. It will assist those groups which hold formal or informal engagement ceremonies. Couples who have terminated their agreement to marry may also apply for remedies under the Bill. However, where the agreement has been terminated for more than three years, they may no longer apply and will need to rely on the general law. That provision is consistent with Section 2(2) of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1970.
Amendments Nos. 3 and 4 are intended to achieve a consistency with the general provisions of the existing law. Any violence between the couple is likely to occur within three years of the termination of the agreement. That limitation is also likely to assist the courts with any problems of definition and proof if they do not have to deal with agreements which have been terminated many years previously, where the couple may no longer have any greater nexus than other members of the public.
The amendments I propose will provide a helpful and practical means of addressing the evidential difficulties which may arise in relation to the definition of those who have agreed to marry and will ensure that a remedy is offered to those who have entered into such agreements without undermining the Bill's ability to provide urgent remedies where domestic violence occurs.
I have spoken to the subject matter of the four amendments as well as to Amendment No. 2, because I believe that they all go together. I beg to move Amendment No. 1.
Lord Archer of Sandwell: My Lords, I express my warm appreciation to the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack for addressing his mind to some of our

1063
anxieties and for responding so adequately to what those anxieties were. If I may say so, our proceedings in Committee, under the chairmanship of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Brightman, were the ideal way in which a legislature ought to address the details of its legislation. We heard evidence from those who were capable of giving informative evidence; we addressed our minds to one another's anxieties. Over a very large area, we reached consensus, and where there were differences we clarified them.
The history of the matter has been set out by the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor. In the initial version of the Law Commission's draft Bill, the words referred to by the noble and learned Lord were there. They were left out in the Government's version. On Second Reading some of us asked the reason for that, and the reason was expressed by the noble and learned Lord. He has expressed it again today. I say at once that I found what he said persuasive, but my noble friend Lady David, who very much regrets that she cannot be with us today, having committed herself to be elsewhere before she knew the date of these proceedings, decided that she would like to hear further discussion. She set down an amendment in Committee to restore the words which were in the Law Commission's original draft Bill.
The noble and learned Lord again repeated the reasons for the form of the Bill as it had been originally introduced. The noble Lord, Lord Meston, supported my noble friend, and I think, if I may paraphrase him, expressed the view that perhaps some of the difficulties were a little exaggerated. The noble Lord, Lord Butterworth, expressed his support for the amendment. I said, positively and decisively, that I found it difficult to make up my mind, and the noble Baroness, Lady Darcy, equally decisively, shared my hesitation. That was how the matter left Committee, except that the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor suggested that there might be room here for a compromise in the sense in which he has already described it to the House so that much of our anxiety would be dealt with without opening the field to the very long delays which might emerge from the original Law Commission version.
At that stage, my noble friend Lady David, the noble Baroness, Lady Darcy (de Knayth), the noble Lord, Lord Meston, and I went into a huddle. We sought advice in particular from those who were knowledgable about the anxieties of the minority ethnic groups and we tabled the amendment. I wish to acknowledge the great assistance that we received from the noble Lord, Lord Meston, who greatly improved my initial efforts at drafting.
The response of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor has met all our anxieties, subject to one, and we are grateful for that. I am sure that those whose anxieties we were seeking to express will be grateful too.
As the noble and learned Lord said, the one matter that has not been addressed is the position of those from certain minority ethnic communities who undergo a religious ceremony of marriage which in the view of that community establishes a marriage but is not recognised as such in English law. It is curious if when all they seek to do is to undergo an engagement ceremony they are protected under Clauses 7 and 13. However, sometimes the engagement ceremonies are not public and fall into
1064
exactly the category which occasioned the anxieties of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor. If, instead, they undergo what they see as a marriage ceremony in accordance with the requirements of their religion, and they are perceived by their community as being married and they perceive themselves as being married, normally all that remains is at a suitable time—frequently when various people can be present and when arrangements can be made—to go to a registry office and undergo a ceremony that is recognised in English Law as creating a marriage. But that is not what such couples see as creating the marriage; they consider that they are married at the time that they undergo the original religious ceremony. It would be most curious if they would be protected merely because they considered that they were engaged but they would not be protected if they considered themselves to be married.
I have not had an opportunity to consult the noble Lord, Lord Meston, or the noble Baroness, Lady Darcy (de Knayth), and therefore I can speak only for myself. I would not wish to seek to divide the House today. I express our gratitude for the amendments, which have been tabled as a result of the noble and learned Lord's reaction to our anxieties. I believe that the matter is worth further discussion between us and perhaps at some stage something will emerge which we all find ourselves able to live with.
Amendment No. 2 appears in my name, but that of the noble Lord, Lord Meston, appears above mine. Perhaps I should leave it to him to move the amendment but if the task falls to me I shall be happy to move it for purposes of discussion today. However, I say at once that if it is left to me I shall in due course seek leave to withdraw it.
12.45 p.m.
Lord Meston: My Lords, for the reasons indicated by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Archer, I should be happy to follow that course in relation to Amendment No. 2. I join him in thanking the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor for responding to the amendment tabled in Committee and I pay tribute to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Brightman, for his chairmanship of the Committee.
The amendments return us to the question of where to draw the line between those who can and those who cannot seek relief under the Bill. The Law Commission included those who had agreed to marry and also those who have had a sexual relationship. The Bill excluded them because of the risk of difficulties in definition and proof. The arguments were fully rehearsed in evidence to the Committee and were summarised by the noble Baroness, Lady David, when she moved her amendment.
The provisions will apply only to a small number of people who are not caught in the other categories listed in Clause 2. Only in a small proportion of that small number would there arise the issue of whether the parties were engaged to marry. I suspect that in respect of an even smaller proportion of that small proportion would any time need to be taken in resolving that issue. However, the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor helpfully pointed the way to a possible compromise, hence the tabling of these amendments.

1065
The government amendment appears to be more elaborate than ours. It includes a specific reference to evidence of the agreement to marry being in writing. Frankly, in the real world few agreements to marry are in writing. I doubt whether even the most fastidious member of the Chancery Bar would solemnly record his engagement in writing. I was pleased to hear the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor indicate the wider interpretation to be given to that provision. Of course, in practice the more important evidential requirements will be the existence of a ring or a betrothal ceremony of some kind. Today we have had reference to Bardell v. Pickwick. It remains the fact that Mrs. Bardell, with no ring and no corroboration, would not be covered by the provisions of the Bill. It is such a topical case that I reread it and was reminded that even an early conditional fee agreement was undertaken by Messrs. Dodson and Fogg. Perhaps that will be material for later debate.
The point of difference between our amendment and that tabled by the Government is the inclusion of those who have undergone a ceremony of marriage in the presence of others, whether or not such a ceremony created a valid marriage. I respectfully agree with everything that was said about the provision by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Archer. There are people who are married in the eyes of their own community. They may be married without a betrothal ceremony, so they would be caught by the preceding provision of the amendment.
I have in mind a case in which I was involved concerning an Asian arranged marriage. The 16 year-old bride was tricked into a religious marriage ceremony, which our courts would not have recognised. She then had the strength of character to resist the subsequent arrangements for the civil ceremony and to resist cohabitation with the "husband". Thereafter, he harassed her; in particular he tried to obtain money from her and her family. Such a situation might usefully be covered by the Bill. However, it must be remembered that in some situations there is a gap between the religious ceremony and the subsequent civil ceremony. The amendment would serve the purpose of filling that gap. Of course, there may be other consequences. I suppose that polygamous marriages would then come within the ambit of the Bill. But perhaps it is not too high a price to pay if we extend the provisions of the Bill to polygamists.
It is not my intention to press that difference at this stage but perhaps it should be looked at further before the Bill leaves this House.
Baroness Darcy (de Knayth): My Lords, perhaps I may give a very warm welcome to these amendments which are the happy result of the ingenuity of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor and the persistence of the noble Baroness, Lady David, and others. I hope that perhaps, as the noble and learned Lord, Lord Archer, has said, eventually we may be able to include the group that he has just mentioned.
As very much the lay member of the Committee, so brilliantly chaired by my noble and learned friend Lord Brightman, perhaps I may say that I found the whole experience absolutely fascinating. I regret very much that we cannot include all those who have agreed to marry but
1066
without any formal agreement and also the other category recommended by the Law Commission and referred to by the noble Lord, Lord Meston; namely, those who have or have had a sexual relationship. However, I understand the difficulty about lack of proof.
I very much hope that we shall soon see the introduction of a new branch of tort which would cover not only those groups but also obsessive stalkers which were referred to frequently in the evidence. Meanwhile, these amendments are extremely welcome.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, I am grateful for what has been said in relation to the amendments which I am proposing. As regards the last point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Darcy, perhaps I may emphasise that it was quite clear from the evidence, and in particular from the evidence of the police, that there are problems in the area covered by the Bill, in particular in relation to molestation, where they face quite severe difficulties. One should address the evil in question, the wrong that is going on. It does not matter whether one has agreed to marry or one happens to be a fellow employee. If molestation is taking place, that is what one wishes to prevent. One does not wish the law to be involved in long inquiries about the nature of the relationship when that is irrelevant to the remedy that is being sought.
The committee was cautioned about extending family homes and domestic violence law in a way which unduly distorts it in order to introduce other perhaps deserving cases. The right way to approach those deserving cases is to develop the law for them. Therefore, I very much welcome what the noble Baroness said and I believe that the law is developing in that connection.
I can see the force of the arguments used by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Archer of Sandwell, on the second branch of Amendment No. 2. The difficulty for me so far about the noble and learned Lord's proposals is that it depends on the nature of the invalidity. If people are moving towards what would be a valid marriage in this country, there are fewer difficulties. If one goes into an area where the law, for good public policy reasons, does not recognise the marriage, it is somewhat difficult in principle to recognise the agreement to marry as having any legal effect, although of course it may have practical effects.
The case to which the noble Lord, Lord Meston, referred is somewhat unusual in that there must be a certain amount of doubt about the status of the original agreement to marry and whether or not it was an agreement. Usually in those cases, marriage would be followed by cohabitation and people would be brought within the provisions of the Bill under that heading.
Obviously, there are matters to consider further. I have tried to explain my difficulties. I shall consider further what we should do and I may consult on the matter. In the meantime, I commend the amendment.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
[Amendment No. 2 not moved.]
Clause 7 [Occupation orders where applicant has estate or interest etc. or has matrimonial home rights]:
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 3:
Page 5, line 31, at end insert:
("( ) Where an agreement to marry is terminated, no application under this section may be made by virtue of section 2(1) (dd) of this Act by reference to that agreement after the end of the period of three years beginning with the day on which it is terminated.").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I explained this amendment in relation to Amendment No. 1. This puts a time limit on the matter, which I think helps, and is consistent with existing law. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 13 [Non-molestation orders]:
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 4:
Page 10, line 41, at end insert:
("( ) Where an agreement to marry is terminated, no application under subsection (2) (a) above may be made by virtue of section 2(1) (dd) of this Act by reference to that agreement after the end of the period of three years beginning with the day on which it is terminated.").
On Question, amendment agreed to.
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 5:
After Clause 14, insert the following new clause:
Evidence of agreement to marry
(".—(1) Subject to subsection (2) below, the court shall not make an order under section 7 or 13 of this Act by virtue of section 2(1) (dd) of this Act unless there is produced to it evidence in writing of the existence of the agreement to marry.
(2) Subsection (1) above does not apply where the court is satisfied that the agreement to marry was evidenced by—

(a) the gift of an engagement ring by one party to the agreement to the other in contemplation of their marriage, or

(b) a ceremony of betrothal entered into by the parties in the presence of one or more other persons assembled for the purpose of witnessing the ceremony.").

On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 17 [Arrest for breach of order]:
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 6:
Page 12, line 39, at beginning insert ("if the matter is not then disposed of forthwith,").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, in moving this amendment, perhaps I may speak also to Amendments Nos. 7, 8 and 12. These amendments represent minor and drafting amendments that have arisen following further consideration of the amendments agreed in Committee. I. am grateful to some of the witnesses who drew some of those matters to our attention, in particular, Judge Fricker.
Amendments Nos. 6 and 7 clarify the powers available to the court when a person is arrested and brought before the court within 24 hours. The Bill as drafted does not exclude the powers of the court to deal with the respondent other than by remanding him or her. However, it has been suggested that the Bill could have been interpreted as meaning that the only power available to the court was the power to remand. None of us wanted that. The amendment therefore ensures that the provision cannot be interpreted as excluding the other powers of the court in dealing with the respondent, particularly the power to hear the contempt proceedings forthwith.
Amendment No. 8 to Clause 19 clarifies the position in relation to the right of a successor in title or trustees affected by a charge under Clause 8 of the Bill to apply for the variation or revocation of orders. Clause 8(1) (b) enables the person deriving the title under the owning
1068
spouse to apply for an order under Clause 7 For example, a successor in title of the owning spouse might apply for an order restricting or terminating the matrimonial home rights of the other spouse. If the owning spouse's successor in title was, by virtue of Clause 8(1), the applicant or respondent in the original proceedings, he will be able to apply under Clause 19(1) for the variation or revocation of the order. However, no provision was made for a successor in title or trustees to apply for the variation or revocation of an order made against the owning spouse on the application of the other spouse. The amendment to Clause 19 is intended to permit such an application.
Amendment No. 12 to Clause 30 clarifies the definition of "relevant judicial authority" in relation to a magistrates' court in Clause 30(1). The amendment clarifies that the term "any justice of the peace" is not intended to override the current statutory provisions and rules relating to the constitution of a magistrates' court. As your Lordships will know, there are certain circumstances in which "any justice of the peace" may do so, but we became concerned that if that were used as a definition, it might be thought that we were overriding or overruling the existing provisions stating the constitutions of the court required for various subject matters. Therefore, the amendment refers to a "magistrates' court" instead of "any justice of the peace". That brings into effect the rules which would ordinarily govern the exercise of the jurisdiction. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 7:
Page 13, leave out lines 8 and 9 and insert:
("(10) Where a person is brought before a court by virtue of a warrant issued under subsection (9) above and the court does not dispose of the matter forthwith, the court may remand him.").
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 19 [Variation and discharge of orders]:
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 8:
Page 13, line 43, at end insert:
("( ) Where a spouse's matrimonial home rights are a charge on the estate or interest of the other spouse or of trustees for the other spouse, an order under section 7 of this Act against the other spouse may also be varied or discharged by the court on an application by any person deriving title under the other spouse or under the trustees and affected by the charge.").
On Question, amendment agreed to.
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 9:
After Clause 19, insert the following new clause:
Power of magistrates' court to suspend execution of committal order
(".—(1) Where under section 63(3) of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 a magistrates' court has power to commit a person to custody for breach of a relevant requirement, the court may by order direct that the execution of the order of committal shall be suspended for such period or on such terms and conditions as it may specify.
(2) In subsection (1) above "a relevant requirement" means—

(a) an occupation order or non-molestation order,

(b) an exclusion requirement included by virtue of section 38A of the Children Act 1989 in an interim care order made under section 38 of that Act, or

(c) an exclusion requirement included by virtue of section 44A of the Children Act 1989 in an emergency protection order under section 44 of that Act.").

