Sitting of 26 March 2001

ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT AND THE REGIONS

  Light Dues
  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on light dues. [155949]

  Mr. Hill
  I am pleased to announce that the light dues rates will remain the same for 2001–02.

  Following four years of stability, the current rates were set in 1997 when charges were reduced by an average of 4.6 per cent. The General Lighthouse Authorities deserve

  £ million

  Programme

  1996–971

  2000–012

  Education Standards Fund

  46

  78

  New Deal for Schools capital3

  —

  450

  Health programmes

  24

  21

  New Deal for Communities3

  —

  120

  Air Quality and Smoke Control Supplementary Credit Approvals

  3

  3

  Estates renewal

  30

  81

  Estate Action

  252

  68

  Land reclamation

  51

  6

  Crime Fighting Fund and schools intervention3

  —

  48

  PFI credits for joined up schemes3

  —

  30

  Invest to Save Budget3

  —

  39

  Capital Modernisation Fund3

  —

  340

  European Structural Funds4

  116

  212

  Single Regeneration Budget (Challenge Fund)/SRB5

  265

  814

  City Challenge6

  224

  —

  DCMS/Wolfson Public Libraries Challenge Fund3

  —

  2

  Combined Conservation Area Partnership Schemes and Heritage Economic Regeneration Scheme

  12

  5

  Innovative transport project3

  —

  1

  Rural Bus Challenge3

  —

  20

  Total

  1,023

  2,338

  1 Actual outturn

  2 Provisional

  3 Programmes did not exist in 1996–97

  4 Outturn for both years

  5 In the SRB, local regeneration partnerships, which normally include local authority partners, were able to bid for resources under individual bidding rounds (1–6)

  6 Programme ended in 1998.

  In addition £18.5 million has been allocated to fund the development of new and the ex tension of existing neighbourhood warden schemes.

  Explosion (Sandhurst, Gloucestershire)
  Mr. Laurence Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions when he expects to receive the(a) next and (b) final reports from the (i) Environment Agency and (ii) Health and Safety Executive, following the explosion at Sandhurst, Gloucestershire; and if he will make a statement. [153747]
  424W
  credit for their efforts in trying to maximise efficiency while keeping costs down.

  We will consult the shipping industry on the current charging regime later this year, to discuss where there can be further savings and improvements.

  Local Government Finance
  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will make a statement on Government policy on competitive bidding for funds by local councils on specific projects; and how much level of public expenditure was allocated to such arrangements in(a) 1996–97 and (b) 2000–01. [153801]

  Ms Armstrong
  The vast majority of Government support to local authorities is provided as general support. Competitive bidding for funds can play a part in bringing forward local proposals for specific projects. Figures for that part of Government support allocated by competitive bidding, as opposed to provision through a standard allocation process, on specific projects for which local authorities are able to bid, are given in the table.

  Mr. Meacher
  [holding answer 15 March 2001]Three reports from the Environment Agency and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) have been received and placed in the Library of the House:

  1. Interim report of the joint investigation by the Agency and HSE under the Control of Major Accident Hazards (COMAH) Regulations. The possible contravention of waste management controls is also being covered by this investigation;

  2. Final report of the quality assurance review of the Agency's regulatory actions; and

  3. Final report of the review carried out by HSE as part of its major incident handling.

  425W
  The final report of the joint investigation (Report One) will be split into two parts. Part 1 will report on the COMAH investigation into the cause of the fire and will be submitted to the European Commission by 12 April. It will not include decisions on prosecution. Part 2 will report on the Agency's and HSE's views on liability and prosecution of the operator. In the light of Counsel's advice, the Agency advise that they now expect Part 2 to be completed and submitted to Ministers by late summer. A progress report, providing an indication of possible breaches of the waste controls, will be submitted to Ministers by 30 April.

  Crash Barriers
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what the specifications for use are of(a) corrugated steel crash barriers and (b) concrete crash barriers on (i) motorways and (ii) trunk roads; and what criteria were used in determining the specifications. [154472]

  Mr. Hill
  I have asked the Chief Executive of the Highways Agency, Tim Matthews, to write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from John Kerman to Mr. David Amess, dated 26 March 2001:

  CRASH BARRIERS

  The Transport Minister, Keith Hill, has asked Tim Matthews, Chief Executive of the Highways Agency to reply to your recent Parliamentary question concerning specifications and criteria for crash barriers. I am replying in the absence of Tim Matthews.

  The specifications for corrugated steel and concrete crash barriers are given in the Manual of Contract Documents for Highway Works, Volume 1 Specification for Highway Works. Additional information is given in the Manual of Contract Documents for Highway Works, Volume 3 Highway Construction Details (Section 2). No distinction is made between the use of steel and concrete for normal containment on motorways and trunk roads.

  You have also asked what criteria are used in determining their specification. There are two steps used to determine the criteria for the use of safety barriers.

  The first step is to consider what level of protection is appropriate for the specific conditions on the road concerned. In most situations this would require a normal containment safety harrier, defined as being able to contain and safely redirect a 1.5 tonne car travelling at 110 kph (70 mph) and impacting at an angle of 20°. This is equivalent to an impact from a family size saloon travelling at the maximum legal speed on a motorway under normal conditions. This is an internationally recognised standard used on many motorways and A class roads throughout Europe.

  The second step is to consider the need to refine the general specification to take into account any special roadside features or conditions that might: limit the amount of deflection provided by the barrier; require a higher level of protection; or involve environmental and aesthetic considerations. Guidance on such matters is given in the Highways Agency's design standard TD 19/85 "Safety fences and barriers".

  Copies of the documents referred to are held in the House of Commons library.

  If you would like any further information about this matter, please contact Brian Hill, in Room 4/30, St Christopher House, Southwark Street, London, SE1 OTE (telephone 020 7921 4936).

  Mobile Phone Masts
  Mr. Linton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what advice he has given local planning authorities on applications to erect mobile phone masts in residential areas. [154833]
  426W
  Mr. Raynsford
  Government planning policy for telecommunications is set out in Planning Policy Guidance note 8 (revised): Telecommunications and the Department's Circular 4–99 "Planning for Telecommunications".

  I wrote to Council leaders in June 2000 to explain the action the Government had in hand to take forward the planning recommendations of the Stewart report ("Mobile Phones and Health") published in May 2000. This letter said that the Stewart report had concluded that
  "the balance of evidence indicates that there is no general risk to the health of people living near to base stations on the basis that exposures are expected to be small fractions of the guidelines. However, there can be indirect adverse effects on their well-being in some cases".
  Gaps in scientific knowledge led the Stewart report to recommend a precautionary approach comprising a series of specific measures. The report did not recommend a ban on masts in schools, hospitals or residential areas. The Government accepted the recommended precautionary approach and are taking forward a range of precautionary actions.

  In response to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Basildon (Angela Smith), I announced on 16 March 2001,Official Report, columns 748–51W, a series of important changes to the planning system for telecommunications masts which the Government intend to make. These will significantly strengthen the current arrangements. On that day, I wrote to the Leaders of all Councils in England to advise them of the proposed changes. Copies of the letter were sent to Chief Planning Officers. I also wrote in similar terms to all hon. Members for constituencies in England.

  Airports
  Mr. Horam
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if he will list the sites identified by Scott Wilson in the work on the South East Regional Airports Study as being suitable for development as airports. [155424]

  Mr. Robert Ainsworth
  The work undertaken by Scott Wilson identified a significant number of sites which might be suitable for development either as a very large new airport or to serve particular sectors, such as air cargo. From that list Ministers selected a small number of options for further study and appraisal, alongside options for the development of existing major airports. We will proceed through successive sifts to narrow down these options to a final shortlist, on which there will be a full public consultation before Ministers come to conclusions.

  In advance of the consultation, it would be premature to comment on the status of any specific option. Releasing information at this stage, in advance of final options, could result in unnecessary and lengthy blight, as well as multiplying uncertainty and anxiety. This approach is consistent with my Department's Code of Practice on the Dissemination of Information during Major Infrastructure Developments.

  Compulsory Purchase
  Mr. Kidney
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what conclusions he has reached from his Department's review of existing law relating to compulsory purchase. [155421]
  427W
  Mr. Raynsford
  The Urban White Paper ("Our Towns and Cities: the Future". Cmnd 4911), published last November, set out our approach in response to the recommendations of the Advisory Group, which conducted a review of the laws and procedures relating to compulsory purchase and compensation, published in July last year. New guidance on the operation of the system will be available in the next few months, and the Law Commission will shortly publish a preliminary scoping study, which they have undertaken at the Department's request, of ways of simplifying, consolidating and codifying the law. Consideration is being given to proposals for changes to the law made by the Advisory Committee and in responses to their report. In doing this we are taking account of the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and it may be necessary to await the outcome of legal challenges to the system currently before the courts before further proposals for changes to the law can be put forward.

  Foot and Mouth
  Mr. Luff
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions when he will conclude his consideration of the further business rate relief he will provide to those indirectly affected by foot and mouth disease; and if this relief will be extended to the self-catering holiday accommodation sector. [155250]

  Mr. Meacher
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]As I indicated in my statement to the House on 20 March, the Government will underwrite 95 per cent. of local authority costs in offering discretionary hardship rate relief to businesses badly affected by foot and mouth disease.

  Any type of businesses with a rateable value of £12,000 or less in rural local authority districts, which adopt the scheme, will be eligible for a reduction of up to £1,290 for a three month period, provided they can show that they have suffered serious economic loss through the impact of foot and mouth disease. For some businesses this could amount to all of their rate bill for the period in question. The scheme will allow impacts beyond three months to be kept under review.

  Businesses with properties above £12,000 rateable value level affected by Foot and Mouth disease will be eligible to benefit from existing loca1 authority hardship relief provisions in which Government meet 75 per cent. of the cost.

  The scheme will be available in the rural local authorities as set out in the list.

  Rural Local Authorities

  For rural rate relief announcement 22 March 2001

  North East

  Alnwick

  Berwick-upon-Tweed

  Castle Morpeth

  Derwentside

  Durham

  Easington

  Redcar and Cleveland

  Sedgefield

  Teesdale

  Tynedale

  Wear Valley

  428W
  North West

  Allerdale

  Carlisle

  Chester

  Congleton

  Copeland

  Crewe and Nantwich

  Eden

  Ellesmere Port and Neston

  Lancaster

  Pendle

  Ribble Valley

  South Lakeland

  Vale Royal

  Wyre

  Yorkshire and the Humber

  Craven

  East Riding of Yorkshire UA

  Hambleton

  Harrogate

  North Lincolnshire UA

  Richmondshire

  Ryedale

  Scarborough

  Selby

  East Midlands

  Bassetlaw

  Boston

  Daventry

  Derbyshire Dales

  East Lindsey

  East Northamptonshire

  Harborough

  High Peak

  Hinckley and Bosworth

  Melton

  Newark and Sherwood

  North Kesteven

  North West Leicestershire

  Rushcliffe

  Rutland UA

  South Derbyshire

  South Holland

  South Kesteven

  South Northamptonshire

  West Lindsey

  West Midlands

  Bridgnorth

  East Staffordshire

  Herefordshire UA

  429W

  Malvern Hills

  North Shropshire

  North Warwickshire

  Oswestry

  Shrewsbury and Atcham

  South Shropshire

  South Staffordshire

  Staffordshire Moorlands

  Stratford-on-Avon

  Wychavon

  East

  Babergh

  Braintree

  Breckland

  Broadland

  East Cambridgeshire

  East Hertfordshire

  Fenland

  Forest Heath

  Huntingdonshire

  Kings Lynn and West Norfolk

  Maldon

  Mid Bedfordshire

  Mid Suffolk

  North Norfolk

  South Bedfordshire

  South Cambridgeshire

  South Norfolk

  St. Edmundsbury

  Suffolk Coastal

  Tendring

  Uttlesford

  Waveney

  South East

  Arun

  Ashford

  Aylesbury Vale

  Canterbury

  Cherwell

  Chichester

  Chiltern

  Dover

  East Hampshire

  Horsham

  Isle of Wight UA

  Lewes

  Maidstone

  430W

  Mid Sussex

  New Forest

  Rother

  Sevenoaks

  Shepway

  South Oxfordshire

  Tandridge

  Test Valley

  Thanet

  Tonbridge and Malling

  Tunbridge Wells

  Vale of White Horse

  Waverley

  Wealden

  West Berkshire UA (Newbury)

  West Oxfordshire

  Winchester

  Wycombe

  South West

  Caradon

  Carrick

  Cotswold

  East Devon

  East Dorset

  Forest of Dean

  Isles of Scilly

  Kennet

  Kerrier

  Mendip

  Mid Devon

  North Cornwall

  North Devon

  North Dorset

  North Wiltshire

  Penwith

  Purbeck

  Restormel

  Salisbury

  Sedgemoor

  South Hams

  South Somerset

  Stroud

  Taunton Deane

  Teignbridge

  Tewkesbury

  Torridge

  West Devon

  West Dorset

  West Somerset

  West Wiltshire.

  Mr. Webb
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions which parts of South Gloucestershire Unitary Authority come within the scope of the proposed measures to assist rural areas with the consequences of foot and mouth disease set out in his oral statement of 20 March. [155304]
  431W
  Mr. Meacher
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]Wherever they are located, rural businesses experiencing financial hardship as a consequence of foot and mouth disease will benefit from the Government's commitment to give them sympathetic treatment on tax and other payments as set out in my statement of 20 March 2001,Official Report, column 191. The increase from 75 per cent. to 95 per cent. in the contribution to the cost of rate relief is being made available to the most rural authorities. South Gloucestershire is not one of these.

  Quality Mark Scheme
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (1) what has been the cost to date of introducing and operating the Quality Mark scheme in the pilot areas; [154854]

  (2) how many builders and allied traders have (a) applied to join and (b) joined the Quality Mark scheme; [154856]

  (3) what estimate his Department has made of the annual cost of operating the Quality Mark scheme nationally; [154855]

  (4) what plans he has to extend the pilot Quality Mark scheme to the rest of the country. [154857]

  Mr. Raynsford
  In total the Department has paid out just over £700,000 to support the development of the Quality Mark scheme and its implementation in the two pilot areas of Birmingham and Somerset. Likely costs for running a national scheme will be identified as part of the review of the pilot.

  Some 280 builders and allied traders are now pursuing the Quality Mark, and nine have already achieved it.

  The Government will carry out a review of the pilot scheme towards the end of the year, following which a decision will be made about extending the scheme to the rest of the country.

  I refer the hon. Member to my reply of 28 February 2001, Official Report, column 688W, to my hon. Friend the Member for Edmonton (Mr. Love).

  Mr. Grieve
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what assessment has been made of the quantity and effect of emissions into the air of dioxins resulting from the burning of coal slag, railway sleepers and the other materials being used for the incineration of animals culled for the purpose of eradicating foot and mouth disease; and if he will make a statement. [155435]

  Mr. Meacher
  My Department has asked the National Environmental Technology Centre of AEA Technology to calculate amounts of air pollutants, including dioxins, particles (as PM10) and nitrogen oxides, released from the burning of carcases and fuels on the pyres. At present, it is estimated that the amount of dioxins released from the burning on pyres to date is about 10–20g. This is equivalent to about 3–6 per cent. of the total annual emissions of dioxins in the UK. This is roughly equivalent to the amount released annually from domestic burning of coal and wood and is less than one third the amount
  432W
  released annually from accidental fires and other open burning sources. I will write to the hon. Member with more accurate figures as they become available.

  Infected animals must be killed quickly to prevent the further spreading of the disease and their carcases have to be destroyed. Burning on farms, although not without its pollutant emissions, is the quickest and most appropriate method to dispose of the large number of carcases, at present. We are investigating other methods of disposal, such as rendering, landfill and burial on farms, where appropriate. We will also continue to assess the levels of emissions from the pyres, including dioxin levels.

  Housing Tenure
  Liz Blackman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions what plans he has to review the law relating to housing tenure. [155960]

  Mr. Raynsford
  Following clearance by the Lord Chancellor, the Law Commission has today been asked to undertake a major review of the law surrounding housing tenure in both the social and private rented housing sectors. The referral is in response to a Law Commission paper ("Reform of Housing Law: A Scoping Study Paper") which the Commission has also published today. Terms of reference reflecting the ground covered by the Scoping Paper are:"To consider the law relating to the existing forms of housing tenancies in the rented sector and their creation, terms and termination, with a view to its simplification and reform; and in particular to review the law on:

  (1) the forms of housing tenancy let by:

  (a) local authorities and other social landlords;

  (b) private landlords,

  with a view to providing a simple and flexible statutory regime for both the social and the private housing sectors;

  (2) the remedies available in respect of harassment and unlawful eviction;

  (3) tenants' statutory rights of succession; and

  (4) such other aspects of housing law as may be agreed between the Law Commission, the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, and the Lord Chancellor's Department."

  Today's referral asks the Law Commission to undertake work on the ground covered by item (1) of the terms of reference and which the Commission's Scoping Paper refers to as the "first phase" of work. This in itself represents a substantial piece of work on which the Commission has undertaken to deliver a report and draft Housing Bill by July 2003. A further referral covering items (2) and (3) of the terms of reference (referred to in the Scoping Paper as the "second phase" of work) will be considered in the light of progress on first phase work.

  The Law Commission's scoping paper represents an excellent piece of work. It highlights a long overdue need for a simpler, less complex framework for housing tenure law—one that will be more transparent and better understood by landlords and tenants alike; one that will enable social landlords to make better use of their stock; and one that will facilitate greater choice and diversity in the housing sector along with tenant participation.

  We also intend to look to the review as the sensible vehicle within which to take forward our intention, announced in the Housing Policy Statement ("Quality and

  433W
  Choice: A decent home for all—The Way forward for Housing") to look at a single form of tenure for the social housing sector and other tenure flexibilities. The Law Commission's continued readiness to work with DETR and other key housing interests, and to involve a wider range of landlord and tenant interests in taking forward this substantial piece of work will ensure an inclusive approach.

  I am arranging for a copy of the Law Commission's Scoping Paper to be placed in the Library of the House.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

  Recycling
  Ms Walley
  To ask the Chairman of the Administration Committee if she will introduce an audited scheme to recycle House waste paper. [155945]

  Mrs. Roe
  I understand that the Serjeant at Arms is in the process of introducing a paper recycling scheme. The first phase will be implemented in Portcullis House by the end of May this year.

SOLICITOR-GENERAL

  Departmental Policies
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Solicitor-General if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Ceredigion constituency, the effects on Ceredigion of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154971]

  The Solicitor-General
  In 1999, in line with national policy, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), in liaison with the Dyfed Powys police and the magistrates court, introduced procedures based upon the Narey proposals. All defendants charged with a criminal offence where a guilty plea is anticipated now make their first appearance before the Cardigan or Aberystwyth magistrates within three working days of charge, or eight days if charged after the cut-off point for that court for that week.