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, in moving this amendment, I wish to speak also to Amendment No. 10 and, in particular, to Amendment No. 11 which is in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Meston. Towards the end of the Committee stage there was a discussion about the powers of various courts to suspend the operation of an order for committal for contempt. The general consensus of the Committee was that, subject to the levels of jurisdiction, the powers of the various courts exercising jurisdiction under the Bill should follow the same pattern and that, if the High Court and the county court had powers to suspend, so too should the magistrates' court.
Some doubt was expressed at the end of the proceedings about the precise basis of the county court's jurisdiction in that connection. I am glad to say that the researches which I instituted came to exactly the same conclusion as the research carried out by the noble Lord, Lord Meston. I am most grateful to the noble Lord. His letter arrived at just about the time we concluded our research. Therefore, we have corroboration that we have found the right answer. I arranged for an amendment to be drafted to give effect to that. The only difference between the two ways of doing it is that, in our amendment, I have done it in the Bill so that the legislation is self-contained. The amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Meston, has proceeded by amending the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980. On the whole, I am keen to try to make it a self-contained code with all the relevant information contained therein. For example, there obviously has to be some reference to the Children Act 1989, but the actual powers are specified. Therefore, I propose to move Amendment No. 9 for that purpose while acknowledging the fact that the amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Meston, would also do the job perfectly well. We happen to have done it this way. For the reasons I have given, I believe that our amendment may be preferable. I shall be glad to hear the noble Lord's view in that respect. I beg to move.
1 p.m.
Lord Meston: My Lords, I am most grateful to the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor for taking the matter to such a stage. I also express my thanks to the noble Viscount, Lord Colville of Culross, who, although unable to be here today, inspired me to look into the matter in more detail.
As the noble and learned Lord said, the position is quite clear; namely, that the High Court and the county court have power to suspend orders for committal, but, curiously, the magistrates' court does not. That was made clear in a decision of the Divisional Court reported in 1969 and the position has remained the same ever since.
In passing, it should be mentioned that on at least one occasion—in fact, I believe it was more than one—the Children Act advisory committee has, in its annual report, expressed the view that that anomaly should be removed generally. It is suggested that the powers and procedural safeguards as regards the High Court, the county court and the family proceedings courts should
1070
be unified. That cannot be completely achieved within the ambit of the Bill now before the House. But the amendments certainly go as far as they can in that direction.
It is perhaps worth pointing out that, in such cases, the courts have traditionally taken the view that imprisonment or committal is a last resort. Indeed, in a recent decision of the Court of Appeal the county court was held to have been wrong in having failed to consider a suspended committal order. If a county court was wrong not to have considered it, it is doubly curious that, as the law stands, a magistrates' court cannot contemplate it even if it wanted to do so.
Having said that, there is one point I should like to draw to the attention of the House. It concerns the differences between my amendment and that moved by the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor. My amendment specifically covers the breach of any undertaking as opposed to just the breach of any order. As I understand it, the Bill very sensibly—and for the first time—enables the magistrates' court to accept an undertaking. Of course, it is trite law that an undertaking to the court is as enforceable as an order of the court. Therefore, I question why the amendment proposed by the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor does not include the possibility of committal or of a suspended committal order when there is a breach of an undertaking which, as I said, is clearly intended to be enforceable under Clause 16 of the Bill as if it were an order of the court. With that slight reservation, I am happy to support the amendment.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, perhaps I may deal with the reservation expressed by the noble Lord. It has arisen partly because the Magistrates' Court Act does not confer on those courts the power to deal with the undertaking in the way set out in our amendment. Clause 16(3) as amended by the Committee says:
"An undertaking given to a court under subsection (1) above shall be enforceable as if it were an order of the court".
Therefore, the fundamental jurisdiction applies as if the matter in question was an order of the court. In other words, for all practical purposes of enforcement it makes an undertaking given to the court the equivalent of an order of the court. The amendment is framed on that basis. Therefore, where a magistrates' court has power to commit a person to custody for breach of a relevant requirement, the court may by order direct that the execution of the order shall be suspended, and so on. Because of Clause 16(3), the idea is that that should apply equally to undertakings.
I shall obviously need to check the position in view of the fact that the noble Lord has raised the matter. However, I have outlined my understanding of the way the process should work. Subject to that reservation, and as I hear no counter voice in respect of my amendment, I renew my motion to move it.
On Question amendment agreed to.
Clause 20 [Power of magistrates' court to order hospital admission or guardianship]:
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 10:
Page 14, line 10, leave out from ("requirement"") to end of line 17 and insert ("has the meaning given by section (Power of magistrates' court to suspend execution of committal order) (2) of this Act").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I have already spoken to this amendment. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 27 [Magistrates' courts]:
[Amendment No. 11 not moved.]
Clause 30 [Interpretation]:
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 12:
Page 19, line 38, leave out ("justice of the peace") and insert ("magistrates' court").
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Schedule 3 [Amendments of Children Act 1989]:
Lord Meston Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 13:
Page 24, line 39, after ("living") insert (", or about to live,").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving the amendment I shall speak also to Amendment No. 18 which is identical. The amendments would alter the provisions of Section 38A and Section 44A of the Children Act which are both to be inserted by way of the Bill. They refer not simply to another person living in the dwelling house who is able and willing to give the child the care which it would be reasonable to expect a parent to give him, but also to another person living or about to live in the dwelling house.
The purpose of the amendments is to ensure, where appropriate, that the child can remain in the dwelling-house where he has been living, even if the parent or carer is not living there at the time the order is made. It should be possible for another person who is able and willing to care for the child to enter the dwelling-house and to care for the child.
The Bill currently envisages the carer as someone who is presently living with the child. That excludes the possibility of a relation or friend coining to live with the child in the child's home. There will be cases where the child's welfare will be best served by staying in his or her home, close to friends, relations and school. That would mean a relation moving in to care for the child. Such a situation could arise, for example, where the mother of the child has a disability and is living with a man who is a risk to the child. Under the provisions of the Bill the man can be excluded, but as the mother is unable to provide the necessary care alone a relation, perhaps a grandparent, or a friend may move into the dwelling-house to provide care for the child. The child would then remain with its mother in a safe and caring environment. In other words, the amendment would ensure that a responsible adult can move in to preserve the status quo for the child. I beg to move.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, as the noble Lord explained, Amendments Nos. 13 and 18 propose that the consent to an exclusion requirement being attached to an interim care and emergency protection order should be extended to include the consent of a person about to live in the dwelling-house as well as one already living there.
1072
The amendments would broaden considerably the categories of persons able to consent to the exclusion requirement, and as drafted could include not only relatives of the child but anyone proposing to enter the home to look after that child. I believe that it would not be right to allow someone not living in the dwelling-house to consent to an exclusion order and, therefore, that the extent of the amendments are too great.
Essentially, it is a question of the person presently providing care. It may be that the intention, as explained by the noble Lord, would be effected by another person coming to live in the house. However, if that person does not do that then it cannot be right to allow consent to an exclusion order to be made by someone who is not already living in the house.
In addition, I am concerned that the policy of the requirement of consent of the current carer of the child could also be defeated if someone else is allowed to consent to the exclusion requirement regardless of the wishes of the current carer. The examples given by the noble Lord, Lord Meston, did not encompass that possibility but, as I understand the amendment, that could happen. Someone not living in the house could give consent when the carer was not prepared to give consent. That would not work at all.
I do not believe that the noble Lord referred specifically to Amendments Nos. 14 and 15.
Lord Meston: My Lords, with the permission of the House, I intended to deal with those amendments separately. They deal with a separate matter.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, I am content to do that. That being the case, that completes what I have to say about Amendments Nos. 13 and 18. I believe that they would unduly open up the possibility of consent to exclusion orders by persons who are not necessarily the right people to give consent. Unless the current carer gives consent I do not believe that the provision would work.
Lord Meston: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble and learned Lord for his explanation of why he cannot accept the amendments. I see his point in relation to the drafting. It may be that the matter can be tackled better with some improved drafting. I hope to attempt to achieve that before the Bill leaves the House. In the meantime, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
1.15 p.m.
Lord Meston Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 14:
Page 25, line 10, leave out ("may") and insert ("shall").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 14 I shall speak also to Amendment No. 15, which is connected. The purpose of the amendments is to amend the proposed new subsection (5) of Section 38A of the Children Act so that it reads:
"Where the court makes an interim care order containing an exclusion requirement, the court shall attach a power of arrest to the exclusion requirement, unless the court is satisfied that in all circumstances of the case the applicant or child will be adequately protected without such a power of arrest".
One of the nagging worries I have about this particular provision of the Bill is that, although in the main body of the Bill there are criteria governing when the power of arrest can be considered and imposed by the court, no criteria are laid down under this part of the Bill which introduces this new section of the Children Act. All one can deduce is that it is implicit that the court would probably impose a power of arrest if there was a risk of the person being excluded returning to the home.
The purpose of the amendments is to make the power of arrest mandatory when including an exclusion requirement in an interim care order. Without the amendments the child and the person looking after the child may not be sufficiently protected where the excluded person can return to the home without fear of arrest. That could make it possible for the adult responsible for caring for the child to consent to an exclusion requirement on the ground that they may not be able to protect the child should the excluded party return. In the absence of the power of arrest the local authority would be faced with having to remove the child on an emergency basis if an exclusion requirement were breached. That goes against the intention of the legislation which seeks, in an appropriate case, to remove the alleged perpetrator of the abuse rather than the child.
It is proposed that the same wording be adopted in Schedule 3 as presently exists earlier in the Bill. It leaves the option for the court to include an exclusion requirement without the power of arrest when the court is satisfied that in all the circumstances of the case the child will be adequately protected without the power of arrest. I beg to move.
Lord Archer of Sandwell: My Lords, I rise briefly to indicate that my noble friend Lady David, who unhappily cannot be with us today, very much supports the amendment. Your Lordships may recollect that in Committee it was a question from my noble friend which evoked the answer from Mr. Joel-Esam of the NSPCC to the effect indicated by the noble Lord, Lord Meston.
One can see, and Mr. Joel-Esam himself indicated, that some problems may arise. It is a matter of balance. He recognised that if the power of arrest became mandatory the courts might be reluctant to make the order in the first place. These are matters to which the NSPCC had clearly given attention. On balance it considered that the danger of making an order without a power of arrest, with the consequences indicated by the noble Lord, Lord Meston, was paramount.
All that emerges from the amendments, if they appeal to your Lordships, is that instead of the power of arrest being wholly neutral with the court directing its mind to whether it should add the power of arrest, the normal situation would be that it will exist. The second of the two amendments makes it possible to say that where there is no danger to the child it will still not be mandatory. The onus would be on those who do not wish a power of arrest to be added. In those circumstances, I support the amendment.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, this is obviously a difficult matter. This is an option for replacing the interim care order with an exclusion requirement; in other words,
1074
taking the person who is seen to be the possible cause out of the home, because it is an interim matter. That is an option that has to be considered. There is a great deal to be said for that course of action if it is a reasonable one. However, it requires the consent of the carer. Therefore all of this has to be taken into account, as regards considering realistic options, when the court is considering the matter.
In her evidence to the Committee, Mrs. Justice Hale, who was the law commissioner responsible, thought that to introduce a mandatory power of arrest here could be too draconian, and it could mean—as the noble and learned Lord, Lord Archer of Sandwell, has said—that the usefulness of the order would be limited as the court might be unwilling to make the order where it might be obliged to attach a power of arrest in these circumstances. Of course there is also the question of the consent of the carer; the carer's consent is required. There might well be a consideration in that connection of whether or not a power of arrest is there.
As regards leaving the matter discretionary, the court would have considerable opportunities to reconsider its position. It would also be possible for the matter to be reviewed. However, I have reached the conclusion—trying to balance all these matters—that I am prepared to believe that the court can be trusted properly to exercise its discretion in an open way in this situation where there are so many aspects of an option that are difficult for us here, or even for the NSPCC with its great experience, to envisage. It is much better that this matter should be considered on an individual case basis.
The inclusion of this requirement in Clause 17 of the Bill in relation to occupation orders and non-molestation orders deals with the situations where the respondent has actually used or threatened violence. This should be distinguished from the situation in relation to exclusion requirements under Schedule 3 where the use or threat of violence may not have occurred. I believe therefore that the best course for this Bill to take is to leave the court with the flexibility to decide whether to attach a power of arrest. I believe that best allows it to deal with the wide range of circumstances with which it is likely to be faced. Therefore, as at present advised, I would not feel able to support Amendments Nos. 14 or 15.
Lord Meston: My Lords, as the noble and learned Lord has just said, this is a matter of balance. The concerns of the NSPCC are obviously worthy of consideration. I, for my part, also wish to stress the point which initially concerned me; namely, that if a statute is to give a right of arrest, the statute should indicate criteria. However, I fully understand and respect the points advanced by the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor. Therefore I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 15 not moved.]
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 16:
Page 25, line 29, leave out from ("authority") to ("period") in line 31 and insert ("have removed the child from the dwelling-house from which the relevant person is excluded to other accommodation for a continuous").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, this is an amendment that I spoke to with Amendment No. 13. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Meston Lord Meston moved Amendment No. 17:
Page 26, line 21, after ("child") insert ("usually").
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the purpose of this amendment is to clarify the confusion which might arise where an exclusion order As sought on the basis that a child is presently being accommodated elsewhere under Section 44 of the Children Act 1989. Clearly, if the child is being presently accommodated elsewhere, then he or she is not living in the dwelling house referred to in the provisions of new Section 44A of the Children Act 1989. Nevertheless, the conditions necessary to obtain an exclusion order against the relevant person rely on the relevant person living at the same house as the child. The Bill presumably envisages a situation where the child has been accommodated for a period of time, having left the dwelling house where the relevant person is residing, or visits. On the present drafting it may be argued that the relevant person may not be excluded from the dwelling house as the child is not there at the time of the application. It is for that reason, and that reason only, that I seek to introduce the word "usually" into subsection (2) of the proposed new section in the Children Act. I would hope that the word "usually" adds clarity and would not itself beg too many questions, if and when the matter came to be debated in a court. I beg to move.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, this amendment is intended to enable a person to be excluded from a dwelling house in which a child usually lives as opposed to the current wording which refers to where the child lives. In my view the word "lives" is a word that a court would apply as a matter of practical common sense. If the child was there only on a temporary basis it would still be proper to describe the place as where the child lives. On the other hand I do not think one would wish to have some kind of arrangement under which a child who spent more than half the year in one house and the rest of the time in another house was covered by this provision. It is a practical matter and my view is that the words in the Bill are sufficiently precise, and yet sufficiently general in their scope, to allow the court to apply the provision in a practical way. I would not favour, as at present advised, adding the word "usual" to the Bill. Living in a house implies a degree of use of a house, or of "usualness", if that is a correct expression. It implies that to a degree the house is the place where the child usually lives. I suggest that the present wording is reasonably plain and would not be particularly advantaged by adding the word "usual".
Lord Meston: My Lords, this was intended to be a drafting improvement. It has been suggested, however, that perhaps it is not. I hope I do not have to declare an interest if I say that I look forward to arguing the point in court one day. But, subject to that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 18 not moved.]
The Lord Chancellor The Lord Chancellor moved Amendment No. 19:
Page 27, line 19, leave out from ("applicant") to ("period") in line 21 and insert ("has removed the child from the dwelling-house from which the relevant person is excluded to other accommodation for a continuous").
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I have spoken to this already with Amendment No. 13. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.