  In the last eight months, over half of defendants have had their cases finalised at the first court hearing. Since October 2000, the prosecution of Persistent Youth Offenders has been subject to a fast-track procedure. Fourteen defendants in Ceredigion have been dealt with to date under this procedure. These cases have been finalised in an average of 56 days over the five months to February 2001.

  In January 2001, the provisions of section 51 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 came into force. Seven defendants within Ceredigion charged with indictable-only offences have been sent directly to the Crown court in Swansea. All these changes illustrate the Government's successful policy of speeding up the criminal justice system.

  In May 2001, CPS Dyfed Powys will be altering its structure in line with the proposals of the Glidewell review. This will enable the CPS to place greater emphasis on the more serious crime cases in the Crown courts in Swansea, Carmarthen, and Haverfordwest.
  434W
  Since May 1997, the CPS has successfully prosecuted a number of significant cases arising in the Ceredigion area. In 1998–99 police officers targeted heroin dealers in Aberystwyth in an operation that led to the arrest and successful prosecution of 12 heroin dealers in Aberystwyth. This had an important deterrent effect on further drug offences in Aberystwyth.

  In 2000, the Dyfed Powys CPS also dealt with a murder case involving an elderly defendant who had allegedly murdered his wife. The defendant claimed that he had killed his wife as part of a suicide pact. After an extensive inquiry the prosecution accepted a guilty plea to manslaughter accepting the defendant's version of events. The case was dealt with by leading counsel and a higher court advocate from the Dyfed Powys CPS office.

  Actions and policies of the Treasury Solicitor's Department and the Serious Fraud Office do not directly affect the Ceredigion constituency.

  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Solicitor-General (1) if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Caernarfon constituency, the effects on Caernarfon of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997; [154972]

  (2) if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Meirionnydd Nant Conwy constituency, the effects on Meirionnydd Nant Conwy of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997; [154973]

  (3) if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Ynys MÔn constituency, the effects on Ynys MÔn of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154970]

  The Solicitor-General
  The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), in liaison with the police and the magistrates courts, introduced procedures based upon the Narey proposals for he Central and Western Divisions of the North Wales Police Area, which includes these constituencies. All defendants now charged with a criminal offence make their first appearance before a magistrates court within one week and, in some cases, within 96 hours of being charged. Current figures indicate that around 40 per cent. of defendants now have their cases finalised at that first hearing. On 1 July 2000, the CPS North Wales Area office, which has responsibility for prosecutions in these three constituencies, altered its structures in line with the proposals contained in the Glidewell report. This enabled the CPS to place greater emphasis on more serious crime. More recently, as a further development of a proposal in the Glidewell report, the CPS have established a co-located Criminal Justice Unit within the Divisional Police Headquarters at Caernarfon. Closer links between the CPS and police in this area will further enhance the progress of cases into and through the magistrates courts.

  CPS North Wales is also piloting Statutory Time Limits in youth cases and has worked together with the other agencies locally to speed up youth justice, particularly cases involving persistent young offenders. This has resulted in cases being disposed of within 71 days in two quarters of the last year. Since May 1997, the Crown Prosecution Service has reduced the time taken to finalise prosecutions arising in the Caernarfon, Meirionnydd Nant Conwy and Ynys MÔn areas, especially cases involving

  435W
  youth offenders. All these changes illustrate the Government's successful policy in speeding up the criminal justice system.

  CPS North Wales are also piloting the Victim Notification arrangements. They have established a Victim Information Bureau at their headquarters at Wrexham, which provides detailed explanations to victims when cases are dropped or charges substantially amended. Meetings are also offered to victims in certain cases.

  Action and policies of the Treasury Solicitor's Department and the Serious Fraud Office do not directly affect the Caernarfon, Meirionnydd Nant Conwy and Ynys MÔn constituencies.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Motor Industry
  Mr. Stevenson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many complaints were received by the Director General of Fair Trading of unfair practice by insurance company-owned motor industry vehicle body repair shops in 2000. [155141]

  Dr. Howells
  The Director General of Fair Trading received six complaints of unfair practice by insurance company-owned motor industry vehicle body repair shops in 2000.

  Mr. Stevenson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on his policy towards competition in the UK motor vehicle body repair industry; and if he will make a statement. [155139]

  Dr. Howells
  Under UK competition law, it is the responsibility of the Director General of Fair Trading to monitor competition in the UK motor vehicle body repair industry.

  Gas and Electricity Licences
  Ms Buck
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what plans he has to publish the standard licence conditions for gas and electricity licences. [155950]

  Mr. Hain
  The final draft of the standard licence conditions for gas and electricity have been published today. Following the two consultations which were undertaken last year, I am inviting final comments— particularly on drafting—from all interested parties by the end of April.

  It is currently planned that the standard licence conditions should be formally determined in May, and should come into effect shortly afterwards.

  Business Investment (London)
  Ms Harman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what total new investment was in business in London in(a) 1996 and (b) the most recent year for which figures are available. [154778]

  Mr. Caborn
  Regional statistics on business investment are currently available for manufacturing only. The Office for National Statistics' 'Annual Business Inquiry' shows that in 1996 business investment in 436W
  London was £1.16 billion. In 1997 (the most recent year for which information is available) investment in London was £1.3 billion.

  ONS plan to extend coverage to include the service sector later this year.

  Sub-post Office Closures
  Mr. Jenkin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many sub-post offices have closed in each quarter since 1990 in Essex; and how many have been newly established. [151459]

  Mr. Alan Johnson
  [holding answer 26 February 2001]I understand from the Post Office that the information requested is not available, as data on post office closures are not maintained on a county basis.

  Commodity and Service Prices
  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry in what form his Department maintains records of prices of commodities and services(a) in different regions of the United Kingdom, (b) in urban and rural areas, (c) comparatively with other EU member states and (d) in the Republic of Ireland; and if he will list those categories of goods and services for which price information is monitored. [154560]

  Dr. Howells
  The Department collects information on energy prices as set out; however it does not routinely collect information on the prices of other commodities or services.

  Petroleum product prices

  Average UK prices of lead replacement petrol, premium unleaded petrol, ultra low sulphur diesel, standard grade burning oil and gas oil are collected on a weekly basis by the Department. These figures are published by the European Commission in its weekly "Oil Bulletin" which contains comparable prices for the other EU member states. Average prices are also collected on a monthly basis for these fuels and for super-unleaded petrol. These are also published in the "Oil Bulletin", as well as in the DTI monthly publication "Energy Trends" and in the annual "Digest of UK Energy Statistics".

  Industrial energy prices

  The DTI collects average prices for fuel purchased by manufacturing industry in Great Britain on a quarterly basis. These figures are published in "Energy Trends" and in the annual "Digest of UK Energy Statistics". Average prices are published for gas, electricity, coal, heavy fuel oil and gas oil, broken down by size of consumer. The average prices for medium fuel oil, liquefied petroleum gases and hard coke are also published, however these are not broken down by size of consumer. The data are not analysed on a regional basis.

  Certain elements of these data are also provided to the International Energy Agency (IEA) for inclusion in their publication "Energy Prices and Taxes" where information on prices paid by industry in other OECD countries is presented.

  The DTI also collects data on industrial prices for gas and electricity for Eurostat (the Statistical Office of the European Communities), as part of the directive on transparency of gas and electricity prices. The figures are published by Eurostat in their series "Statistics in Focus".

  437W
  The data are for certain sizes of consumers in specific towns in the UK and also for the UK as a whole. Comparable data for other EU member states are presented in the publication.

  Household energy prices

  Average household prices for gas and electricity are collected on a regional basis and on a UK basis. For electricity, the regions follow those of the regional electricity distribution companies. For gas, the regions follow those of Transco's local distribution zones. These figures are published in the annual "Digest of UK Energy Statistics".

  Information on household electricity and gas prices for different consumption levels and in different towns in the UK is published in the Eurostat series "Statistical in Focus". Comparable data for other EU member states are presented in the publication.

  Prices paid by households for other fuels are collected by the Office for National Statistics as part of the Retail Prices Index.

  Non-energy prices

  With the exception of energy prices, the Department does not routinely collect information on the prices of commodities, such as bread, or services, although from time to time prices may be collected as part of an individual investigation initiated by the Department. Most regular collection of price information in the UK is carried out by the Office for National Statistics. The main domestic measure of inflation in the UK is the Retail Prices Index (RPI) which includes 130,000 separate price quotations in compiling the index each month. The European Union member states compile the Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices (HCIP) which provides similar information to the RPI across the member states of the EU. Average UK prices based on the RPI price collection are published each month for certain food items, petrol, tobacco and alcohol.

  Eurostat (the Statistical Office of the European Communities) co-ordinate the European Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) exercise which compares prices of goods and services in each of the 15 countries in the European Union, and several other European countries. Results are published annually for groups of commodities and services, in the form of purchasing power parities expressed in national currencies and price level indices compared against the EU average. Detailed average prices for individual goods or services are confidential and are not published. No regional analyses for the RPI, HCIP or PPP are available.

  Comic Relief (Telephone Calls)
  Mr. Jim Murphy
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what plans he has to review the regulations governing the charging by telecommunications companies for telephone calls to charity events, with particular reference to Comic Relief. [155258]

  Ms Hewitt
  I understand that BT has made substantial donations to charity to reflect the increase in its traffic revenues generated by calls to Comic Relief. While this is a matter for the company, I welcome BT's generosity.