Geneva Conventions (Amendment) Bill [H.L.]
1.27 p.m.
Lord Archer of Weston-Super-Mare: My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time. May I open as in the great tradition of this House by declaring an interest? I am a fully paid up member of the British Red Cross Society and have been for many years. It has over those years cost me a great deal of money. The purpose of this Bill is to make the necessary changes in United Kingdom law to enable the United Kingdom to ratify the 1977 protocols additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. These 1977 protocols, like the 1949 Geneva Conventions, concern the protection of war victims.
The Minister of State for foreign and commonwealth affairs announced in another place in October 1993 that Her Majesty's Government would ratify the two 1977 treaties,
"as soon as the necessary legislation can be enacted in domestic law".
Such domestic legislation is required before ratification can take place so that Britain is not in breach of its international obligations once the treaty is ratified. So the Bill may be considered non-contentious and mainly technical in nature, but it is nevertheless extremely important. I also hope it will find support from all sides of the House.
The Bill amends the existing Geneva Conventions Act 1957, enacted nearly 38 years ago to enable the United Kingdom to ratify the 1949 Geneva Conventions. Broadly, the Bill extends or amends existing sections of the 1957 Act to give effect to certain articles of the First Additional Protocol 1977. As an illustration, by virtue of the 1957 Act, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions are already criminal offences in United Kingdom law. This Bill extends the relevant section of the 1957 Act to include grave breaches of Additional Protocol I so that they too become criminal offences in our law.
The Bill also seeks to update or improve a few provisions of the 1957 Act, mainly with a view to enhancing the legal protection of the Red Cross and other protective emblems and devices and adds the two 1977 protocols as schedules to the 1957 statute.
I doubt that your Lordships need a great deal of introduction to the Geneva Conventions, whose protective, humanitarian purposes have been well known through films, television and history books and, of course, taught to our children over many years. Noble

1077
Lords will know that for centuries countries have agreed that despite actions to the contrary there are constraints on the waging of war. Indeed, the idea of restraint in warfare has been called one of civilisation's greatest achievements. There now exists a large body of international law—some written, some unwritten—regulating the means and methods of warfare, as well as protecting the victims of armed conflict. These rules are variously called "the law of war" or "the law of armed conflict" or "international humanitarian law".
The Geneva Conventions are a very important part of this branch of the law of nations and since 1863 the Red Cross movement has been closely associated with its development, dissemination and respect. Indeed, it was at the statutory meetings of the International Red Cross and the Red Crescent movement in October 1993 that the Minister for Overseas Development, following the parliamentary announcement, made a commitment to the movement to ratify the 1977 additional protocols.
Like other parts of international law and, indeed, like national laws, the rules governing warfare are not always obeyed. But that does not mean that these laws should be discarded. Moreover, their application in particular conflicts has often been accompanied by controversy, as indeed was the case in the conflicts in the Gulf and the Falklands. But even in these conflicts, lives have been saved and suffering prevented by the application of international humanitarian law. There are many people—Britons and others—who have spent years in prisoner of war camps or who were wounded on the battlefield, whose lives have been saved by these rules; in particular, by the Geneva Conventions.
In addition, increasing numbers of civilians are caught up in armed conflicts throughout the world and their position would be made even more vulnerable without the protection of these laws. The original Geneva Convention was agreed in 1864. It sought to improve the plight of wounded soldiers on the battlefield. Since then, the Geneva Convention has been extended to other categories of war victims—the shipwrecked, prisoners of war and, of course, civilians. It has also been periodically updated and expanded in the light of the experience of new conflicts and of new developments in warfare.
The main principles laid down in the 1864 Convention have been maintained in all subsequent Geneva Conventions. They are: first, relief to the wounded without any distinction as to nationality; secondly, the inviolability of medical personnel and medical establishments and units; and thirdly, the distinctive sign of the Red Cross on a white background, known universally as the Red Cross emblem, to be used as a symbol of protection and neutrality.
Britain has in the past been a party to all the Geneva Conventions. Over the years, Parliament has had to enact legislation before ratification of the relevant Geneva Convention was possible. This happened in 1911, when the Geneva Convention Act of that year was passed to enable Great Britain to ratify the 1906 Geneva Convention. The same thing happened in 1937 with respect to the 1929 Geneva Convention. As already mentioned, the Geneva Conventions Act 1957 was
1078
required to enable the UK to ratify the 1949 Geneva Conventions. Thus, the Bill is only the latest in the line of legislation necessary to enable the United Kingdom to become a party to the latest update of the Geneva Conventions, namely, the additional protocols of 1977.
I shall explain briefly the two additional protocols whose texts are set out in the schedule to the Bill. These treaties were adopted after much consideration over four years, taking into account various developments since 1949. These developments included the greater number of internal armed conflicts and the greater number of mixed armed conflicts—that is, part international and part internal; the increasing use of guerrilla warfare; the wars and effects of decolonisation; the growth in the field of human rights and changes in military technology. The two protocols reflect these experiences. They supplement and update the 1949 Geneva Conventions, bringing them into line with modern methods of warfare and provide better protection for the victims of armed conflicts. The vast majority of their rules remain relevant and necessary today.
Additional Protocol I, relating to international armed conflicts, strengthens the protection for the civilian population, in particular, against the effects of hostilities such as aerial bombing. It clarifies the classic distinction between civilians and combatants, and civilian objects and military objects, through prohibitions and definitions. The protocol provides protection for special categories of persons with special needs, such as refugees and stateless persons; it extends the protection of medical services, both military and civilian; it improves the provisions on relief actions in favour of starving civilians and has new provisions relating to the search for missing persons.
The protocol also introduces a new mechanism to enforce the law, through an international fact-finding commission. I hope that the United Kingdom will make a declaration accepting the competence of this commission when it deposits its instrument of ratification of the protocol.
Protocol II, which is much shorter than Protocol I, develops protection for victims in certain non-international armed conflicts. It establishes fundamental guarantees for all persons who do not take a direct part in hostilities, and bans attacks on the civilian population and forbids the forced displacement of civilians. The Second Protocol also provides an improved basis for humanitarian actions by such bodies as Red Cross organisations and local medical and religious personnel.
The United Kingdom played a leading role at the diplomatic conference which met from 1974 to 1977 and which adopted the two protocols. Your Lordships will remember that we had a Labour Government during most of that time, which is one reason why I hope that there will be cross-party support of the Bill. The United Kingdom representative signed both treaties on 12th December 1977, subject to certain understandings. Since then, 137 states have become a party to Additional Protocol I, and 127 countries have become a party to Protocol II. Parties include most of our NATO partners, Russia and China. France is a party to Protocol II. Ratification could be influential in encouraging the few remaining countries which are not yet parties to the protocols to become so.

1079
The International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent will meet in Geneva in early December this year. They will want this Bill to become an Act. The International Conference, one of the most important humanitarian forums in the world, will bring together representatives of 185 states which are party to the Geneva Conventions, as well as all the recognised Red Cross and Red Crescent organisations worldwide. Acceptance of the 1977 protocols will be among the matters discussed. It would enhance the British influence at the conference were legislation for ratification to be in place.
As has already been noted, the Red Cross movement promoted the original Geneva Convention of 1864. It has continued to have a prominent role in helping to develop and promote subsequent Geneva Conventions, including the 1977 additional protocols. The British Red Cross has long been an advocate of this country's ratification of the 1977 treaties. It would be particularly gratifying to the society if this necessary legislation could be enacted during 1995, the year of its 125th anniversary.
We do not estimate that there would even be a significant increase in cost by enacting this Bill. On the contrary, costs could be saved if, as a result of UK ratification, more countries accept the protocols, since the cost to our country and others of the disruption or destruction of thousands of innocent lives, the forced homelessness of entire communities and populations, and the victimisation of children, who grow up knowing only hatred, death and fear, is incalculable.
The 1977 additional protocols are the most recent efforts at a multi-lateral level to moderate the horrors of war. They follow a long line in Geneva Conventions to which this country has always adhered. The protocols represent a balance between military requirement and humanitarian dictates, which, after long study, the Government have already decided they can accept. Many of the rules contained in the protocols are part of customary law, or have been influenced by human rights treaties, and are accepted already by our allies. United Kingdom ratification in the near future would limit potential problems for our Armed Forces at an operational level, as in the Gulf War, where not all the coalition members had signed Protocol 1. The fact that the protocol was not universally ratified also made it more difficult for this country to condemn Iraq's destruction of the oil-fields in Kuwait as a violation of international humanitarian law.
The values of humane treatment and restraint, of making a distinction between civilians and military, so that the former are not attacked, as contained in both protocols, merits reaffirmation. They are relevant to existing armed conflicts of all kinds throughout the world. It has been estimated that 240 armed conflicts have occurred since the end of the Second World War. Sadly, it appears inevitable that such conflicts will continue. Today, in conflicts throughout the world, civilians are most affected by war, and many of them are children. It is reported that 90 per cent. of those who died in the conflicts in the Lebanon were civilians; and 25 per cent. to 30 per cent. of those were children.
1080
The toll on civilian lives by armed conflicts in the past 50 years is now calculated to run into millions. The world community is desperately in need of international agreements such as the two 1977 additional protocols, which protect innocent human beings caught up in the tragedy of war and conflict. The United Kingdom, I say to the Minister, can give a lead, and avoid embarrassment internationally by acting swiftly to ratify these humanitarian law treaties.
It could not be more appropriate than in the 125th year of the British Red Cross that the country should offer its own olive branch and ratify these two protocols. It would allow the British delegation to attend the convention in Geneva on 4th December and confirm that Britain has signed and turned them into law. I doubt whether there is an institution in the world that is more universally admired and respected than the Red Cross and the Red Crescent movement. It is with considerable pride that I represent those organisations in your Lordships' House today. I hope that the House will give the Bill a Second Reading. I beg to move.
Moved, That the Bill be now read a second time.— (Lord Archer of Weston-Super-Mare.)
1.45 p.m.
Lord Craig of Radley: My Lords, I believe that no one in this House dissents from the view that the 1977 protocols, which supplement and update the 1949 Geneva Conventions, are long overdue for full ratification. The proximity of the next International Red Cross conference, which is due before the end of the year, is a timely reminder to ensure that this country formally ratifies the protocols before then.
Perhaps noble Lords will agree that our experiences in the Falklands and Gulf conflicts are also strong reasons for ensuring that we are a fully ratified signatory to these important protocols. They are important because, as the noble Lord, Lord Archer, said, they bring the 1949 Conventions into line with more modern methods of warfare, and not least the effects of aerial bombing and missile attack. War and conflict are horrible experiences for those who are caught up in them, whether operations are of a high intensity or the more frequently experienced mortar and small arms exchanges that have filled our newspapers and television screens over recent months.
While ratification may not give complete comfort that all will be well for servicemen and women and the civilian population, it is still an important element of control in the conditions of modem conflict. Noble Lords will recall the utterly callous and deplorable treatment of some of our air crew captured by the Iraqis in the Gulf conflict. Their forced appearance on television and their maltreatment as injured prisoners of war were humiliating and degrading in the extreme, even though Iraq had already ratified the two protocols. I contrast that treatment with our own preparations to fulfil the Geneva Conventions and our humane treatment of Iraqi prisoners of war. Those arrangements involved our Armed Forces in considerable extra effort to meet the Conventions. Although not explicitly stated in the protocols, I would hope that the shocking treatments meted out to our air crew by the Iraqis would be specifically forbidden as inhumane and

1081
degrading. Surely there can be no place for exploitation of prisoners of war by the use of television in that cynical way. Our position to argue so is morally weakened unless we, too, have formally enacted the protocols through this Bill.
1.48 p.m.
Lord Wright of Richmond: My Lords, we should all be grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Archer of Weston-Super-Mare, for introducing this valuable, timely, and indeed long overdue Bill. Like the noble Lord, I declare a personal interest as a member of the international advisory committee of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva. I have served in that capacity for about four years; and in that capacity I have been able to see the extent to which the ICRC, perhaps more than any other body in the world, has the sad opportunity to witness—but also to try to alleviate—the suffering of the victims of armed conflict, whether international or domestic in character.
The ICRC shares with the depository power, namely, the Government of Switzerland, and indeed with all signatories to the Geneva Conventions, a desire both to disseminate more widely the principles of international humanitarian law and to ensure their observance. The ICRC has been monitoring particularly closely the list of those signatories to the Geneva Conventions who have not yet ratified one or other of the additional protocols under discussion today. I have therefore been very gratified by the several assurances given—also noted with gratitude by the ICRC—that Her Majesty's Government are ready and willing to ratify the additional protocols and that it only remains, in the words of a reply I was given as recently as 18th May by the Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Chalker,
"to find a way of ensuring that these protocols can be ratified".
The Bill of the noble Lord, Lord Archer, seems to provide just such a way of fulfilling Her Majesty's Government's public commitment. I therefore urge the Minister to ensure that that is done as soon as possible and certainly in good time before the Red Cross international conference to be held in December this year.
I should perhaps add that no one and certainly not the International Committee of the Red Cross has any doubts about the extent to which the British Armed Forces both understand and comply with the principles of international humanitarian law. On the contrary, we score very high marks. But ratification by Her Majesty's Government is not only important in itself. It will also be an encouragement and an incentive to those few governments who still retain some reservations about one or both of the protocols.
The noble Lord, Lord Archer, eloquently described the constraints which have applied to Her Majesty's Government from our failure so far to ratify the additional protocols. I urge the early passage of the Bill.
1.52 p.m.
Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, I apologise for speaking in the gap, having missed the deadline last night. I too thank my noble friend Lord Archer for bringing to
1082
your Lordships' House the Geneva Conventions (Amendment) Bill in this very important 125th birthday year of the Red Cross.
As an honorary vice-president and an active member of the Red Cross for well over 30 years, having started under the inspirational guidance and wise leadership of the noble Baroness, Lady Hylton-Foster, I naturally feel very strongly on this matter.
Since 1949, there have been four Geneva Conventions for the protection of war victims, which have been adopted by virtually every country in the world. The aim of the original Convention of 1864 was to improve the condition of the wounded of armies in the field. In 1907 a Convention agreed at The Hague adapted previous provisions to cover the wounded of maritime warfare. A further Convention, adopted in 1929, detailed the acceptable treatment of prisoners of war; and a Convention in 1949 provided for the protection of civilians in time of war.
Two new treaties, called protocols, were drawn up in 1977. They add to and update the 1949 Geneva Conventions and aim to give greater protection to civilians. It is the work of the International Committee to develop the Geneva Conventions and the entire movement has a key role in their promotion throughout the world. It is in relation to those 1977 protocols that we are debating this Bill today in your Lordships' House.
As we heard, in 1993 at the Red Cross conference in Birmingham, it was agreed that we would ratify those protocols. Sadly, they still remain unratified. I add my voice today to urge my noble friend the Minister to make sure that our Government, who have always been so supportive of the British Red Cross Society, ratify those protocols as soon as possible.
1.55 p.m.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the support of the Labour Party for the successive Geneva Conventions has never been in any doubt. We have no hesitation whatsoever in supporting the purposes of this Bill. I shall speak very briefly because, unlike the previous distinguished speakers, I have no individual knowledge or personal experience to communicate to your Lordships. In my view, the only question is how to put this Bill on the statute book as soon as possible. The question preceding that—it is a question to the Government—is: why is this a Private Member's Bill and not a government Bill?
This is the third occasion within the past month that a Bill has come before your Lordships' House as a Private Member's Bill. It ought to have come from the Government and in particular from the Home Office. The Bills brought forward by the noble Earl, Lord Lauderdale, and the noble Lord, Lord Chesham, were both fully supported by the Government and, I believe, drafted by officials. They ought to have come as government Bills and been treated with the respect and full professionalism that is due to a government Bill.
The same is true of the present Bill. I have not been through it in great detail but I see that the Long Title of the Bill is incorrect, in that it refers to the Geneva Conventions Act 1975 instead of the Geneva Conventions

1083
Act 1957. That fills me with, a certain amount of dread and I wonder what is in the text of the Bill and whether that kind of inaccuracy is present anywhere else. No doubt such matters can be tidied up, but what is necessary above all is that we have a Bill which can go through this House, can be relied upon to be properly drafted and properly effective and is restricted to only those matters which are essential for the ratification of the two additional protocols of 1977, and nothing else. If the Minister, in replying, can say that she is prepared to give her assistance to tidying up the Bill, which I believe will be necessary, it would be enormously helpful not only in speeding the passage of the Bill through your Lordships' House but also in ensuring that time can be found for it, at least the time necessary for it to be approved by the other place.
I understand that my honourable friend Mark Fisher will take charge of the Bill if and when it goes to the other place. I am sure that he will say, as I do, that it is essential that the Bill that he receives from your Lordships is the best Bill possible. I hope that both the Ministers and the promoters of the Bill will feel it possible to talk seriously and make sure that we have a Bill that can be enacted through both Houses of Parliament in good time for the international conference in December this year.
1.58 p.m.
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Blatch): My Lords, a fortnight ago the 50th anniversary of victory in Europe was commemorated throughout the country. Indeed, it was commemorated throughout the world. It was an opportunity to remember and give thanks for the spirit and sacrifice of those who fought for the democratic ideals which we all hold dear and which were so determinedly threatened during those dark days of the last war.
During that long conflict, those in the Armed Forces and their loved ones could draw some comfort from the protection afforded by the Geneva Conventions. However, the war showed that there was a need to improve and indeed extend the scope of those Conventions, which have now been replaced by the four Geneva Conventions of 1949.
The process of improvement has been taken further with the additional protocols of 1977. Through the Conventions, a humanitarian duty towards friend and foe alike is imposed upon combatant states. The Geneva conventions are, of course, inextricably linked in history and in practice with the Red Cross whose relief work in time of war and peace cannot be commended too highly. In this, the 125th anniversary year of the British Red Cross, it is fitting that we should be discussing ratification of the additional protocols to the Geneva Conventions which extend the protection already given to combatants under the Geneva Conventions and introduce new protections for the civilian population.
Few could argue with the general principles underlying the protocols and, indeed, the Government are committed to their ratification. As my noble friend indicated in his outstanding and telling Second Reading speech in bringing forward his Bill, domestic legislation is required before ratification can take place. Such legislation is
1084
needed in order to ensure that what are defined as "grave breaches" of the First Protocol can be dealt with under our criminal law. My noble friend's Bill, however, goes somewhat further than is strictly required in a number of areas and in so doing raises some sensitive issues. It also has some technical deficiencies, as was pointed out by the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, which would require amendment. Indeed, the Bill requires; substantial amendment.
Clause 2, for example, provides that certain contraventions of the First Protocol, such as threatening an adversary that there shall be no survivors, shall be treated as grave breaches, although the protocol itself does not treat them as such. In these circumstances it is, in the Government's view, inappropriate and inconsistent with the approach we have taken to the Geneva Conventions more generally to seek to extend the criminal law to cover those acts which are, in any event, already likely to be covered by the general criminal law or the Armed Forces' disciplinary codes.
Clause 3 also goes further than is required for ratification by seeking to make the Defence Council the sole protecting authority for emblems instead of the function being divided between the Defence Council and the Board of Trade, as is currently the case. The current arrangements reflect the fact that the misuse of the relevant emblems often arises in a trading context and raises issues which are outside the responsibility of the Defence Council.
Those are only two examples of areas in which my noble friend's Bill goes beyond what is strictly required by the protocols and raises wider issues. These are, of course, issues which need to be debated but, with all deference to my noble friend, I have to say that I believe that they require more time for debate than is likely to be available for his Bill.
Some helpful discussions have already taken place with the Red Cross which has indicated that many of the policy issues are likely to be capable of satisfactory resolution. Nevertheless, a considerable number of amendments to the Bill would be required which would also need to be discussed with my noble friend and the Red Cross. As your Lordships will appreciate, they could consume valuable parliamentary time when we already have an extremely busy programme. Noble Lords may agree therefore that, given the importance of this subject, it may be better to defer consideration of those proposals until more time can be devoted to them.
Perhaps I can say to the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, that, first, I noted his remonstration as to whether the Government should have brought forward this Bill at this time. But the determination to ratify the protocol is actively being pursued by the Government and it is therefore a matter of timing. There have been extremely constructive talks between officials in my department and Red Cross officials about some areas of the Bill which may require resolution. I hope that those discussions will continue. However, I must flag up to the House that parliamentary time is an issue at this end of the parliamentary Session.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, my intervention was meant to be helpful. The Minister said, rightly, both that the Government are committed to

1085
ratification and that legislation is necessary. Surely, the easiest thing to do would be to take a Bill which has already had its First Reading and will have its Second Reading and by agreement speedily make the amendments, if necessary in the form of excisions of inessential material, rather than introduce other legislation. There is simply no other way of getting it done by December except through this Bill.
Lord Wright of Richmond: My Lords, is the Minister telling us that she does not now expect ratification before the end of this year? If so, I must express strong personal disappointment. The tone of this brief debate today shows that any further debate on ratification is unlikely to be contentious. I ask the Minister whether a way cannot be found quickly to amend the Bill, as the Government think fit, and proceed rapidly to ratification.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I note the points that have been made. It would be presumptuous of me at this time to predict a smooth passage with all the outstanding issues being resolved in sufficiently amicable form to be able to facilitate the Bill's passage. I cannot say that there will not be parliamentary time; I simply flag up that parliamentary time at this end of the parliamentary Session is an issue. Some amendments may be complex. Discussions are taking place with officials of the Red Cross. So far they have been extremely constructive. I shall certainly report back to both the officials in my department and to my right honourable friend the Home Secretary at least to communicate the goodwill of the House to do what it can to facilitate the Bill's passage. But we cannot be presumptuous about people who are not present today either agreeing or disagreeing with any amendments that may be tabled on behalf of the Government in order to find a resolution to the problem.
With that caveat along with the fact that discussions must continue and adding the reminder that parliamentary time is an issue, I have flagged up that some issues may be sensitive. I hope therefore that it is possible to enact the Bill. If it is not possible, it is still the intention of the Government to get on as quickly as possible towards completing the ratification process:
Lord Archer of Weston-Super-Mare: My Lords, I apologise for interrupting my noble friend but she must have clear in her mind that we are talking about December. The Minister talks of disagreements. It must clearly be in her mind also that every person who has spoken on the Bill wants it to be enacted. We are talking about time. I do not want people going to Geneva in December giving that as a British excuse—that we could not find the time. I do not want the Minister leaving the normally gentle House of Lords under the illusion that she has crept out and her civil servants have got her off the hook, because they have not. This is an important Bill and she should support it. I want to know that she will do everything she can to see that this Bill goes through by December.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I can give my noble friend an absolute assurance that I will spare no energy in making sure that all the messages of this debate are
1086
conveyed both to my officials and to my right honourable friend the Home Secretary. That I will do. But I cannot pre-empt—this point is well understood by the House—the consternation of Members who are not present who may raise points that could delay the passage of the Bill. Nor can I pre-empt the time that may be taken in another place. What I can say is that we are all seized of the importance of ratification and, depending on the outcome of discussions with Red Cross officials, we will do all we can to find a proper resolution of the issue.
2.8 p.m.
Lord Archer of Weston-Super-Mare: My Lords, I thank the Minister because I know, despite my raising my voice, how much work she has done and how sincere she is about wanting to get this done by December.
The one thing the Minister must be clear about is that the second speech in the debate was made by a former Marshal of the Royal Air Force, the third speech by a former head of the Diplomatic Service, and the fourth speech by someone who has served the Red Cross for the past 30 years. After that we immediately had the support of the Benches opposite. I say that to the Minster only because I want her to realise that while we are only five people we probably represent between us a fair number of people who want it to be possible for the British Red Cross to go to the Geneva meeting on 4th December and say that this has been done. Not least, as the noble Lord, Lord Wright, pointed out, it will be an influence on those remaining countries which have not yet signed the protocol.
I thank the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, for his support. I had not picked up the mistake he referred to in dates, which was my own stupidity, but I hope he will forgive me for pointing out that the work done by the officials of the Red Cross on this Bill has been long into the night for a long time. I would say to him that I do know that it was considered a well drafted Bill. A lot of hard work went into it. If his idea of slight modification were possible —I aim this point at the Minister as well—that could be a way through to making this possible before 4th December. I thank the noble Lord very much for his support.
I thank the Minister for her support. I am sure my noble friend will appreciate that it is much easier if the Minister is not someone one knows very well. The Minister and I have been great friends for many, many years. I hope that our theatre date next week, when her husband is not in London and my wife is not in London, will still be allowed. But I want to say to you, Minister, that I hope by then you will have some news for me, because I feel very strongly about this Bill.
I conclude as I began in my opening speech. I am immensely proud to stand here representing the British Red Cross. If there is a body in this country that deserves the support and gets the support of both sides of the House, it is that movement. When the Minister walks out of this Chamber and sees her civil servants, I hope she will say to them, "I am damn well going to have this through by 4th December 1995".
On Question, Bill read a second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

Dangerous Dogs (Amendment) Bill [H.L.]
Report received.

Landlord and Tenant (Covenants) Bill
2.12 p.m.
The Earl of Courtown: My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time. This Bill will put an end to the operation of the doctrine of privity of contract, described during the Bill's passage in another place as "the privity trap", which has resulted in considerable hardship and financial distress for large numbers of former tenants of all types of property over the years. I should like to thank my honourable friend the Member of Parliament for Bolton, North-East, Mr. Peter Thurnham, for and congratulate him on having persevered in bringing this Bill through another place in order that I may bring it before your Lordships' House.
While there have been some significant changes along the way, the starting point of the reforms which your Lordships are to consider is the Law Commission's 1988 report. It considered the extent and duration of liability undertaken by the parties to leases of land and their successors in title, under the doctrines of privity of contract and privity of estate, which apply to all types of lease, whether commercial, residential or agricultural.
The report explains the law with the thoroughness and erudition we have almost come to take for granted from the Law Commission, and I shall attempt only a brief overview. A lease of land has a twofold effect, acting both to create a new legal estate vesting the property in the tenant for a defined period and as a contract between the parties, who normally undertake liabilities under the contract for the whole of that period.
Under privity of estate, the landlord and tenant for the time being are bound by the covenants under the lease which "touch and concern" the land, as opposed to those which impose merely personal or collateral obligations. The original landlord and tenant, however, are also bound by privity of contract, and this binds them to their respective obligations for the whole period of that lease, notwithstanding that they may have parted with their whole interest in the property.
As many former tenants have found to their often crippling cost, this can mean having to pay rent or to pay for repairs years after parting with the property. Worse still for the former tenant, the liability is not limited to what he was paying when he parted with the property, so that, if there have been rent reviews or changes to the property in consideration of a higher rent, he may find himself liable for vastly increased sums.
The Law Commission criticised the existing law on two grounds in particular. The first is that the distinction between covenants which "touch and concern" the land and those that do not is unclear and a potential source of difficulties. The second, and the one which has drawn support from every quarter, is that it is intrinsically unfair for anyone to continue to bear burdens under a contract when he no longer derives any benefit and has no control, and that privity of contract bears particularly harshly on tenants.
1088
When a demand is made of a former tenant under this doctrine, it will often be not only out of the blue but also beyond his means, particularly where a small businessman assigned his lease so that he might retire. There is also no logical way in which a former tenant who does understand that he has this contingent liability can estimate its amount.
The Law Commission recommended reform for all types of leases based on two principles. First, a landlord or tenant should, as a general rule, have no rights or liabilities arising from a lease once he has lawfully parted with his interest in the property; and, secondly, all the terms of a lease should be regarded as a single bargain for letting the property, so that, when the landlord's or tenant's interest changes hands, the successor should take on the whole package of his predecessor's rights and obligations, with no distinction between covenants which "touch and concern" the property and those which do not.
These two principles would ensure that rights and obligations would go hand in hand and would produce a clean break on assignment of a party's interest. The commission accepted, however, that there would be circumstances where it would be reasonable for both landlords and tenants to have a degree of continuing liability. For tenants it was accepted that it would in some circumstances be reasonable for a landlord to expect an outgoing tenant to guarantee performance of the tenant's obligations by his assignee, and it should be possible for a landlord to require such a guarantee, but only where that is a reasonable condition of his giving consent to the assignment and covering only the period until the assignee himself assigns, at which point the landlord could seek a similar guarantee from the outgoing assignee.
In the case of landlords, the commission noted that tenants would rarely, if ever, be in a position to exercise any control over assignment by the landlord, and so would be unable to require guarantees of performance by the landlord's successor. It recommended instead that a landlord's rights and liabilities under the lease should continue after assignment unless the landlord is released in accordance with a procedure allowing for the tenant to argue that it would not be reasonable for the landlord to be released.
The commission's recommendations also included detailed provision for apportionment of liability where only part of the landlord's or tenant's interest is assigned, and such matters as anti-avoidance provision to invalidate contractual or other devices to the extent that they have the effect of subverting the reforms.
In 1993 the Government accepted these recommendations, but with one very significant change; namely that they should apply only to new leases, and not, as the Law Commission recommended, also to leases already in existence when the Act comes into force. It is accepted by all sides that retrospective legislation of that order could not be justified, and the Bill accordingly gives effect to these recommendations for new leases only.
There was still concern, however, for those former tenants who would still be subject to continuing liability and who might still be presented without warning with demands for payment covering extremely long periods of arrears. To alleviate this, the Government agreed a further