  Sudan
  Mr. Rowe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how much ECGD cover was given for exports by British companies to Sudan in the past two years. [154906]

  Mr. Caborn
  None.

  Dr. Tonge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many export credits have been granted by the UK Government for British companies exporting to Sudan in each of the last three years; and if he will list the(a) value of each export credit and (b) companies to which they were granted. [155145]

  Mr. Caborn
  No export credit facilities have been provided by ECGD for exports to the Sudan during the last three years.

  Dr. Tonge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what advice the UK Ambassador in Khartoum gives to UK(a) companies considering investment in Sudan and (b) oil companies investing in Sudan. [155136]

  Mr. Caborn
  The British Embassy in Khartoum provides a full range of Trade Partner UK services including frank and comprehensive advice about doing business, including the political climate.

  Dr. Tonge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what recent discussions he has had with UK companies(a) operating and (b) considering operating in Sudan. [155149]

  Mr. Caborn
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has not recently met with any UK companies to discuss Sudan or related issues.

  Postal Services Act
  Mr. Anthony D. Wright
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when the remaining provisions of the Postal Services Act 2000 will come into force; and if he will make a statement. [155962]

  Mr. Alan Johnson
  I have now made a further Commencement Order to bring into force by today the remaining major provisions of the Postal Services Act 2000. The order includes a number of provisions smoothing the transition to the new statutory framework, and applying the schemes under which the Post Office has traditionally carried out its postal and postal order business to the future Post Office company and its subsidiaries. The only provisions of the new Act still to be commenced are a few repeals of the Post Office Act 1969 which are being retained until the Post Office is dissolved in accordance the new Act.

  The new Act will thus became fully operational today and the business of the Post Office has been transferred to the company nominated as the Post Office company, ie Consignia Holdings plc. The operational functions of the Post Office company will be carried out by its wholly owned subsidiary, Consignia plc.

  In accordance with Part II of the Act, the Postal Services Commission has granted a licence to Consignia plc permitting it to provide the postal services which are restricted under section 6 of the Act, and requiring it to provide a universal postal service throughout the whole of the United Kingdom at a uniform tariff. Consignia plc

  439W
  (registered number 4138203 of 148 Old Street, London EC1V 9HQ) is thus a universal service provider for the purposes of the Postal Services Act 2000.

  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry has confirmed the appointment of the current members of the Post Office as the initial directors of the Post Office company and the directors of Consignia plc.

  The implementation of the Act and the issuing of the licence heralds the completion of the reform programme described in July 1999 in the Post Office Reform White Paper and sets in place a Post Office company with the greater commercial freedom that it needs to meet the challenges of the changing postal markets, and provides the framework in which postal users can look forward to the evolution of the modern and effective postal services that are essential for the business and social life of the nation in the 21st century.

  Climate Change Levy
  Mr. Heathcoat-Amory
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if the climate change levy rebates have been cleared by the EU Commission under the state aids provisions; and if he will make a statement. [149887]

  Mr. Timms
  I have been asked to reply.

  The Government are seeking approval under EU state aids rules for 80 per cent. discounts from the climate change levy for energy-intensive industries and businesses that negotiate agreements to improve energy-efficiency. An amended version of the EU state aids guidelines for environmental measures was published recently, and the Government are confident that these discounts and negotiated agreements will be approved as falling within the scope of these guidelines.

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

  Departmental Report
  Mr. McFall
  To ask the Secretary of State for International Development when she plans to publish the 2001 Departmental report for her Department. [155632]

  Clare Short
  The Departmental report 2001 for my Department is published today. It looks back at a year in which considerable progress was made in strengthening international efforts to reduce poverty: 22 countries have now qualified for HIPC debt relief; increasing numbers of poor countries are producing comprehensive poverty reduction strategies; and the European Union has agreed to duty-free access for all imports except arms from least developed countries. As this report shows, the Department for International Development is a driving force behind these and many other efforts to reduce global poverty.

  This year's report provides a more detailed assessment of progress against the International Development targets broken down by region. The report also shows progress in meeting the objectives set in our 1998 Public Service Agreement which are based on the performance of our top 30 partners in achieving the International Development targets. The 2000 Spending Round agreed substantial additional resources to enhance our existing efforts. Our plans for allocation of these resources are set out in the report.

  Sudan
  Mr. Rowe
  To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what mechanisms are in place to ensure that the aid Britain gives to Sudan reaches areas in the south and in the Nuba Mountains. [154905]

  Clare Short
  We meet urgent humanitarian demands in Sudan wherever they arise. The mechanisms in place are the standard reporting and accountability procedures that are part of our funding agreements with international non-government organisations and United Nations agencies. Our officer at the British Embassy in Khartoum regularly monitors and reports on progress and the impact of assistance provided. DFID staff also regularly visit to monitor our support and assess humanitarian needs. In addition, the Embassy regularly presses the Government of Sudan for access to all areas of need by the organisations and UN agencies we support.

  Dr. Tonge
  To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent discussions her Department has had with the(a) Department of Trade and Industry and (b) Foreign and Commonwealth Office concerning the role of UK companies' investment in Sudan. [155137]

  Clare Short
  We have regular contacts with other Government Departments about the impact of investment on development in Sudan.

  Mr. Rowe
  To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much aid the Government gives to Sudan. [154904]

  Clare Short
  Our support to Sudan is designed to meet urgent humanitarian needs. A small proportion is also spent on support for civil society and on international and grass roots efforts to build peace.

  In the last five years the UK has provided the following amounts of aid to Sudan:

  £000

  1995–96

  5,996

  1996–97

  4,534

  1997–98

  5,677

  1998–99

  24,201

  1999–2000

  3,231

PRIME MINISTER

  Ministerial Visits
  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  To ask the Prime Minister what authority is necessary for Ministers to take(a) a spouse and (b) a partner on an overseas visit paid out of public funds; and how many such visits have taken place, and by which Ministers, since May 1997. [143162]

  The Prime Minister
  Ministers require my approval if they plan to take a spouse or partner on an overseas visit at public expense. However, no central record is kept of whether such visits actually take place after allowing for cancellation or postponement for parliamentary business or other reasons. Where a spouse or partner has accompanied a Minister on an overseas visit the cost is included in the figures published annually on Ministers?
  441W
  visits overseas. Figures for 1999–2000 were published on 28 July 2000, Official Report, column 969W. This showed that the cost of travel in 1999–2000 was £4.6 million compared with £7.9 million in the last year of the previous Administration.

  Mrs. Gillan
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the visits overseas undertaken by Government Ministers costing in excess of £500 between 2 May 1997 and 31 December 2000 indicating(a) the cost, destination and purpose of the visit and (b) if the Minister was accompanied by a partner or spouse, indicating the name of their partner and the contribution to the cost of the trip made by the Minister towards the partner's expenses. [148563]

  The Prime Minister
  [holding answer 2 February 2001]Lists of all visits overseas undertaken by Cabinet Ministers costing £500 or more for the periods 2 May 1997 to 31 March 1999 and 1 April 1999 to 31 March 2000 have already been placed in the Libraries of the House. The annual list for travel during the period 1 April 2000 to 31 March 2001 will be published in due course. In relation to the information requested about spouses or partners accompanying Ministers overseas I refer the hon. Member to my answer earlier today to the right hon. Member for South-West Surrey (Mrs. Bottomley),Official Report, columns 438–39W.

  Departmental IT Projects
  Mr. Field
  To ask the Prime Minister (1) if he will list the IT projects being undertaken at No. 10; and if he will state(a) the expected completion date and (b) the cost of each project; [151843]

  (2) if he will list the IT projects No. 10 is planning to undertake during the next year; and if he will state in each case (a) the expected date of commencement and completion and (b) the cost. [151844]

  The Prime Minister
  I refer my right hon. Friend to the reply given to him by the Minister of State for the Cabinet Office on 16 March 2001,Official Report, columns 770–71W.

  Porton Down
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Prime Minister if all documents in his office relating to an official inquiry by the then Prime Minister in 1970 into allegations that the chemical and biological defence establishment, Porton Down, had experimented on old people for germ warfare purposes, have been placed in the Public Record Office; and if he will make a statement. [154767]

  The Prime Minister
  There are no documents in my office relating to such an inquiry.

  Foot and Mouth Taskforce
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his answer of 16 March 2001,Official Report, column 753W, on the Foot and Mouth Taskforce, for what reason he did not include in the taskforce representatives from the (a) National Assembly for Wales, (b) Farmers Union of Wales, (c) Welsh Development Agency and (d) Welsh Tourist Board. [155131]
  442W
  The Prime Minister
  The taskforce is considering the economic impacts of the outbreak of foot and mouth disease across the United Kingdom and includes representatives of the devolved administrations, including the National Assembly for Wales. Mike German, the Assembly's Minister for Economic Development, attended the taskforce's second meeting. Although the taskforce is a UK-wide body, most of the issues it discusses are devolved, and in practice it concentrates mainly on proposals to be implemented in England. It is then for each devolved administration to decide whether to follow similar policies. In order to avoid the group becoming too unwieldy, we have inevitably had to restrict membership. My right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment and other UK Ministers concerned would, however, welcome constructive suggestions from organisations in all countries.

  Sinn Fein
  Mr. William Ross
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the undertakings he gave to the leaders of Sinn Fein in May 2000, indicating which have been(a) fulfilled and (b) remain outstanding. [154321]

  The Prime Minister
  [holding answer 19 March 2001]In the course of the multi-party talks at Hillsborough, the Government committed themselves to honouring the Good Friday Agreement, if all other parties did, in relation to all aspects of it. Those undertakings were reflected in the proposals made jointly with the Irish Government on 5 May 2000.

  I am satisfied that we are honouring these commitments.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  China
  Mr. Rowe
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he has taken to ensure that the EU delegation to the UN Commission on Human Rights will raise the current human rights situation in China with special reference to religious freedom and torture. [154907]

  Mr. Battle
  We are pressing the EU Presidency and our EU partners to ensure that relevant EU statements at the UN Commission on Human Rights reflect our concerns about the human rights situation in China, including the use of torture and respect for religious freedoms.

  I spelt out the UK's concerns on human rights in China in my address at the UN Commission on Human Rights on 22 March.

  Entry Clearance
  Mr. Letwin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reasons were given for refusal of visas by entry clearance officers at the appeal stage in the case of visa refusals overturned by the Minister for Europe. [155298]
  443W
  Mr. Vaz
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]: When an entry clearance officer refuses a visa applicant he or she always gives the applicant written reasons for doing so. The reasons for refusal will vary from case to case. Where there is a right of appeal against the refusal, the Minister with responsibility for entry clearance does not become involved in the appeal process, which is handled by the Independent Appellate Authority.

  Mr. Letwin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reasons were given for the initial refusal of visas by entry clearance officers in the case of visa refusals overturned by the Minister for Europe. [155299]

  Mr. Vaz
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]: In such cases, entry clearance officers initially refused to grant a visa because they were not satisfied that the applications met the requirements of the Immigration Rules. Where hon. Members subsequently made representations which have satisfied me that, in fact, the requirements of the Immigration Rules have been fully met, I have overturned the original decision of the entry clearance officer.

  Family visit visas applications 2001

  Applications received

  Applications determined

  Applications issued

  Applications refused

  January

  February

  January

  February

  January

  February

  January

  February

  Abidjan

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Abu Dhabi

  24

  1—

  23

  1—

  17

  1—

  6

  1—

  Abuja

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Accra

  753

  1—

  685

  1—

  277

  1—

  408

  Addis Ababa

  31

  12

  39

  11

  14

  6

  25

  5

  Almaty

  36

  13

  37

  13

  37

  13

  0

  0

  Amman

  426

  85

  0

  85

  0

  84

  0

  1

  Amsterdam

  38

  34

  38

  34

  32

  30

  6

  4

  Ankara

  29

  38

  29

  38

  28

  38

  1

  0

  Bahrain

  16

  10

  16

  10

  16

  10

  0

  0

  Baku

  19

  9

  19

  9

  18

  9

  1

  0

  Bandar Seri Begawan

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Bangkok

  80

  173

  73

  154

  45

  131

  28

  23

  Banjul

  38

  34

  40

  31

  32

  20

  8

  11

  Beirut

  92

  62

  89

  62

  87

  61

  2

  1

  Belgrade

  258

  391

  4

  352

  0

  347

  4

  5

  Bogota

  33

  33

  33

  33

  25

  29

  8

  4

  Bombay

  619

  1,070

  619

  1,070

  454

  874

  165

  196

  Bratislava

  50

  1—

  50

  1—

  47

  1—

  3

  1—

  Brussels

  14

  10

  4

  7

  3

  5

  1

  2

  Bucharest

  58

  85

  59

  90

  48

  82

  11

  8

  Budapest

  6

  7

  6

  7

  5

  7

  1

  0

  Cairo

  137

  145

  129

  142

  113

  124

  16

  18

  Calcutta

  94

  118

  97

  120

  95

  116

  2

  4

  Canberra

  7

  1—

  7

  1—

  4

  1—

  3

  1—

  Casablanca

  117

  119

  110

  116

  105

  114

  5

  2

  Chicago

  141

  176

  119

  162

  119

  162

  0

  0

  Colombo

  70

  74

  70

  74

  32

  48

  38

  26

  Copenhagen

  44

  36

  44

  36

  44

  36

  0

  0

  Damascus

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Dar Es Salaam

  107

  104

  107

  104

  93

  83

  14

  21

  Dhaka

  451

  490

  348

  415

  203

  227

  145

  188

  Doha

  49

  31

  49

  31

  46

  31

  3

  0

  Dubai

  71

  79

  75

  81

  47

  47

  28

  34

  Dublin

  36

  1—

  36

  1—

  34

  1—

  2

  1—

  Dusseldorf

  106

  272

  100

  246

  94

  241

  6

  5

  Ekaterinburg

  11

  16

  11

  16

  11

  16

  0

  0

  Geneva

  25

  74

  21

  67

  20

  66

  1

  1

  Georgetown

  33

  1—

  33

  1—

  28

  1—

  5

  1—

  Guangzhou

  121

  1—

  90

  1—

  84

  1—

  6

  1—

  Hanoi

  4

  3

  4

  3

  2

  1

  2

  2

  Harare

  0

  1

  0

  1

  0

  0

  0

  1

  Havana

  3

  0

  3

  0

  3

  0

  0

  0

  444W
  Mr. Letwin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs in respect of visa refusals overturned by the Minister for Europe, how many he intervened on(a) following representations from an hon. Member and (b) following external requests. [155300]

  Mr. Vaz
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]: I have overturned a total of 49 decisions following representations from right hon. and hon. Members since October 1999. I do not take representations from other sources and have therefore overturned no decisions following external requests.

  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many family visit visa applications were(a) received, (b) determined, (c) allowed and (d) refused since 1 January, broken down by entry clearance post. [155570]

  Mr. Vaz
  The table sets out the information received from entry clearance posts issuing more than 1,200 visas per year. I regret that the information for the remaining posts issuing less than 1,200 visas per year is not available centrally.
  445W

  Family visit visas applications 2001

  Applications received

  Applications determined

  Applications issued

  Applications refused

  January

  February

  January

  February

  January

  February

  January

  February

  Hong Kong

  32

  1—

  32

  1—

  27

  1—

  5

  1—

  Islamabad

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Istanbul

  430

  453

  485

  522

  424

  451

  61

  71

  Jakarta

  36

  58

  37

  56

  33

  50

  4

  6

  Jedda

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Jerusalem

  5

  1—

  5

  1—

  5

  1—

  0

  1—

  Kampala

  116

  102

  120

  84

  100

  59

  20

  25

  Karachi

  575

  1—

  460

  1—

  397

  1—

  63

  1—

  Kathmandu

  0

  1

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Khartoum

  44

  15

  15

  16

  5

  6

  10

  10

  Kiev

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Kingston

  52

  1—

  46

  1—

  35

  1—

  11

  1—

  Kuala Lumpur

  14

  12

  13

  13

  10

  11

  3

  2

  Kuwait

  200

  43

  200

  43

  196

  39

  4

  4

  Lagos

  1,147

  1,193

  901

  1,293

  688

  1,143

  213

  150

  Lima

  12

  1—

  12

  1—

  8

  1—

  4

  1—

  Los Angeles

  0

  216

  0

  216

  0

  216

  0

  0

  Luanda

  8

  2

  8

  2

  8

  1

  0

  1

  Lusaka

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Madras

  217

  229

  233

  226

  216

  211

  17

  15

  Madrid

  26

  1—

  26

  1—

  26

  1—

  0

  1—

  Manila

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Minsk

  0

  14

  0

  14

  0

  13

  0

  1

  Moscow

  237

  214

  228

  191

  223

  190

  5

  1

  Muscat

  75

  39

  72

  39

  68

  36

  4

  3

  Nairobi

  156

  1—

  156

  1—

  132

  1—

  24

  1—

  New Delhi

  913

  1,153

  907

  1,129

  573

  682

  334

  447

  New York

  533

  1—

  511

  1—

  500

  1—

  11

  1—

  Nicosia

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Oslo

  30

  44

  27

  42

  27

  41

  0

  1

  Ottawa

  475

  278

  442

  185

  442

  184

  0

  1

  Paris

  0

  253

  0

  248

  0

  246

  0

  2

  Peking

  109

  63

  94

  51

  88

  40

  6

  11

  Port Louis

  80

  136

  80

  136

  73

  126

  7

  10

  Port of Spain

  5

  1—

  5

  1—

  5

  1—

  0

  1—

  Prague

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Pretoria

  27

  1—

  20

  1—

  16

  1—

  4

  1—

  Quito

  24

  14

  24

  14

  20

  14

  4

  0

  Riga

  11

  1—

  11

  1—

  11

  1—

  0

  1—

  Riyadh

  8

  15

  12

  20

  9

  9

  3

  11

  Rome

  63

  90

  61

  80

  60

  77

  1

  3

  Sana'a

  20

  13

  20

  10

  8

  1

  12

  9

  Sarajevo

  61

  119

  61

  119

  6l

  117

  0

  2

  Shanghai

  10

  30

  10

  30

  8

  23

  2

  7

  Singapore

  21

  26

  24

  25

  18

  25

  6

  0

  Sofia

  89

  118

  74

  117

  71

  113

  3

  4

  St. Petersburg

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  St. Domingo

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Stockholm

  89

  103

  129

  123

  128

  121

  1

  2

  Taipei

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Tashkent

  13

  5

  13

  5

  12

  4

  1

  1

  Tbilisi

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Tehran

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Tel Aviv

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Tirana

  21

  21

  15

  23

  15

  20

  0

  3

  Tokyo

  5

  5

  5

  4

  4

  2

  1

  2

  Tunis

  97

  92

  87

  70

  60

  70

  27

  21

  Valletta

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Vienna

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Warsaw

  0

  3

  0

  1

  0

  1

  0

  0

  Washington

  312

  305

  312

  301

  312

  301

  0

  0

  Wellington

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Yaounde

  7

  1—

  22

  1—

  20

  1—

  2

  1—

  Zagreb

  70

  96

  70

  90

  63

  82

  7

  8

  1 Information not yet received from Posts

  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many family visit visa refusals in relation to which(a) an appeal has been received, (b) the refusal has been overturned by an
  446W
  entry clearance manager after receipt of an appeal, (c) an appeal has been despatched, (d) entry clearance has been issued prior to the outcome of an appeal, (e) an appeal has been allowed and notified to the post and (f) an appeal

  447W
  has been dismissed and notified to the post, there were in each month in 2001, broken down by entry clearance post. [155571]

  Mr. Vaz
  The table on family visit refusals appeals received, refusals overturned after receipt of an appeal and appeals despatched covers information so far received from overseas Posts issuing more than 1,200 visas per year. I regret that the information requested for the remaining posts issuing less than 1,200 visas per year is not available centrally.