1089
provision, to apply to both new and existing leases, and presently embodied in Clause 13 of the Bill. This requires landlords to notify former tenants of arrears within nine months of their falling due, or lose the right to enforce them. It will ensure that former tenants are promptly informed about their obligations when default occurs and will help to protect individuals and companies against the sudden and unexpected costs which cause such problems under the existing law.
Noble Lords who have followed the Bill's progress in another place will know that that is by no means the whole story, and there is particular reason for my congratulations to my honourable friend, Mr. Peter Thurnham, on his determination in bringing the issue to the House. The Bill represents a second attempt to introduce these much needed reforms, an attempt which perhaps carries more of a spirit of compromise than the first. Following the failure last year of the first Bill, for reasons which all parties accept were entirely proper, the British Retail Consortium and the British Property Federation worked together to see whether a measure of agreement could be reached on privity reform, and eventually put forward a balanced and considered package of measures which is now supported across the property industry by, among others, the Association of British Chambers of Commerce, the Forum for Private Business, the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors, the Property Managers' Association and the British Council of Shopping Centres. The force of that agreement has carried the Bill as far as this House and will, I hope, carry it all the way to the statute book.
There are two parts to that agreement. The first is to apply only to new commercial leases; the second to both new and existing leases of all types. The first part comprises the amendment of Section 19 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927, thereby enabling landlords and tenants to agree between themselves at the commencement of the lease, or by agreement later, the terms under which future assignments can be made.
Without such a change, the abolition of the privity of contract doctrine would undermine the ability of landlords to preserve the covenants underpinning investment in commercial property, with consequent serious harm to investment and confidence in the property market, to the detriment of both landlords and tenants. In its absence, it is likely that the majority of landlords would be driven to exercise their right to ban assignment altogether since under the current law the principles on which the courts operate do not give landlords and investors the certainty they require in respect of assignments and covenant strength. By enabling the parties to agree the terms for assignment in advance, this harm will be avoided. Both the British Retail Consortium and the British Property Federation are convinced that this sensible and measured approach will provide the property industry with the necessary control over covenant strength which will maintain confidence in the property market as well as ensuring a real future for the high street. They are certainly not alone in that, as the support of the bodies I mentioned earlier indicates.
1090
The second part of the agreement aims to provide additional protection for tenants by means of three extra measures, all of which are to apply to both new and existing leases. One is a reduction to six months of the nine-month period in Clause 13 of the Bill to which I have already referred. This will mean that those former tenants who remain subject to continuing liability will now have early notice of their financial liabilities for any subsequent default and will be able to budget accordingly, rather than be faced with unexpected demands for debts accumulated over a number of years.
The next measure is to provide that no former tenant or their guarantor will be liable to pay any sum resulting from a change to the lease after assignment by a deed of variation. This provision applies to new and existing leases, but will only apply to deeds of variation after the commencement of the Act. Any increase in the rent solely attributable to a variation of the original terms of the lease would not fall within the original tenant's privity of contract liability. This provision is not intended to cover increases in rent following rent reviews which are provided for by the lease, but rather is intended to prevent cases where assignee tenants have accepted changes in the terms of the lease in the knowledge that they will not have to meet the additional costs which result, and former tenants are then faced with excessive costs resulting from negotiations to which they have not been party. I am sure that your Lordships will agree that it is wholly unreasonable that former tenants should be placed under any obligation resulting from changes in the lease which could not have been contemplated by the original parties.
The final component would allow former tenants to call for an overriding lease when faced with a privity of contract claim. This will address the concern that many businessmen and women have expressed about their lack of control and feeling of helplessness over the property when they are called upon to make good the default of a subsequent tenant. This measure will allow former tenants to take back control of the property and take action to control their liabilities as quickly as possible.
The Bill was introduced in another place without provision for these additional changes, but on the clear basis that they should be incorporated by subsequent amendment. Following wider consultation undertaken by the Lord Chancellor's Department, which revealed support across a wide range of interests in the property industry, the Government accepted these additional changes and have confirmed that they would be willing to extend all necessary assistance to enable the amendments necessary to give effect to them to be brought forward.
The Bill as I have outlined it, together with the additional measures, has wide cross-party support, amply illustrated by the fact that its sponsors in the other place are drawn from all the English and Welsh parties and include the honourable Member for Brent South, Mr. Paul Boateng, who is the Opposition spokesman on the Lord Chancellor's Department, the honourable Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed, Mr. Alan Beith, the deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats, and, for Plaid Cymru, the honourable Member for Ynys Mon, Mr. Ieuan Wyn Jones.

1091
Your Lordships will appreciate that these reforms do represent a compromise which has moved in some respects from the Law Commission's original vision, and I think it proper to mention that the commission itself did express some reservations about the first part of the agreement which I have outlined. Notwithstanding those reservations however, the commission has continued to extend the benefit of its advice and expertise to the drive to enact these reforms, and I should like to thank the commission for its assistance.
In conclusion, I consider that these reforms will introduce fairness in this area of the law, striking a balance between the rights of tenants and those of landlords. To the extent that they represent a compromise, it may be that they omit features which some would have wished for, and include elements which some might have preferred to omit; but it is my firm view that the balance is right, and the will to carry through these reforms and make them work is there, shown by the firm support which the Bill has received from all sides. There is a golden opportunity to secure much-needed reform for the benefit of all in the property world, and I hope your Lordships will agree that we should seize that opportunity and make the most of it. I commend the Bill to the House.
Moved, That the Bill be now read a second time.—(The Earl of Courtown.)
2.26 p.m.
Lord Meston: My Lords, I am sure the whole House will want to thank the noble Earl for his explanation of this important Bill, which should have the support of us all, particularly those who appreciate the problems it seeks to address. The existing state of the law is bad and has created many hard cases. It is also a confusing area of the law, particularly in England. I never properly got to grips with the subject of covenants that touch and concern the land, and I congratulate the noble Earl on his mastery of it.
It must be an enormous worry and a surprise to the original tenant to be met with a demand to meet the terms of a lease of which he has no longer any benefit, possibly several years after he had anything to do with the property concerned. The original tenant may have left those premises years before, having complied with all the covenants and all the obligations as at the date of his departure. He will have assigned the lease to an apparently suitable replacement with the knowledge and full approval of the landlord. There will probably have been good references for the assignee and sureties of apparent means.
The original tenant may also have obtained written indemnities from the assignee. Yet, with all those safeguards, the original tenant might find himself meeting demands, and being embroiled in litigation, arising out of breaches of the lease caused by any of his successors. Those successors may be not be just the assignee he knew about, but subsequent assignees of whom he knows nothing. The claim against him may also follow rent reviews and other actions or transactions with which he had nothing to do.
1092
Moreover, if the landlord has taken time first to pursue the successor tenants and their sureties, the original tenant may also be faced with a large demand for arrears of rent which have mounted in the intervening period and with a large claim for interest.
Alternatively, the landlord may be more selective and go almost immediately for the original tenant, leaving him to pursue his indemnities against whoever else may be liable. All too often those indemnities prove to be worth little or nothing, and it turns out that the landlord has rightly perceived that the blameless original tenant is the person with the deepest pocket.
Perhaps it is also worth remembering that the original tenant of small commercial premises may have assigned the lease on retirement. Indeed, one of the cases that was shown on a television programme which dealt with this subject illustrated the difficulties of the widow of the original tenant who was left to cope with the landlord's claim after her husband's death.
That is the nature of the problem; and it is a problem peculiar to English law. The need for reform was urgent by the time the Law Commission reported in 1988. Unhappily, the Bill comes too late to help those who have suffered during the recession, which has aggravated the problem. The noble Earl mentioned retrospection. I believe that retrospection would be unfair on those who had to pay up under the existing law as against those who as yet have managed to escape liability.
It is ironic that more recently tenants have had greater bargaining power and today are able to require in leases the inclusion of a variety of contractual restrictions on their liabilities. Having noted that, if in years to come the bargaining power returns to landlords, I should not want to see the provisions of this Bill unduly fetter the future assignability of tenancies. I listened with care to what the noble Earl said about that matter, which we must consider in more detail in Committee.
I hope that further thought will be given to Clauses 12 and 13. There is much to be said for an upper limit of 10 years and for some of the other limits on liability of the original tenant, which were suggested by the CBI. It is also not unreasonable that the notices, which under Clause 13 must be served, should also supply information to the original tenant about the identities of other candidates for liability under the lease and that there should be some obligation on the lessor to heed the reasonable wishes and views of the original tenant about possible enforcement against such other people.
Matrimonial law strives to deal with, among other things, the problem of the limping marriage. This Bill tackles tenancy agreements which limp on causing trouble, conflict and expense long after the lease or agreement concerned has any practical utility. I hope that the Bill will achieve what a matrimonial lawyer calls a "clean break" between the original landlord and the original tenant who are no longer wedded in any real sense to the property or to the agreement they signed years ago.
Finally, perhaps I may comment on the drafting of the Bill. It lacks the direct clarity of drafting of the original Law Commission Bill. I wonder whether Clauses 1 and 2 have to be where they are and in that form. I also wonder whether Clauses 3(4) and 4(4) add a great deal. It is not obvious to the reader what is meant by a "non-attributable

1093
covenant", which is used in Clause 6. Perhaps we must return to those issues in Committee; but, with those reservations, I hope that the House will support the Bill.
2.35 p.m.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: My Lords, my noble friend Lord Irvine of Lairg has had to leave the Chamber for an urgent appointment in Scotland. He apologises for having to do so.
He has asked me to say on his behalf that he believes that the Bill will be welcomed by the whole House. It reflects the agreements on reform of the law of privity of contract arrived at between the British Retail Consortium and the British Property Federation.
My noble friend tells me that it is right also to mark the industry and determination of the honourable Member for Bolton North-East which has led to this Bill coming to your Lordships' House in such an advanced state. As the noble Earl explained, amendments remain to be brought forward which will have to be scrutinised with care because of the difficulties of the subject matter. However, we give this measure a fair wind and will co-operate in its speedy translation to the statute book.
There is one specific point which I wish to raise at this stage so that the noble Earl may consider it. Has thought been given to the special position of charities and their trustees? Under Clause 12, the original tenant may be required to guarantee the performance of the covenants, subject to the qualifications in Clause 13. The guarantee will last during the remainder of the term of the tenancy. If the rent is increased due to a rent review, after assignment the guarantor will be liable for the increased rent. If trustees sign a guarantee without having received legal advice independent from that given to the charity itself, when the guarantee becomes enforceable, perhaps many years later after the charity has been wound up, the trustees would remain liable in their personal capacity. In Committee your Lordships may wish to consider whether greater protection should be afforded to the trustees in that position.
Meanwhile, we are grateful to the noble Earl for his full and clear exposition of this long-awaited Bill, which we support.
2.36 p.m.
The Lord Chancellor: My Lords, I am sure that your Lordships are grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, for contributing on behalf of the noble Lord, Lord Irvine of Lairg. If one has to leave the Chamber, I cannot think of a better place to go than that to which he has gone.
I join with those who congratulated my honourable friend in another place for his perseverance in bringing forward the previous Bill, for considering the points made about it and the discussions of the property industry organisations, and for keeping up the momentum by bringing forward the present Bill in the conviction that the eventual agreement reached by those organisations represented a proper compromise and a way forward which all sides, including the Government, would find themselves able to support. It must be underlined that my
1094
noble friend brought forward this Bill in the wake of the agreement before we could know the extent to which it was generally acceptable elsewhere. His courage and judgment in doing so have been vindicated, as I shall indicate.
I think "perseverance" is the right word, for the level of agreement which has carried the Bill as far as your Lordships' House has been hard-won. As my noble friend Lord Courtown said, the backbone of the Bill was provided by work done by the Law Commission and reflects the decision of the Government which I announced in 1993 to accept the commission's recommendations, but only in relation to new leases.
That decision itself represented a compromise following consultation in which I played an extensive part. There were those on the one hand who regretted that more could not be done to alleviate the difficulties which would continue to be faced by former tenants under existing leases, and those on the other hand who applauded the decision to legislate with prospective effect only, but remained worried about how the market might greet the new regime and the potential effects for tenants as well as landlords.
Those worries, as your Lordships are aware, proved an insurmountable obstacle to the previous Bill, but there were indications that the debate was not between an irresistible force and an immovable object, and the Government for their part remained willing to hear suggestions as to how progress towards the principal objective of abolishing privity of contract liability might be made. Accordingly, when at the end of 1994, the agreement outlined by my noble friend Lord Courtown was put forward, it was clearly a matter for close consideration.
Reservations about the effect of aspects of the agreement, in particular on small business tenancies, have been mentioned. It was a matter of concern to the Government that notwithstanding the influence and breadth of representation of the British Retail Consortium and British Property Federation, the agreement which has been put forward could not be said to have been tested against the views of every sector of the property industry. In particular, while what might be described as the big battalions were supportive of the spirit of the agreement, it was considered necessary that smaller commercial tenants, residential tenants and agricultural tenants should be given the opportunity to make their views known.
In accordance with that view, I and my colleague, the Minister in another place, initiated consultation to that end. That consultation produced a clear vote in favour of the compromise, a notable feature of which was the number of respondents who expressed the view that no progress could be made without compromise and urged the Government to seize the opportunity and act on the agreement.
In the light of the views expressed, the Government decided that the package of extra measures should be accepted as a proper and widely-supported compromise and the best way of making progress. It was decided, however, that while the three elements aimed at alleviating the difficulties of former tenants were of benefit to all tenants and should apply to all types of lease, the first element, allowing for new leases a greater degree

1095
of control over assignment by the tenant, should apply only to commercial leases and not to residential or agricultural tenancies. A number of respondents argued—and it is accepted by all sides—that the commercial and economic arguments for applying the measure to new commercial leases had no real application to tenancies of dwellings. It was also accepted that agricultural tenancies, to which a different regime for control over assignment has always applied, should also be excepted from the change.
As your Lordships have been told, the acceptance by the Government of the principle of the additional changes, and cross-party support for the agreement in the other place, enabled the Bill to pass to this House unopposed, so that the necessary amendments might be considered by your Lordships. In the circumstances, your Lordships may think that that was the best way forward. I am happy to confirm my readiness to offer all the necessary assistance to my noble friend in bringing forward those amendments and in assisting your Lordships to give them the consideration which they deserve.
Quite apart from those amendments, I am advised that there are some areas of the Bill which will require amendments, not to introduce additional changes but as a matter of technical necessity, to ensure that the Bill will effectively implement all aspects of the reforms. My noble friend will no doubt be relieved to hear that I consider it proper that I, rather than he, should consider those matters and bring forward the necessary amendments on behalf of the Government.
I am sure that my noble friend will also wish to consider the further points made by the noble Lord, Lord Meston, and those made on behalf of the noble Lord, Lord Irvine of Lairg. I believe it only right that we should consider them in preparation for the Committee stage. Indeed, I do not think that they are points upon which we would wish to elaborate at this juncture.
My noble friend referred in his opening speech to the attitude of the Law Commission and outlined the package of additional changes. I believe that it would be both helpful and right if I were to expand on what has already been said in that respect. The Law Commission expressed concern about the terms; of the package in its response to my department's consultation paper. Its concern is principally in relation to the amendment of Section 19 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927, which it fears will seriously weaken the protection enjoyed by tenants, particularly small business tenants, in terms of freedom to assign the property. That protection was recently strengthened by Parliament, implementing Law Commission recommendations, in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1988. The commission is also concerned that to allow the parties to negotiate in advance the grounds on which any future assignment will be permitted will be likely to lead to delay and greater expense in leasehold conveyancing. I shall be happy to supply a copy of the commission's response to any noble Lord who may be interested to read it.
Your Lordships will appreciate that the Law Commission is concerned with the long-term aspects of reform. On the other hand, your Lordships and the Government have also to consider the shorter-term situation.
1096
The consultation suggested an urgent need to deal with the matter while at the same time suggesting that unless there were a degree of compromise it would not be possible to make progress. While I understand the Law Commission's reservations, it is in that spirit that we are continuing. The Law Commission will wish to keep the long-term arrangements under review and make what proposals it considers right in that connection.
As my noble friend mentioned, notwithstanding its concerns the Law Commission has been prepared to lend its expertise. I should like to add my thanks to those already expressed for the Commission's gracious assistance, which will without doubt enable the production of a greatly superior end product. I am sure that your Lordships will wish to mark that notwithstanding the fact that the Commission has reservations about the compromise it has been willing to give the benefit of its great expertise to enable us to do the best that we can with this Bill. It may go some way towards reassuring those who share the Commission's reservations if I say that all parties have very much in mind the need to ensure that while the amendments which are to be brought forward are fully effective to implement the essence of the agreed compromise, they should not unwittingly extend beyond it to possible deleterious effect.
To sum up, your Lordships may agree that the history of this matter shows a need throughout for a degree of accommodation and compromise so that genuine conflicting interests may be reconciled to the overall benefit of all. It is perhaps of the essence of this type of reconciliation that the final result may not please everyone and that those who take the very long view may see the need for the position as a whole to be assessed again in the longer term. However, it seems to me that the consensus is very much in favour of doing now what is possible to extend to the people who really need it the relief that they require. It is in that spirit that I am happy on behalf of the Government to support the Bill and support the Motion that it should now have a Second Reading.
2.46 p.m.
The Earl of Courtown: My Lords, I thank noble Lords who have taken part in this debate. This has been a serious discussion on a very serious matter. The more I listened to the debate the more it confirmed my belief that neither is this a simple matter, but one in which it is very difficult to strike the proper balance. On the other hand, I remain hopeful that the spirit of compromise will remain uppermost and that we may be able to reach the statute book with an agreement which, while it may not be ideal for many, will be acceptable to most.
Due to the adjournment yesterday and the second reading being held over until today a number of noble Lords have been unable to speak in the debate. In particular, my noble friend Lady Gardner of Parkes wishes me to say that she fully supports the Bill and intends to support it on behalf of the British Retail Consortium.
I should like to thank the noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, for putting forward the views of his noble friend Lord Irvine of Lairg, and also the noble Lord, Lord