  Family Visit Visa Refusals 2001

  Appeals received

  Refusals overturned by ECM

  Appeal despatched

  January

  February

  January

  February

  January

  February

  Abidjan

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Abu Dhabi

  1

  1—

  0

  1—

  1

  1—

  Abuja

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Accra

  3

  1—

  0

  1—

  6

  1—

  Addis Ababa

  0

  1

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Almaty

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Amman

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Amsterdam

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Ankara

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Bahrain

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Baku

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Bandar Seri Begawan

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Bangkok

  0

  6

  1

  0

  0

  5

  Banjul

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Beirut

  1

  0

  0

  0

  1

  0

  Belgrade

  0

  1

  0

  0

  0

  1

  Bogota

  2

  0

  0

  0

  1

  0

  Bombay

  9

  13

  0

  0

  8

  14

  Bratislava

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Brussels

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Bucharest

  0

  2

  0

  0

  0

  2

  Budapest

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Cairo

  0

  1

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Calcutta

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Canberra

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Casablanca

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  Chicago

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Colombo

  5

  1

  1

  0

  4

  1

  Copenhagen

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Damascus

  3

  2

  0

  0

  1

  6

  Dar Es Salaam

  0

  2

  0

  0

  0

  2

  Dhaka

  12

  14

  2

  2

  7

  12

  Doha

  1

  0

  0

  0

  1

  0

  Dubai

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Dublin

  1

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Dusseldorf

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Ekaterinburg

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Geneva

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Georgetown

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Guangzhou

  3

  1—

  0

  1—

  2

  1—

  Hanoi

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Harare

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Havana

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Hong Kong

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Islamabad

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Istanbul

  2

  7

  0

  0

  2

  5

  Jakarta

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Jedda

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Jerusalem

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Kampala

  1

  3

  0

  1

  1

  1

  Karachi

  4

  1—

  0

  1—

  9

  1—

  Kathmandu

  0

  1

  0

  0

  0

  1

  Khartoum

  0

  1

  0

  1

  0

  0

  Kiev

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Kingston

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Kuala Lumpur

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  448W
  The information requested at (d) on the issue of entry clearance prior to the outcome of an appeal is not available centrally or locally. The Entry Clearance Manager may sign an appeal form only if he or she decides, after review, that the refusal stands.

  Similarly, the information requested at (e) and (f) on appeals allowed and dismissed is not available centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost by contacting all entry clearance issuing posts individually. The Home Office informs posts of the outcome of allowed appeals. The Lord Chancellor's Department informs posts of dismissed appeals.
  449W

  Family Visit Visa Refusals 2001

  Appeals received

  Refusals overturned by ECM

  Appeal despatched

  January

  February

  January

  February

  January

  February

  Kuwait

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Lagos

  31

  33

  6

  5

  22

  31

  Lima

  1

  1—

  0

  1—

  1

  1—

  Los Angeles

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Luanda

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Lusaka

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Madras

  1

  0

  0

  0

  1

  0

  Madrid

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Manila

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Minsk

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Moscow

  0

  1

  0

  1

  0

  0

  Muscat

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Nairobi

  4

  1—

  0

  1—

  4

  1—

  New Delhi

  15

  21

  1

  2

  12

  20

  New York

  1

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Nicosia

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Oslo

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Ottawa

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Paris

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Peking

  1

  3

  0

  0

  0

  3

  Port Louis

  0

  1

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Port of Spain

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Prague

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Pretoria

  1

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Quito

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Riga

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Riyadh

  0

  2

  0

  0

  0

  2

  Rome

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Sana'a

  1

  1

  0

  0

  1

  1

  Sarajevo

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Shanghai

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Singapore

  0

  5

  0

  0

  0

  5

  Sofia

  1

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  St. Petersburg

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Sto Domingo

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Stockholm

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Taipei

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Tashkent

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Tbilisi

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Tehran

  1

  5

  0

  0

  1

  5

  Tel Aviv

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Tirana

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Tokyo

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Tunis

  0

  5

  0

  0

  0

  5

  Valletta

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Vienna

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  1—

  Warsaw

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Washington

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Wellington

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Yaounde

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  0

  1—

  Zagreb

  1

  1

  1

  1

  0

  0

  1 Information not yet received from Posts

  Iraq
  Mr. Hilary Benn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if the no-fly zone in Northern Iraq applies to military aircraft of the Turkish air force. [155065]

  Mr. Hoon
  I have been asked to reply.

  The northern no-fly zone was established on humanitarian grounds in an effort to prevent Saddam Hussein from repressing the Kurdish civilian population from the air. The zone was not established to monitor the activity of our NATO allies. We therefore routinely collect information only on the activity of Iraqi aircraft.

HEALTH

  Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome
  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what NHS provision there is for sufferers of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome; and if he will make a statement; [141639]

  (2) what provision for diagnosis there is in England and Wales within the NHS for Ehlers-Danlos syndrome; [141638]

  (3) what budget health authorities have to discharge their responsibilities for the treatment of patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome; [141637]
  451W
  (4) what responsibility health authorities have for the provision of treatment of patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome; and if he will make a statement. [141636]

  Yvette Cooper
  The National Health Service provides Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS) services for anyone who needs them in the same way as for other rare genetic disorders. These are funded from general allocations.

  The National Specialist Commission Advisory Group is working closely with Wales to consider whether EDS services should be commissioned nationally.

  MRI Scanners
  Mr. Sawford
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he will identify the NHS trusts which are to receive funding for an MRI scanner. [147705]

  Yvette Cooper
  Those National Health Service trusts identified to receive funding for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanners through the new opportunities fund have already been notified and announced.

  The NHS Plan announced funding for 50 additional MRI scanners and we anticipate that the recipient NHS trusts will be identified in the financial year 2001–02.

  MMR Vaccine
  Miss Kirkbride
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many of MMR vaccines his Department is committed to purchasing; and over what period of time. [150177]

  Yvette Cooper
  Measles mumps rubella vaccine is routinely contracted on a yearly basis. A new contract for 1.2 million doses has been let to cover the period 1 April 2001 to 31 March 2002.

  World Health Organisation
  Miss Kirkbride
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what commitment Her Majesty's Government have made to the WHO on measures to eradicate measles; and what time scale is proposed for achieving its eradication. [150176]

  Yvette Cooper
  There is no World Health Organisation (WHO) strategy to eradicate measles nor a target date to achieve eradication. No commitments have therefore been made to WHO.

  The United Kingdom has set a target of 95 per cent. measles mumps rubella vaccine uptake as this, based on guidance from WHO, is the level of uptake required to avoid outbreaks of measles, mumps and rubella. This level is sufficient to prevent long-term accumulation of pools of susceptible individuals that provide the opportunity for transmission of these diseases.

  NHS Funding
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the expected funding of the NHS in England per head of population is in 2000–01. [150225]

  Mr. Denham
  [holding answer 13 February 2001]: Public expenditure on the National Health Service in England is expected to be around £890 per head of population in 2000–01.

  vCJD
  Mr. Harvey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what precautions against vCJD are taken in surgical procedures other than tonsillectomies; what organs are known to incubate vCJD; and if he will make a statement. [150433]

  Yvette Cooper
  On 4 January 2001 the Department announced a precautionary strategy for reducing the theoretical risk of transmission of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD) from patient to patient via surgical instruments.

  The strategy focuses first and foremost on ensuring high standards of decontamination. This has been identified by the Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC) to be a key step in reducing risk. In October 2000, the Department required all National Health Service trusts and health authorities to conduct comprehensive reviews of their decontamination services. As part of this work, decontamination facilities at neurology and posterior ophthalmology centres have recently been inspected and any necessary improvements identified. A comprehensive strategy to modernise NHS decontamination facilities, backed by £200 million funding announced on 4 January and based on the trust reviews, is currently being prepared. This strategy will be published once it is complete.

  The "Risk Assessment for the transmission of vCJD via surgical instruments" published by the Department on 16 March (available from the Department's website at www.doh.gov.uk/cjd/riskassessmentsi/htm) confirms that the risks of transmission are significantly reduced if instrument decontamination is carried out to the highest standards. On body organs, the risk assessment also shows that the central nervous system and the back of the eye would carry the highest potential infectivity, whereas lymphatic tissue such as tonsils, and front of the eye tissue are of a lesser order of risk.

  When the Department's strategy was presented to SEAC at its meeting in November 2000, the committee welcomed it and the advances being made on decontamination. The committee also endorsed the concept of using tonsillectomy as a pilot scheme to see how single-use instruments would work in practice.