1097
Meston. I have noted the queries raised by noble Lords and hope that these can be considered before the Committee stage.
I thank my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor for the help he has given personally and the encouragement that he and my honourable friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Lord Chancellor's Department have given to the endeavours to carry this Bill through. I also thank the Lord Chancellor's Department, the Law Commission and parliamentary counsel for their continuing assistance. I hope that with the good will that has been shown this afternoon we may succeed and that your Lordships will agree that the Bill be now given a Second Reading.
On Question, Bill read a second time and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

Electoral Registration
2.47 p.m.
Lord Monkswell Lord Monkswell rose to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have any plans to improve the level of electoral registration and to make all aspects of the electoral system more easily accessible.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, every British Commonwealth and Irish citizen resident in this country has a right to vote in our elections; but there are a number of ways in which that right is denied to some of those people.
I want to ask the Government what plans they have to deal with those problems, and in particular to deal with the financial, bureaucratic and physical barriers which prevent some people from exercising their rights. I intend to explain what I mean about those barriers and suggest ways to bring them down; but before doing so I want to highlight the broad problem and explain why I believe that we need to take action. Overall in this country between 5 per cent. and 9 per cent., or between 2 million and 3.5 million people, may be denied their right to vote. This masks some quite startling local variations which mean that up to 30 per cent. of people in some areas may be disenfranchised.
I am proud that in 1832 one of my ancestors, the father of the first Lord Monkswell, was elected as one of the first MPs for the City of Plymouth. For six generations my family has endeavoured to serve the people. In the past 160 years we have seen a steady enlargement of the electoral franchise. Initially it was available just to men of property, then to all men, then to women, and finally to all those over 18 years of age. We might ask why that has happened and what are the benefits that derive from it. It happened because people demanded their right to vote, their enfranchisement. The benefits have been the cohesiveness and the unity of our society.
Because everyone is involved in drawing up the rules of our society, by and large they accept those rules. However, at the end of the 1980s that changed and for the first time we had the poll tax. Effectively to be a member of society one had to pay a price. Statistics now confirm the anecdotal evidence, and the experience of those of us
1098
involved in the election process, that some people took themselves off the electoral register in the hope of escaping the imposition of the poll tax. Of course the poll tax has now been abolished and replaced by the council tax. However, the working of the council tax, and specifically the 25 per cent. discount for single adult households, still provides, unfortunately, a financial incentive not to be registered on the electoral roll. The first detailed supplementary that I have—if I can put it like that—is: will the Government look at this problem and do something to prevent that perceived financial disincentive to be registered on the electoral roll?
I now turn to the bureaucratic barrier to voting. The register is compiled in October and comes into effect in the following February. When the system was set up most people did not move house frequently. They might only move house once in a lifetime. But now society is much more fluid and people move house much more frequently. In fact, the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys reports that in the year up to the 1991 census, 9 per cent. of the population moved home. In some areas there is more movement than in others. It is estimated that in some areas the electoral register may be up to 30 per cent. inaccurate by the end of the year in which it is in force.
My second supplementary is: what plans do the Government have to modernise our electoral registration system? In this context, I commend two ideas: first, a computerised rolling register, as suggested by Harry Barnes MP in his Private Member's Bill, the Representation of the People (Amendment) Bill, which he introduced in another place in 1994; and, secondly, the system that operates in some states in the United States of America where a resident can go to a polling station on polling day and register and vote at the same time.
The third barrier to the human rights of voting is the physical barrier to disabled people. Due to changes in our society and medical science we now have many more disabled people wanting to play their full part in society. They have every right to do so. However, SCOPE, previously the Spastics Society, carried out a survey in 1992 which showed that 88 per cent. of polling stations were inaccessible to disabled people.
The third supplementary question that I ask is: what plans do the Government have to make polling stations more accessible? I point out that postal voting and proxy voting are no real substitute for the ability of people to vote in person. Also, making polling stations more accessible will help disabled people at other times than on polling day because most polling stations are in schools or other public buildings which should be accessible in their own right during normal use.
I should like to thank all those who are taking part in this little debate today. I thank the Minister in advance for her reply which will, I am sure, be studied with great interest. I pay tribute to Harry Barnes, M.P., for his activity on the subject and for the help he has provided to me with statistics and in other ways. I wish to thank Full Franchise, a non-party campaign to maximise involvement in the electoral process, for its work in the field.
In my remarks I must pay tribute to the electoral registration officers in town halls throughout the land for the contribution they make to ensuring that our electoral system works as well as it does, with limited resources and even less recognition.
Finally, I wish to give three case studies of the problems which I am talking about this afternoon. The first is of a single mother with an 18 year-old son who does not register him for the elections because she cannot afford to pay what is effectively an extra 30 per cent. on her council tax. Secondly, there is the little old lady who, when she arrives at the polling station, is told "No, I am afraid you cannot vote". Why not? Either because she did not receive the form or because she filled it out wrongly. That lady may not have moved house, she may have voted in virtually every previous election. That happens in election after election and it is palpably unfair. Thirdly, I cite the case of the disabled man in a wheelchair who could not get into the polling station. He was only able to cast his vote because the election officers at that polling station, acting totally illegally, brought the ballot paper and ballot box out of the polling station to him, to enable him to cast his vote. It is surely wrong that people can only vote illegally.
The problems that I have highlighted this afternoon and the solutions that I have proposed will, I hope, not be considered as party political in any way. I hope that the Government will address the issues, to the benefit of the whole of society, with the recognition that every human being in our society is equal and should be treated as equal and have equal human rights when it comes to the electoral system. I thank all noble Lords.
2.58 p.m.
Lord Lester of Herne Hill: My Lords, I am very glad that the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, has initiated the debate to discover the Government's thinking on ways not only of improving the level of electoral registration but also of making all aspects of the electoral system more accessible. We should be grateful to him for raising some important problems and suggesting practical solutions to make the electoral system work better.
I should like to focus on one notorious way in which the existing electoral system is inaccessible to the unwary voter. It is, namely, that parliamentary candidates can use deliberately confusing and misleading party political labels so as to pass themselves off, confuse voters and produce results which are not truly representative of the people's wishes.
The United Kingdom is obliged by Article 3 of the first protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights to hold free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot, under conditions which ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature. We are also bound by Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to guarantee the free expression of the will of the electors. Most unfortunately, our existing election law enables a candidate to describe himself or herself in such a way as to confuse and mislead the electorate and to distort the free expression of the people and the electors' will.
1100
A recent and blatant example of this mischief occurred during the European parliamentary election for the Devon and East Plymouth constituency on 9th June 1994. That constituency consists of seven parliamentary constituencies and an electorate of some 527,000. A certain Mr. Huggett delivered to the returning officer his nomination paper describing himself as—I must enunciate clearly—a "Literal Democrat" (with a "t"). The returning officer held his nomination paper to be valid because it was in good form and complied with the narrow rules of the present electoral game.
The official Liberal Democrat candidate sought unsuccessfully to apply for judicial review of the returning officer's decision that Mr. Huggett's nomination paper was valid. The court held that it had no jurisdiction to deal with the case. So the election went ahead with eight candidates on the ballot paper, including Mr. Huggett, described as a Literal Democrat, and Mr. Sanders described as a Liberal Democrat.
The election was keenly contested and the result was very close. The Conservative Party candidate received almost 75,000 votes, narrowly defeating the Liberal Democrat by only some 700 votes. Mr. Huggett, the Literal Democrat received some 10,203 votes—quite an impressive result for an unknown, recently arrived schoolmaster describing himself as a student of "perceptual psychology". Mr. Huggett had not campaigned at all, but he enjoyed the great advantage of preceding Mr. Sanders on the ballot paper, and of having a party label which must have misled many supporters of the Liberal Democrat candidate.
Complaints poured in from understandably indignant voters, and the Liberal Democrats pursued a parliamentary election petition—the first European parliamentary petition, and the first election petition of any kind presented since 1962.
The Divisional Court decided that, under the law as it stands, the political party description on the ballot paper is optional, and that it is unnecessary to include such a description to qualify as a candidate. The court also found that there is no requirement at present that the description be true, fair or not confusing. The fact that some voters may be confused by a candidate's chosen words of description is irrelevant for the purposes of existing law, unless those words have obscured the identification given to the candidate by his or her full name and address.
During the debate in another place on 18th December 1968 on the Representation of the People Bill, there was much discussion on the subject of political descriptions of candidates. Mr. Quintin Hogg, as he then was, very sensibly proposed a rule entitling a duly nominated candidate to object to the description of another candidate on the ground that his description was misleading and did not accurately describe him. The Home Secretary, Mr. Callaghan, as he then was, opposed this on the basis that it was unlikely that candidates advancing themselves for selection by their fellow citizens would misuse the procedure so as to deceive electors about themselves. Sadly, subsequent political history has shown that on this issue the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone, was the better prophet.

1101
With the leave of the House I should like to quote the words of Mr. Justice Dyson in the Divisional Court in the Literal Democrat case. He said:
"It is … clear that the Rules do not prohibit candidates (whether out of spite or a wicked sense of fun), from describing themselves in a confusing way or indulging in spoiling tactics … Parliament considered these very matters at length and in detail during the debates on the Representation of the People Bill in December 1968. Parliament was so anxious to avoid Returning Officers becoming involved in what might be called 'political controversy' that, as the Home Secretary said, it was prepared to take a risk that occasionally there would be misleading and confusing descriptions. It is not for us to say whether that political judgment of Parliament was wise. In other jurisdictions, such as New Zealand, the Commonwealth of Australia, the State of Queensland and the Republic of South Africa, a wholly different course has been adopted involving electoral commissions, a system of registration and political parties in the statutory provision, limiting the ability of candidates to use the name of a political party".
Mr. Justice Dyson concluded:
"It may be in the light of the present case that Parliament will wish to consider again whether a similar regime should be adopted for the conduct of elections in the United Kingdom".
I gave notice this morning to the noble Baroness the Minister that I wished to raise this issue during the debate. I very much hope that the Government have considered the judgment given some six months ago and the suggestion made by the Divisional Court that a similar legal framework might be adopted for the conduct of elections in this country to that which exists in other Commonwealth countries.
In case noble Lords believe that this is a problem exclusively for Liberal Democrats and their supporters in Devon and East Plymouth who were cheated of a result which reflected the true wishes of the majority of voters, I should mention that the problem has also afflicted the other parties as well. It seems from newspaper reports that in the recent local government elections, Mr. Ashton, a staunch Conservative from the village of Bloxham, stood for the Conservative controlled Cherwell District Council in Oxfordshire. On discovering that Labour (spelt in the normal way) had chosen not to fight the seat for Bloxham, he decided to stand and described himself as a candidate for the Labor Party (spelt without a "u"). The local Labour Party was reported to have accused the Conservatives of a crude attempt to split the anti-Conservative vote to assist their candidate, as local Conservatives were reported as saying, "We need every vote we can get."
Fortunately, that particular incident had a happy ending for the good people of Bloxham. The Liberal Democrat candidate won the seat and Mr. Ashton managed to gain only 65 votes. But the opportunity to mislead and deceive voters was once again exploited.
Much has been made recently in the press of the formation of a "Conversative Party"—which is no doubt dedicated to promoting the art of good conversation. It remains to be seen whether or not that new party will indeed put up a candidate at a parliamentary by-election or any other election. The fact is that any candidate, quite extraordinarily, may now put himself (or herself) forward as the Conversative Party candidate, or even as the official Conservative Party candidate, whether he (or she) is or is not. There is nothing that a returning officer can do about it.
1102
I believe that what happened in Devon and East Plymouth and what might have happened in Cherwell will come to haunt the Conservatives very much more than it will haunt the Liberal Democrats. The time is surely ripe—I would say over-ripe—to change the rules of the electoral system so that further flagrant abuse of that kind cannot take place. Some suggest that people vote for the individual person and not for a party. But that is clearly undermined by the wealth of party-related advertising and broadcasting at election time, especially in the context of European parliamentary elections, where constituencies sometimes exceed even the boundaries of a whole shire county. When there is an electorate of over 500,000, it is impossible to expect that all, or even most, voters will know the name of their candidate and will vote for him or her by choice.
We pride ourselves—we tell ourselves again and again in this country—on being the Mother of Parliaments. Surely the time has come to ensure that our elections remain free and fair, so that candidates can no longer sail under false party political colours. We already protect consumers against the misleading passing off of trade names. Surely we should do the same for the misleading passing off of the names of political parties by the mischievous, the unscrupulous and the deceitful.
3.10 p.m.
Lord Tope: My Lords, it is a particular personal pleasure for me to follow immediately after my noble friend Lord Lester of Herne Hill, who raised an important point and, as he rightly says, a point of considerable concern to all political parties, not just the Liberal Democrats. The event in Devon is not the first time this has occurred, but it was probably the event that gained the greatest publicity. Therefore the danger of it happening again and again is that much greater, and I hope that in her reply the Minister will have something encouraging to say to us on how the Government propose to tackle what I believe will be a growing problem in elections to come.
I want to return to the comments made by the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, in his opening speech and to thank him for raising those points so timely and so well. Indeed, I shall repeat some of them in my comments. All of us who are involved in elections meet all too often on the doorsteps people who cannot be bothered to vote. When we remember, as the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell did, the fight to get the vote in the first place, and more recently the pictures of those people in South Africa queuing for hours to place the vote they had fought so hard to achieve, understandably we feel a little frustration with those who say they cannot be bothered. On the other hand, some of the answer to that problem lies with us politicians, encouraging people to feel that it is worthwhile to vote.
This debate is not so much about those who cannot be bothered to vote, but those who cannot vote for a variety of reasons. One of the first reasons is that when the election comes along they find that they are not on the electoral register and often that is the first time that they discover that they are not on the register. There are a range of reasons for that and they are perhaps only a minority. As the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, said, registration in this country is still relatively high. In my borough we have managed to get registration up over 97 per cent. in all our

1103
wards; but, as the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, said also, commendable though that is, it serves to disguise much lower registration levels in other parts of the country, for obvious reasons.
The trend is downwards; it is in the wrong direction. A survey carried out after the censuses of 1966 and 1981 showed that non-registration in Great Britain had risen from 4 per cent. of the eligible population in 1966 to 6.5 per cent. in 1981. The 1991 census showed that it had again risen to over 7 per cent. Research carried out by the OPCS as part of the 1991 Census Validation Survey, found that non-registration was—perhaps not surprisingly—highest among young people, people from ethnic minorities, people living in private rented accommodation and people who had recently moved. But other people, outside of those groups, who would have wished to be included on the register have also been excluded.
In the 1992 general election, and indeed in many other elections, people found that they were not eligible to vote, some because they had failed to return their forms or were ineligible to register on the qualifying date, others because they had recently returned from abroad or become British citizens since the qualification date for registration and those who did not register due to lack of accommodation on the qualifying date. Many of those people did not realise that they were not on the register until the poll cards had been issued and they had not received one, by which time it was too late to apply for inclusion onto the register even if they were eligible to do so, and still be able to vote at the forthcoming election.
We need to make registration as easily accessible as possible. We need to make the registers as accurate as possible. I hope that when the Minister replies she will tell us what the Government are proposing to do in response to the many recommendations of the report of the working group on electoral registration, published by the Home Office in February last year. But one specific measure mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, and which I strongly support, is a rolling or continuous register. As is known, the qualifying date of 10th October means that by the time the register is put into operation, it is already four months out of date. By the time it ceases to be in operation, it is as much as 16 months out of date. People have moved.
In a general election, one can use the argument that people are electing a national government, and that it perhaps matters less where they actually vote. I spend a lot of my time in local elections. To call on people who want to take part in a community to which they have moved to tell them that they have no vote there but that they have to go back to the place where they used to live to help elect a council in which they have only a nostalgic interest is just not good enough. In these days of information technology, when it is possible, although difficult, to have a poll tax register on a daily basis, we should be moving to an electoral register that is updated on a daily or at least a weekly basis, and certainly more frequently than on an annual basis. That would do something to help improve registration, but not enough in itself.
1104
There are other factors that contribute towards a disinclination both to register and to vote. The noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, mentioned the poll tax, which undoubtedly had a very serious effect on electoral registration, particularly in certain areas, from which we are now only beginning to recover. There are other reasons why people do not register. One that I have come across many times is that they simply do not want to have their names and addresses sold to the many commercial organisations which use the electoral register for junk mailing. I regret that those authorities, like mine, which decided not to sell the electoral register on a commercial basis are now required to do so. I hope that the Government might consider returning to at least allowing local authorities the freedom to decide on that for themselves.
In addition to the introduction of a continuous register, a number of other measures can be taken to tackle the decline in registration and to encourage people to vote. One of those measures is to change the day on which we vote. I have never understood why it has to be a Thursday or whether it does have to be a Thursday. But it always is. Thursday is a working day for those fortunate enough still to be working. In many areas it is also a late shopping day. In my area the shops close at the same time as the polling stations for local elections close. For some reason completely beyond me, some people seem to prefer to go shopping than to go to vote. Sunday is widely used as a polling day in Europe and has proved very popular. In countries which vote on Sundays, registration—and more particularly turn out—are usually much higher than in this country. There are other reasons for that, but I suspect that the convenience of being able to vote is one factor.
The noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, mentioned accessibility to polling stations. That is particularly important. As he rightly said, improving access has benefits beyond just those enjoyed on polling day. There is another form of access in terms of voting which was mentioned in the other place in a Written Answer last week. I was most disappointed to see that the Minister at the Home Office said in a Written Answer on 18th May that he had no plans to introduce ballot papers in Braille for local, general or European elections. I would ask the Minister and the Government to reconsider that. In a reply given to another question on the same day the Government said that those with vision difficulties wanting to vote in person could ask someone else to help them vote. That is a direct negation of a secret ballot. Why should people who have vision difficulties be any more disadvantaged than they already are? 'Why cannot we produce ballot papers in Braille?
Another means of accessibility is the forms produced by the Home Office. I hope that the Home Office will look seriously at improving the design of those forms and using plain English on those forms. Postal and proxy votes should be available on demand. It is a lot easier now to get a postal or proxy vote than it used to be, but it is still not easy enough. I also believe that there should be separate forms for a proxy vote and a postal vote. We know of cases where people have signed a form believing that they are applying for a postal vote—perhaps because many of them are elderly and not so aware—but do not get their postal vote because someone else has completed the

1105
section in respect of a proxy vote and taken their vote from them. We know that that has happened in a number of cases. I am quite certain that it has happened in many more cases that we do not actually know about. There is no reason for it having to be done on the same form. To have separate forms would tackle that abuse straight away.
Similarly, I believe there should be a later date for registration for postal and proxy voting. By the time people realise that they need a postal vote—or indeed that they are entitled to have one—it is often too late for that election. There is no reason for such an early deadline.
Another measure considered by the working group to which I referred earlier was the need for anonymous registration for those who believe themselves to be at risk in some way. We should have the opportunity for anonymous registration either under the list of other electors at the end of the register or, as I would personally prefer, using an agreed pseudonym.
I cannot end a speech on this subject from these Benches without a call for what I believe would have the greatest effect on our electoral system and on voter turn-out. That is a call for the reform of our voting system as part of a much wider package of constitutional reform. That in itself is a subject for debate on its own. I believe that a fair voting system would do more than any other single measure to encourage voter registration and turn-out. A fair voting system would end the frustration of a wasted vote which serves only to increase a majority or, perhaps even worse, to elect nobody. It would mean that people were voting for what they wanted rather than, as is so often the case, against what they do not want. It would bring about in time a positive approach to voting and not a negative one. I suspect that in a few minutes we shall not be hearing from the Minister that the Government propose to adopt such a system; but until and unless such a system is adopted in this country, we shall be tinkering at the edges.
Dire predictions have been made that, as things continue, we could soon achieve the level of voter apathy seen in the United States of America. I do not believe that it is likely to be that bad, but it would surely add to alienation from the democratic process and disinterest in elected government which is evidenced in America today. As politicians we should be taking every measure to ensure that not only does that never happen in this country, but that it ceases to be predicted and that as a nation we achieve levels of registration and electoral participation that are the envy of every democratic country. In that way we shall have a healthy democracy for which all of us strive.
3.22 p.m.
Baroness Gould of Potternewton: My Lords, perhaps I may also begin by thanking my noble friend Lord Monkswell for introducing this brief but extremely important debate. It is important because, as has been said, it deals with people's fundamental democratic rights to register as an elector and to have the ability to vote. Often people do not realise that electoral registration is the key to voting. If one does not register one does not vote:
1106
not everyone is aware of that position. There is no doubt that an examination of the state of electoral registration in this country clearly identifies a largely unnoticed but serious democratic deficit.
As other noble Lords have said, the right to vote is absolutely fundamental. It should not be denied anybody either by administrative or even, may I say, for cost reasons. It is for most people the only opportunity to express a view on the performance of their public representatives or on their hopes or aspirations for the future.
I am sure that other noble Lords along with myself have had to deal with people who have not registered and who have suddenly recognised, close to polling day, that they cannot vote. The frustration and disillusion of those electors is heartbreaking on many occasions. It is very often because of ignorance or because they were in the wrong place on the qualifying date. We have to look at ways of making the system much simpler. We have to make sure that such people have the basic civil right to vote. I should only add in passing that, having voted in 11 general elections, not being able to vote in the next one is already causing me some anxiety. But I understand the reason for that; many people do not.
Earlier this year, I asked the Minister in a Written Question whether she accepted that 3 million eligible voters are missing from the electoral register and what efforts were being made to rectify that position. I did not pursue it at the time but I did not find her answer satisfactory. There was a disagreement over the figures. Furthermore, there was no suggestion that the procedures for encouraging people to vote would be improved. I shall not go into the dispute over the figures in detail—suffice it to say that after discussion in the OPCS, the Director of Statistics stated in November last year that the estimate of 3.4 million people currently missing from the electoral register in Britain was broadly correct. That means that, for many reasons, 5 per cent. of eligible voters have simply vanished from the register.
Even if we accept the 2 million figure cited by the Minister, that still shows an extremely disturbing trend. As my noble friend Lord Monkswell and the noble Lord, Lord Tope, said, we should be even more concerned if we break down those blanket figures. In greater London, it is estimated that 11.6 per cent. of eligible voters are missing from the register. Throughout the country, nearly 20 per cent. of ethnic minority electors are not on the register. The figure is 28 per cent. for those in private rented accommodation. Perhaps of most concern is the fact that an estimated 18 per cent. of 18 to 24 year-olds are not registering.
Along with other opposition parties, the Labour Party has been putting its concerns to the Home Office for some considerable time. In its report Agenda for Change, the Hansard Society reinforced that view when it stated:
"There is indeed considerable cause for anxiety".
It defines its concern not only from the figures but because of the widely differing efforts that are made when compiling the register. It concluded that there is a case for increasing the resources devoted to canvassing and advertising for registration, preferably through a system of central funding. I should like to know whether any central funding will be forthcoming.

1107
Those differing efforts were highlighted by two successful court cases taken by the Labour Party against Brent and Milton Keynes councils which, we felt, were not carrying out their statutory duty. The judge said that there was an obligation on returning officers to,
"make sufficient house to house enquiries"
and not merely the basic one visit a year.
There is no doubt that the electoral administration service is under funded and that too little is being spent on national promotional campaigns. I should like to ask the Government how they can justify spending more in 1992 on encouraging those residing overseas to register than on encouraging UK voters to register. However one looks at that—even if only numerically—there must be something wrong with that.
The legislative framework for establishing the electoral register was devised for a static population, not the moving population outlined by my noble friend Lord Monkswell. It is rooted in the pre-computer age. In the words of the Home Office Working Group report on Electoral Registration, to which other noble Lords have referred,
"the system for registering electors in the U.K. has remained largely unchanged since 1918".
The report identifies the key problem, illustrated by the noble Lord, Lord Tope, of the register being out of date by the time it is published and of it becoming progressively more inaccurate during the course of the year. Surely such a statement by officials required action. Unfortunately, the conclusions of the report do not go any way towards resolving the position.
Both the noble Lord, Lord Tope, and my noble friend Lord Monkswell referred to the question of the "rolling register". Although the working group discussed that in some detail, it felt that it could not be introduced because of the cost, which it estimated to be between £4 million and £12 million. In 1993–94, the Home Office campaign to encourage registration cost approximately £0.5 million. Over that period, £1.6 million was spent on the Citizen's Charter and £2 million on printing and updating the Parent's Charter. As it was clear that money was rightly available to ensure that people were informed of the public services that they should expect, I asked the Minister for a Citizen's Charter on electoral rights, but no such plans are afoot. I cannot imagine what greater public service there could be than ensuring that people have the right to vote. I hope that that decision can be reconsidered.
The working party calls for more detailed discussions on the rolling register. I ask the Minister whether that work has commenced some 15 months after the report was concluded. Another recommendation was that the cut-off point should be closer to election day. Again, I ask the Minister what action has been taken to progress that important recommendation. Having a date six and a half weeks before polling day, as we did at the last election, is far too restrictive. I ask also whether there will be changes in the procedures by which EU citizens can register, and whether that position has been re-examined in the light of the UK only achieving 0.72 per cent. of take-up in the Euro-elections, the lowest of all EU countries.
The noble Lord, Lord Tope, mentioned the subject of absent voting. The working group report on absent voting opens with the words that,
1108
"at the last general election there was considerable public dissatisfaction with the current provision for postal and proxy voting"
not least in respect of the number of absent voting irregularities, and notably the question of people not knowing whether they were voting by post or by proxy. While I appreciate that the group had to balance the need to simplify the system versus the importance of making fraud more difficult, it was disappointing that the simplification of the procedures and forms was not forthcoming and that changes in attestation were rejected.
I think also that the working group did not examine in detail—perhaps it did and the Minister will tell us—the causes of the fraud. There should be an examination of whether there is a correlation between the extension in proxy voting and the ability to commit fraud. The report came up with many suggestions. Again, I wonder how many of them have been followed through.
I have been involved, as I am sure have many other noble Lords, in helping the new democracies in east and central Europe and South Africa to develop their electoral roles and procedures. That experience, and the detailed process needed to ensure free and fair elections, confirmed to me the need for a radical overhaul of our own electoral practices. I would not suggest that in the main our elections are not free and fairly conducted, nor that, in principle, every citizen has not the right to vote. But there is a growing awareness that there are, for a number, barriers and obstacles that have to be overcome before they can exercise that right in practice.
There is growing unease among electors, politicians and electoral practitioners that modern election techniques are governed by outdated rules without proper regulation—laws that have become more complex as they have been tinkered with rather than substantial changes having been made. I firmly believe that it is time for there to be a review of our electoral system by a standing conference or some other means—a review not based on whether we can afford the changes, but on clear, democratic criteria. I hope that the Minister will give some indication that such a review is possible.
The Labour Party started that process four years ago when it set up a committee to look at electoral systems under the chairmanship of my noble friend Lord Plant, with a procedures group chaired by the late Lord Underhill. That section of the report made 37 recommendations, covering all aspects of election procedure, including things such as fixed Parliaments, dates and times of poll, and so on, not necessarily relevant to today's debate, but which I hope we can debate at some point in the future.
Perhaps the most important recommendation and that of the Hansard Society in Agenda for Change was the proposal for a single body—an electoral commission— which would be directly and solely responsible for all aspects of electoral administration. That view was supported by all the political parties and, interestingly, by the Home Affairs Select Committee in the other place in its report on the funding of political parties. Not only does the committee recommend that; it suggests that it should be set up as soon as possible.
The noble Lord, Lord Lester of Herne Hill, referred to the judgment given by Mr. Justice Dyson in the Literal Democrat case. He saw an electoral commission as being