  Dr. Gibson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what investment he has made with regard for a diagnostic test for vCJD. [151269]

  Yvette Cooper
  The Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, the Department of Health, the Food Standards Agency, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Medical Research Council (MRC) on 15 March 2001 issued a call to scientists for proposals to develop quick, effective and reliable diagnostic tests for diseases such as BSE and variant Creutzfeldt Jakob Disease (vCJD). This latest co-ordinated drive aims to push the boundaries in as many ways as possible and break new ground towards creating usable diagnostic tools. The MRC is co-ordinating this call on behalf of United Kingdom Government Departments and agencies who fund public research into transmissible spongiform encephalopathies. Funding decisions are expected from autumn 2001 onwards.

  General Osteopathic Council
  Mr. Gale
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what percentage of the membership of the osteopathic council is registered by the General Osteopathic Council; [152778]

  (2) what percentage of members of the osteopathic profession he estimates will be able to vote in elections for the General Osteopathic Council to be held in April; [152777]

  (3) when he will complete his review of the implementation of the Osteopaths Act 1993. [152776]

  Yvette Cooper
  [holding answer 8 March 2001]: I understand that, at 7 March 2001, 2,796 osteopaths had been registered with the General Osteopathic Council. This included 175 osteopaths who are ineligible to vote because they live and work outside the United Kingdom. Of the remaining 2,621 registrants who work in the UK, 551 are conditionally registered and are therefore ineligible to vote in any General Osteopathic Council elections. Approximately 200 further practitioners did not apply for registration until just before the deadline for doing so. As they have not yet completed the registration process they are also ineligible to vote. Thus 79 per cent. of registered UK osteopaths will be able to vote in the forthcoming election of osteopathic members.

  According to the General Osteopathic Council's published register, 13 serving members of the General Osteopathic Council are themselves registered as practising osteopaths. This comprises the 11 osteopathic members of the Council and the two education members who were drawn from the osteopathic profession. There are a further nine members—one education member and eight lay members. Thus registrants make up 59 per cent. of the current council.

  We are still investigating the concerns about operation of the Osteopaths Act 1993 that were raised in the Adjournment debate on 25 October last year. The issues are complex and require careful consideration. This has taken some time but I hope to be in a position to report back to the hon. Members who raised concerns—and all those to whom I have promised to copy my views—in the near future.

  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recognition his Department accords to the New Democratic Osteopathic Council; and if he will make a statement. [154054]

  Yvette Cooper
  While it is open for any organisation or group within the osteopathic profession to establish itself as a representative body for osteopaths, the General Osteopathic Council (GOC) is the only body with the legal authority to register osteopaths within the United Kingdom. Those who register with the GOC may legally call themselves osteopaths. Anyone not registering with the council is committing an offence if he or she says or implies that he is any kind of osteopath, whatever other representative body he may choose to join.

  Smoking
  Dr. Harris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much he has allocated for(a) nicotine replacement therapies and (b) bupropion (Zyban) for (i) 2000–01 and (ii) 2001–02. [153441]
  454W
  Yvette Cooper
  The provision for nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and bupropion (Zyban) has been made within the uplift made for the drugs bill within unified allocations for 2001–02, an increase of 8.9 per cent. In 2000–01, £20 million was allocated to fund specialist smoking cessation services, including the provision of free NRT to poorer smokers. £20 million has been allocated to specialist cessation services in 2001–02; this excludes drug costs.

  Cancer Research
  Mr. Rowlands
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much was spent on cancer research in England in(a) 1997–98, (b) 1998–99 and (c) 1999–2000; and what estimate he has of expenditure for 2000–01. [153153]

  Yvette Cooper
  Funding for cancer research in the United Kingdom is provided from a number of different sources, including the Government, charities and industry. The Department does not routinely collect information on all cancer research expenditure in England.

  We provide funding for cancer research through the Department, the research councils and the higher education funding councils (HEFC). The main Government agency for research into the causes of and treatments for disease is the Medical Research Council (MRC), which receives its funding via the Department of Trade and Industry. The Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council also supports basic research relevant to health. The research councils operate on a UK-wide basis. The Department provides support funding for research commissioned by the research councils and charities that takes place in the National Health Service as well as commissioning research directly to support policy and service priorities. The HEFC provides funds for research infrastructure in medical schools and other relevant research groups in higher education institutes.

  The Department's expenditure on cancer research was approximately £53 million in 1997–98; £75.4 million in 1998–99 and an estimated £77.4 million in 1999–2000. Figures for total Department expenditure in 2000–01 are not yet available.

  We have made a commitment to increasing funding for cancer research. The NHS Cancer Plan confirmed that by 2003 we will be investing an additional £20 million each year in the infrastructure for cancer research and an extra £4 million will be invested in prostate cancer research.

  Mental Health Bill
  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he plans to present a mental health Bill to Parliament. [153486]

  Mr. Hutton
  We have set out our plans to reform the Mental Health Act 1983 in a White Paper, "Reforming the Mental Health Act", published in December 2000. We are committed to modernising mental health legislation and will introduce a Bill as soon as parliamentary time allows.

  Ophthalmic Dispensing
  Mr. David Heath
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what recent discussions he has had with representatives of optometrists and ophthalmic dispensers on the implications of changes in HM Customs and Excise regulations; [153805]

  (2) what his assessment is of the implications of changes in Customs and Excise regulations on ophthalmic dispensing. [153804]

  Mr. Hutton
  On 15 February Her Majesty's Customs and Excise issued a business brief on how they intend to apply a recent judgment in the House of Lords on what, for value added tax purposes, comprises a single supply. At the same time they wrote to opticians' representative bodies explaining that the effect of the judgment would be to make the dispensing and supply of spectacles and contact lenses a single supply. The Department continues its discussion with the optical professions.

  Cervical Screening
  Mrs. Spelman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the reasons for the further delay in reaching a decision on the approval of the Thin Prep Pap test.[154057]

  £000

  1997–98

  1998–99

  1999–2000

  2000–01

  2001–02

  Total allocation

  Total allocation

  HAZ funding1

  Total allocation2

  HAZ funding1

  Total allocation

  HAZ funding1

  Total allocation

  HAZ funding

  County Durham

  282,889

  298,927

  —

  411,001

  —

  452,736

  —

  493,021

  —

  Tees

  255,335

  269,175

  20

  370,553

  1,958

  405,341

  2,834

  440,871

  2,391

  Wakefield

  145,084

  152,248

  20

  211,891

  958

  232,337

  1,206

  251,077

  938

  Northern and Yorkshire region

  683,308

  720,350

  40

  993,444

  2,916

  1,090,413

  4,040

  1,184,969

  3,329

  Barnsley

  104,683

  110,005

  820

  156,588

  3,821

  171,548

  3,051

  186,289

  2,053

  Doncaster

  131,878

  138,789

  —

  198,465

  —

  216,860

  —

  234,962

  —

  Rotherham

  113,750

  119,916

  —

  159,696

  —

  174,259

  —

  189,182

  —

  South

  138,964

  145,527

  —

  199,138

  —

  216,561

  —

  234,702

  —

  Trent

  489,276

  514,238

  820

  713,887

  3,821

  779,229

  3,051

  845,136

  2,053

  North Staffordshire

  210,721

  221,771

  20

  304,458

  1,251

  335,037

  1,581

  363,668

  1,275

  West Midlands region

  210,721

  221,771

  20

  304,458

  1,251

  335,037

  1,581

  363,668

  1,275

  North

  145,260

  151,836

  —

  201,585

  —

  217,660

  —

  236,528

  —

  St. Helens and

  153,596

  162,218

  20

  237,210

  4,183

  258,206

  5,735

  279,857

  4,418

  Wigan and Bolton

  258,518

  273,219

  —

  373,322

  —

  410,052

  —

  446,516

  —

  North West region

  557,375

  587,273

  20

  812,116

  4,183

  885,918

  5,735

  962,901

  4,418

  1 Figures for Barnsley, Rotherham and Doncaster health authorities are for South Yorkshire Coalfields HAZ. Figures for St. Helens and Knowsley health authority are for Merseyside HAZ, which also includes Liverpool, Sefton and Wirral health authorities. County Durham, South Humber, North Cheshire, and Wigan and Bolton health authorities are not in HAZs.

  2 Figures for 1999–2000 onwards are for unified allocations which cover hospital and community health services, prescribing and discretionary family health services. They are not strictly comparable with those for previous years which cover hospital and community health services only.

  Note:

  Allocations for smoking cessation and drugs prevention are still to be made.

  Royal Shrewsbury Hospital
  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when the funding will be provided for the medical assessment unit at the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital; what the expected completion date is, and if he will make a statement. [154461]

  Yvette Cooper
  Funding has been made available for a £1.1 million Medical Assessment Unit (MAU) at the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital National Health Service Trust1.
  456W
  Yvette Cooper
  The pilot study to assess the feasibility of using Liquid Based Cytology (LBC) in the National Health Service cervical screening programme is being progressed in line with the overall guidance published by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence in June 2000. LBC is being piloted in conjunction with Human Papilloma Virus testing.

  The three sites for the pilot study have been selected and training and installation of equipment is under way. The study will become operational in spring 2001 as planned.

  Coalmining Communities
  Caroline Flint
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what specific support his Department has provided to coalmining communities since 1997 by(a) region and (b) health authority area. [154303]

  Mr. Denham
  There are 11 health authorities classified as coalfield communities by the Office for National Statistics. They receive general allocations to commission health care for their population.

  In addition, seven out of the 11 health authorities are in health action zones (HAZ). They have received additional funding for this since 1998–99.