1109
a means and a way of overcoming misrepresentation. Perhaps I may tell the Minister that if I dig deep into my memory I believe that there was a case in which the Conservative Party was also misrepresented. We must look at the whole question of the titles and ensure that people cannot put false names on their nomination papers and misrepresent people. Another fundamental issue is raised, which we do not have time to discuss today; it is the registration of political parties. If political parties were registered we should not have the difficulties that we have had to face over this misrepresentation.
I understand that such a proposition for an electoral commission has been rejected by the Home Office on the ground of cost. I should be delighted if the Minister told me that I am wrong about that. We must overcome the difficulties outlined today, the barriers for voting and the inadequacies in our system. Before the next election the Government have the opportunity, if not to deal with all aspects of procedure, at least to give a commitment of greater support to electoral registration officers in building their electoral registers and in providing considerably more funding for advertising and general publicity. In that way the upward trend of under-registration can be halted. I hope that the Minister will be able to tell us that such improvements are being progressed.
3.36 p.m.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I too thank the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, for initiating this important debate. The Government are by no means complacent about the electoral register. It is one of the most fundamental elements of our democracy that all, and only, those who are eligible to vote should be given every opportunity to do so.
Prime responsibility for effective registration lies with electoral registration officers. Although these officers are employed by local authorities they are not answerable to them for their performance. Nor are they answerable to the Home Office. They are answerable only to the courts for the efficient discharge of their duties. This independence is, I believe, crucial in ensuring that electoral registers are compiled in an impartial way.
I accept, of course, that the Home Office has a part to play as a facilitator in allowing electoral registration officers to achieve as comprehensive a register as possible. Before addressing the points which noble Lords have raised in this debate, I should first like to describe briefly what part the Government play in the process. Our three main contributions to that are publicity, research into best practice and the regular provision of guidance to electoral registration officers.
Each year the Government undertake a publicity campaign which is timed to coincide with the electoral registration canvass in the autumn. The annual budget for this campaign is about £600,000; indeed, last year nearly £700,000 was spent. We are keen to maximise the effect of this campaign and for the past two years we have undertaken television advertising which, research indicates, has proved to be a particularly effective means of communication.
1110
As well as reminding the general public of the registration canvass, we have taken care to target the advertisement to reach special groups such as young people, inner-city dwellers and members of ethnic groups, for all of whom registration is too low. We did this by means of placing the advertisement in selected slots on the cable and satellite channels, which market research indicated were most likely to be watched by these groups, as well as screening it on the main channels.
Research which we undertook after the campaign showed a significant general increase in awareness of electoral registration publicity from 27 per cent. to 57 per cent. and a notable increase in the proportion of young people understanding that they needed to take action to register from 22 per cent. to 41 per cent. for the 16–24 age group. This was a much higher increase in awareness than was achieved by means of posters, which had for a number of years been our main advertising medium.
Based on this evidence of success, we intend to produce a new television commercial for this year's campaign in order to keep the message fresh; and, once again, we intend to broadcast it in ways which will maximise the chances of its message getting across to under-registered groups.
The second contribution which the Home Office makes is to commission research every year into the practical methods which electoral registration officers have used to compile their registers. That is conducted on our behalf by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys, which sends a detailed questionnaire to all electoral registration officers. I am very pleased to say that the response rate to this questionnaire is very high—95 per cent. last year— showing that electoral registration officers are keen to contribute to the dissemination of best practice.
Much valuable information has emerged in the course of those annual research exercises, and the results are published in an annual booklet which is sent to all EROS. Research in previous years has demonstrated that there are several procedures which electoral registration officers can undertake in order to maximise the response they receive from households during the canvass. That knowledge was given to EROs as it became available, and there is growing evidence that increasing numbers of them are using those techniques. This year's questionnaire is now being prepared, and it will seek to refine further our knowledge of how those individual techniques may be combined, according to the particular circumstances of the local area, to increase still further a good response rate.
The third contribution from the Home Office which I mentioned was regular guidance. We have issued code of practice notes and advisory circulars of direct relevance to EROS, dealing with a wide variety of legal and practical matters. We continue to issue regular advisory circulars. Officials in the department are regularly telephoned by electoral registration staff for ad hoc advice.
That is, in broad terms, what the Home Office contributes directly to the system of electoral registration. Support is also given, of course, by the Department of the Environment in the form of the revenue support grant. Approximately £40 million is spent each year by local

1111
authorities on electoral registration, to which the non-hypothecated element of the revenue support grant contributes.
Perhaps I may say teasingly to the noble Baroness, Lady Gould of Potternewton, that she has hinted that we do not spend enough on advertising or on electoral registration. I wonder whether the Labour Party has plans to spend more on both!
I now turn to the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, who was kind enough to give me notice of the points that he would raise during the debate. I do not criticise the noble Baroness, Lady Gould, but she raised a large number of questions. If I do not answer them in the course of my speech and there is anything outstanding, I shall ensure that I give her a full reply in due course.
It has been suggested that, in order to evade the community charge, people sought to evade registration as electors, assuming that that would guarantee absence from the community charges register. However, the register of electors, although important, was merely one among a number of sources available to the community charges registration officer in compiling the community charges register. In particular, canvassing arrangements for the registers were separate. In practice, therefore, staying off the register of electors was likely only to deprive the person concerned of his or her right to vote; he would remain liable to pay the community charge and, if he has refused to give the information required of him by his ERO, he would also be liable to prosecution.
Any system of local taxation will be claimed as a disincentive to register. The council tax is levied only on property and not individuals. But it must be accepted that the right to vote carries with it also a duty to help fund services. Therefore, we have no plans to take any further action in that respect.
It is, of course, true that there is a gap between the annual registration canvass and the publication of the electoral register. The canvass asks about residence on 10th October in Great Britain and the register comes into force the following February. But the publication of the draft register in November is widely publicised and members of the public are encouraged to scrutinise the draft in order to check for errors and omissions. Certainly in my own areas we encourage local councillors and especially parish councillors, who know their communities very well, to assist in that process.
Corrections are possible until 16th December. It is, therefore, possible for anyone moving just before the qualifying date to be entered in the electoral register of his new area by taking advantage of the claims process during the draft register stage. It is also important to remember that, even if electors have not been registered in their new constituency by that means, they are not disfranchised. They can still vote in their old constituency, by using the provisions which exist for absent voting. In the light of that fact, we have no plans to alter the system.
I turn now to the points raised by the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, as regards access for the disabled at polling stations. Again, that is a most important point. For the disabled voter, the issue of first importance is that he or she should be provided with the necessary facilities to enable a vote to be made with proper regard to the provisions for propriety and, indeed, for secrecy.
1112
The Government take very seriously their responsibility towards disabled voters. We believe that the provisions that we have put in place to assist returning officers and councils to deliver their responsibilities are important and that they have been pretty effective in facilitating greater access to the electoral process for those citizens who have a physical or other disability.
Those arrangements include provision to assist councils with grants of up to 50 per cent. of the costs of providing temporary ramps to improve access to polling places where that would otherwise be difficult. The spending on that help has increased considerably since the last general election in 1992. More than £70,000 was given in grants in 1994, and the effect is, of course, cumulative. Ramps provided in 1992, 1993 and 1994 will continue to be available for subsequent elections. The Government are ready to meet any additional requests which may be made to them for these purposes by returning officers.
We accept, of course, that the responsibility to assist electors to register their vote does not stop there. A voter who has a disability, of whatever kind, may need some special arrangements or facilities in the polling station itself to help him or her.
The involvement of SCOPE and of the Royal National Institute for the Blind in the preparation of guidance material which is issued regularly to returning officers by the Home Office has, I know, helped considerably to improve facilities in many individual polling stations. The checklists provided in the guidance cover a wide range of factors which need to be taken into consideration when returning officers look at the arrangements in place. They have been instrumental in raising the awareness of administrators of the special needs of the disabled voter.
We recognise, however, that it has not proved possible to ensure that every polling place in every constituency offers the sort of access which we and the disabled would wish. It remains the Government's long-term objective that every polling place should be accessible to all voters. But it is important to remember that returning officers do not have access to their own dedicated buildings specifically designed for use at elections.
Councils must look for suitable premises which are already available and must look very closely at accessibility before designating a polling place. Indeed, I have to pay tribute to them, because I believe that they work very hard when looking for suitable places. They may not designate a place which is not accessible if there is a better alternative which would still meet the statutory test that it meets the reasonable requirements of all electors.
The Government believe that those are responsibilities which are properly placed at a local level on local representatives and administrators. It is at a local level that there is the best knowledge of local needs and of the measures which need to be taken and which can be taken to meet those needs. The Government will continue to support councils and local administrators with the necessary funds, advice and guidance to meet the needs of the disabled voter.
In one of his case studies, the noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, referred to the possibility of allowing people to turn up, register and vote all in one go. I have to say that

1113
I think that that would be a administrative nightmare for the registration officer. However, I believe that the noble Lord would understand that it would require instantly acceptable, unambiguous and verifiable forms of identification that we do not have as yet. I wonder whether there is a read-across with identity cards here. Certainly there would be a problem in preventing abuse.
Lord Monkswell: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for giving way. Perhaps I may advise her that the example I quoted concerned a state in America. It is my understanding that, if a resident went to the polling station with a neighbour who was on the register and could vouch for that person, that was an acceptable mechanism for registration and, on the basis of that registration, the resident could vote. I cannot believe that, with modern information technology that enables us to interrogate our bank accounts from some distance away and be paid money instantly, we cannot devise an electoral registration system that can do the necessary instantaneous checks.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I shall not be drawn to cite particular cases, but there are people who vouch for others who apply for inclusion on the electoral register when the application is not necessarily bona fide. Some cases are before the courts at this very moment.
In relation to the issue of absent voting and the timetable, I am aware that a number of people have expressed frustration at finding themselves unable to vote because they have missed the deadline for returning their applications for an absent vote. That point was made by a number of noble Lords. The current deadline is 13 working days before polling day. During the remaining time electoral staff must complete a great deal of work in checking and verifying claims and dispatching postal ballot papers. The Government have recently looked again to see whether there is scope for relaxing the timetable but we have not yet reached a firm view.
The levels of electoral registration have not for a number of years kept pace with increase in the estimated eligible population. That trend pre-dates the introduction of the community charge in England or Wales. However, as the table to which I shall refer indicates, 1992 saw the first increase in the proportion of eligible people registered since 1987. The latest return shows the largest number of electors registered. The percentages of the eligible population who registered from 1976 were as follows: 1976, 97.1 per cent.; 1981, 97.4 per cent.; 1982, 97.6 per cent.; 1983, 97.7 per cent.; 1984, 97.7 per cent.; 1985, 97.3 per cent.; 1986, 97.3 per cent.; 1987, 97.2 per cent.; 1988, 96.8 per cent.; 1989, 96.1 per cent.; 1990, 95.7 per cent.; 1991, 95.2 per cent.; 1992, 95.3 per cent.; 1993, 95 per cent.; and 1994, 95 per cent.
Looking at those figures—and I have had some fun playing around with them—there appears to be a peak at general elections and then a dropping away after general elections, as opposed to any link with the taxation system.
A straight comparison between the total number of electors registered and the OPCS revised estimate of the total resident population cannot take account of a
1114
number of hidden factors. For example, the electorate total contains much dead wood and legitimate duplication of names. A study of electoral registration in 1991 by Stephen Smith of the social survey division of the OPCS estimated that between 7.4 per cent. and 9 per cent. of people in private households in England and Wales eligible to vote at the time of the 1991 census were not on the electoral register. However, a few of those people would still have been on the register at an earlier address elsewhere and not identified. Furthermore, the resident population includes people who are not British, Commonwealth or Irish citizens and are ineligible for inclusion on the register. We believe that there are possibly over a million such people over voting age in the United Kingdom.
The noble Lord, Lord Tope, referred to weekend voting. At present, the only restriction on polling day is that it must be a working day. It is merely convention that polling days are on Thursdays. Under the law as it stands it is not possible to hold a parliamentary election at a weekend. I am not convinced absolutely, nor are all the political parties, that polling on a Saturday or Sunday would necessarily improve the turn-out. Many people choose weekends to go away and they would need to obtain a postal or proxy vote in much larger numbers. There are also a number of groups who would refuse on the grounds of religion or conscience to vote on Saturdays or Sundays. It would be wrong to disfranchise them for that reason.
The noble Lord, Lord Lester, referred to the celebrated case of the "Literal Democrat." It is an important issue which is receiving close attention. A meeting has been held recently between my officials and representatives of the main political parties to determine whether there was support for change to existing nomination procedures, and if so, whether there was consensus on any change which might be required. As the noble Lord may understand, it is difficult to get a consensus on such a difficult issue.
There is a consensus as regards dissatisfaction with the practice of wilfully misrepresenting a political party or another person. Three proposals received a degree of support at the meeting. First, a party logo could be introduced in addition to the candidate's name, address and description which are already included on the ballot paper. This would allow challenges to be made under existing copyright law. A second proposal was that existing legislation could be extended to make it an offence to make a false statement of description, as well as in relation to a candidate's personal character or conduct. Another proposal which received some support was the introduction of an additional stage in an election which would allow a draft statement of a candidate's nominations to be published and challenged. None of these proposals alone would be sufficient to prevent a recurrence of the Literal Democrat problem. However, my officials are currently preparing a paper examining the options in detail and a further meeting will be held with the political parties when that paper is published to discuss the options.
Lord Lester of Herne Hill: My Lords, I hope the noble Baroness will allow me to say that I am grateful for that answer. I take it that officials will be considering

1115
the laws in other jurisdictions referred to by the Divisional Court in the Literal Democrat case as a possible model for change.
Baroness Blotch: My Lords, I was going to say that it would be helpful, if people have ideas about what might work and what would eliminate this kind of wilful behaviour, to pass those on. We would of course be receptive to such ideas.
The noble Lord, Lord Tope, asked about the response of the working group. Ministers are currently considering the findings and conclusions of the report and therefore I am not able to say any more at the moment. With regard to the design of forms, that is kept under continuing review. Officials constantly consult administrators and indeed political parties. The registration form "A" is not a compulsory format and registration officers can, and indeed do, modify it within limits. I must say that some do it rather better than others.
The noble Lord, Lord Tope, also referred to selling the register. There are no plans to change current requirements on local authorities to sell the register. It is a public document and it would be impractical to restrict access by not selling it on. It is also worth recording that there is a mail preference scheme which allows people to opt out of receiving junk mail. We would encourage people to use that.
As regards the suggestion about ballot papers written in Braille, this has been advanced by a number of organisations representing visually handicapped voters.
1116
There are, of course, a number of difficulties. Braille ballot forms would inevitably need to be printed on different paper from that of the other ballot forms to accommodate both the Braille and the overprinting necessary for the counters to read them. In a small polling district the limited number of such votes would lead to an increased risk that the secrecy of the individual's vote could not be ensured. That is an important point to take into account.
The noble Baroness, Lady Gould of Potternewton, referred to the spending on overseas electors in 1992 being more than that spent on advertising in this country. Nothing was spent in 1992 on advertising for overseas electors. In fact, nothing at all has been spent since 1990 when money was spent on advertising the extended franchise from five to 20 years, but since that date nothing at all has been spent. The noble Baroness questioned central funding for registration. As I have already said, this exists through the revenue support grant and it is up to local authorities themselves to decide how much of that they wish to allocate to registration.
This has been an interesting and informative debate. I am sure that I have not covered every single point raised, but I can assure the House that the Government welcome the debate and the interest in the subject. I believe that we shall continue to have healthy and lively discussions with the political parties on such matters.
House adjourned for the Spring Bank Holiday at four o'clock.

  Korea: Division of Families
  Korea: Division of Families
  Abkhazia
  Abkhazia
  Lloyd's: Contribution to Balance of Payments
  Lloyd's: Contribution to Balance of Payments
  Sheep Dipping: Safety Guidance
  Sheep Dipping: Safety Guidance
  Industrial Tribunals: Access for the Physically Disabled
  Industrial Tribunals: Access for the Physically Disabled
  Magnox Power Stations: Decommissioning
  Magnox Power Stations: Decommissioning
  Dispensing Doctors: Suppliers' Discount
  Dispensing Doctors: Suppliers' Discount
  VE Day Celebrations
  VE Day Celebrations
  Crown Buildings in Scotland: Fire Certificates
  Crown Buildings in Scotland: Fire Certificates
  Church Buildings: Objections to Faculty Applications
  Church Buildings: Objections to Faculty Applications
  Churches Conservation Trust: Administration of DNH Grant
  Churches Conservation Trust: Administration of DNH Grant
  Redundant Churches: Preservation
  Redundant Churches: Preservation
  Leasehold Reform, Housing and Development Act 1993
  Leasehold Reform, Housing and Development Act 1993
  Packaging Waste: Producer Responsibility
  Packaging Waste: Producer Responsibility
  Homicides by Previously Convicted Murderers
  Homicides by Previously Convicted Murderers
  Immigration Act: Conditions of Detention
  Immigration Act: Conditions of Detention
  Local Prison Accommodation Statistics
  Local Prison Accommodation Statistics