  Details are given in the table.

  In December 2000 the West Midlands Regional Office of the NHS Executive gave approval to the strategic outline case to vacate Royal Shrewsbury Hospital Copthorne South site, leading to replacement of the poor ward accommodation and education facilities with newer facilities on Copthorne North. This is a recognised priority for the trust.

  The MAU, which will be based on Copthorne North, is also a priority for the trust, but needs to be considered within the context of the wider development of facilities

  457W
  on Copthorne North. The timetable for this can be established more clearly once the outline business case has been received from the trust and approval given.

  1 Funded by the national accident and emergency modernisation initiative. This will enable the establishment of a MAU at both the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital and the Princess Royal Hospital, Telford.

  Drinking Water (Schools)
  Dr. Gibson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the requirement for water in the(a) dietary needs and (b) intellectual achievements of young people in schools. [154646]

  Yvette Cooper
  All schools are required to provide safe drinking water, which is a basic requirement for good health. The Department has not assessed the influence of water on the intellectual achievements of young people. However, compulsory National Nutritional Standards for school lunches, which will be in force from 1 April 2001, recommend that drinking water should be available to all pupils every day, free of charge. Breaks within the school day give children ample opportunity to drink water and maintain their fluid intake.

  Doctors (Investigations)
  Dr. Tonge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many doctors were investigated by the GMC in the last three years broken down by(a) sex and (b) racial origin. [154542]

  Mr. Denham
  A comprehensive answer to this question is not readily available from the General Medical Council. However, they are in a position to provide some information immediately and I have requested that they write to the hon. Lady directly with the information to hand. A copy of the letter will be placed in the Library.

  Asperger's Syndrome
  Liz Blackman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on plans to address the needs of people with Asperger's Syndrome following the publication of the Learning Disability White Paper. [155301]

  Mr. Hutton
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]: In late 1999 we commissioned Dr. Tony Holland of Cambridge University to undertake a review of the current state of knowledge on Asperger's Syndrome. We have just received a revised version of his report which incorporates comments from the National Autistic Society, the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of Nursing and other interested organisations.

  We have already responded to Dr. Holland's principal recommendation on prevalence of Asperger' s Syndrome by asking the Medical Research Council to obtain a clear and comprehensive picture of what is currently known about the incidence, prevalence and causes of autism and how strong the evidence is which underpins that knowledge.

  His other recommendations are being actively considered in the context of the needs of people across the autistic spectrum as a whole, including the implications of "Valuing People: A New Strategy for Learning Disability for the 21st Century".
  458W
  Mrs. Browning
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which sections of Chapter 8 of "Valuing People: A New Strategy for Learning Disability for the 21st Century" apply to people with a diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome and an IQ over 70. [155254]

  Mr. Hutton
  The work on diagnosis, screening and early intervention in autism referred to in sections 8.37 to 8.42 applies across the whole of the autistic spectrum, including Asperger's Syndrome, as does the work which the Medical Research Council is taking forward on its incidence. prevalence and causes. Importantly, section 8.41 points out that children with autism are children first and that whether or not they have a learning disability as well they should benefit from our proposals for improving services for all disabled children.

  Chapter 8 also refers to other Government initiatives such as the Care Standards Act 2000 (8.3), the Social Care Institute of Excellence (8.4) and the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (8.13) which will help a wide range of people including those with autistic spectrum disorders.

  Mrs. Browning
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which statutory service has primary responsibility for(a) children and (b) adults with a diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome and an IQ over 70. [155255]

  Mr. Hutton
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]: It is the responsibility of local statutory authorities to determine the pattern of services in their area in the light of their knowledge of local needs and priorities. Health and local authorities should ensure that the particular health, education and social care needs of each child or adult with an autistic spectrum disorder are met with genuine choices for both clients and families, through the most appropriate community based services, in a cost-effective way.

  Current legislation provides that where a health authority or National Health Service trust form the opinion that a child under five has special educational needs (SEN), including those due to autistic spectrum conditions, they shall bring it to the attention of the local education authority (LEA). The legislation also provides that where it appears to an LEA that any health or local authority could help with the identification and assessment of, and provision for, children with SEN, it may request the help of that local or health authority.

  Children and adults with Asperger's Syndrome are individuals whose needs vary. Primary responsibility for meeting those needs will vary accordingly. We continue to work to promote effective collaboration between agencies.

  Porton Down
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to his answer of 6 March 2001,Official Report, columns 188–89W, on Porton Down, if he will place in the Library a list of the titles and authors of the authoritative reviews on which his Department's message was based. [154762]

  Yvette Cooper
  The information requested is in the Library.

  Years of Life Lost Formula
  Mr. Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations he has received about the Years of Life Lost formula; and if he will place them in the Library. [155111]

  Mr. Denham
  A small number of representations have been received about the Years of Life Lost formula. I refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Regent's Park and Kensington, North (Ms Buck) on 26 February 2001,Official Report, column 443W.

  A paper has been prepared on the Years of Life Lost formula which is available on the departmental website at www.doh.gov.uk/allocations/review/pubs.htm in the published papers icon listed under Rawp6. I am placing copies of this paper in the Library.

  Accident and Emergency Services
  Mr. Dobson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what schemes for the modernisation and improvement of accident and emergency and associated services have been carried out in hospitals serving the Richmond, Chingford and Woodford Green, North Essex, South Cambridgeshire, South Suffolk, Devizes, South-West Devon, Tiverton and Honiton, Woodspring, Wells, Bramshill, North-East Hampshire, Horsham, Maidenhead, Maidstone and The Weald, East Surrey and Tunbridge Wells parliamentary constituencies, indicating the sums invested and summarising the works in each case. [155356]

  Mr. Denham
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]: The information requested has been placed in the Library.

  Beta Interferon
  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the number of patients in the Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals Trust who have been recommended for treatment with beta interferon who are awaiting the NICE recommendation; and what has been the change between(a) the first decision to recommend the drug to NICE and (b) since the announcement of the postponement of the decision. [155387]

  Mr. Denham
  We have made no such estimate about local services.

  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the number of persons who could have benefited from treatment with beta interferon and will not do so as a result of the decision to refer the use of the drug to NICE. [155388]

  Mr. Denham
  Because there appeared to be genuine uncertainty over the appropriate use of beta-interferon, which was reflected in different prescribing patterns across the country, we asked the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) to conduct an authoritative appraisal of the evidence on beta interferon as part of its first appraisal programme. We expect NICE to produce its authoritative guidance in November.

  Foot and Mouth
  Mr. Peter Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list the meetings and conferences 460W
  organised by his Department and agencies of his Department which have been (a) cancelled and (b) postponed owing to foot and mouth disease; and if he will make a statement. [155360]

  Yvette Cooper
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]The information requested is not held centrally and could be collated only at disproportionate cost.

TREASURY

  Hauliers
  Mr. Drew
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the financial help being made available to hauliers. [152747]

  Mr. Timms
  [holding answer 8 March 2001]: I refer my hon. Friend to the Budget 2001 document. This outlines several measures that will benefit hauliers.

  The total value of the Budget transport package to hauliers is £660 million, equivalent to a 7p per litre cut in fuel duty for hauliers. This valuation includes the benefit to hauliers from the cut in duty on ultra low sulphur diesel, the first allocation from the £100 million Haulage Modernisation Fund and the reforms to lorry vehicle excise duty.

  In addition, the Government have already paid out over £210 million to hauliers in the form of lorry VED rebates since last December, following the Chancellor's announcement in the 2000 pre-Budget report.

  Departmental Policies (Edinburgh, South)
  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Edinburgh, South constituency, the effects on Edinburgh of the Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [155341]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  Edinburgh, South along with the rest of the United Kingdom, is benefiting from the long-term action we have taken to build economic stability and secure high and stable levels of growth and employment. Since the General Election, claimant unemployment in the constituency has fallen by 983, or 48 per cent., youth unemployment is down by 83 per cent. and long-term unemployment has fallen by 70 per cent.

  Macro-economic stability is being complemented at the micro-economic level by the Government's policies to ease the transition from welfare into work and to make work pay. To the end of December 2000, the New Deal for 18–24 year olds had helped 586 young people in Edinburgh. South constituency gain valuable skills and experience—298 (51 per cent.) of whom had moved into employment. The Working Families Tax Credit (WFTC), introduced in October 1999, is helping to make work pay for low and middle income families. In August 2000, 900 families in the constituency were benefiting from WFTC.

  The Government are also committed to policies that enable pensioners to share in the country's rising prosperity. All pensioners, including 13,300 in Edinburgh, South, will receive an above-inflation increase in the basic state pensions from April 2001. Single pensioners will receive an extra £5 a week, and couples will receive an

  461W
  extra £8 a week. All pensioners aged 75 or over have also been entitled to a free TV licence since November 2000—including around 9,000 in Edinburgh, South.

  NHS (Wales)
  Mr. Llwyd
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of the funding announced in the Budget for the NHS will be allocated to Wales. [155042]

  Mr. Andrew Smith
  The Government announced in the Budget an additional £100 million over three years for Wales. This represented the share for Wales of the overall increases in spending announced in the Budget, including as a consequence of the increases announced for England for health and other spending. It is for the National Assembly for Wales to decide how to allocate the increase in its budget according to its priorities.

  Local Government Finance
  Mr. Chope
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what targets have been given to the Valuation Office for the time scale within which appeals against the 2000 rating list must be determined.[155038]

  Dawn Primarolo
  The Valuation Office Agency's targets for 2001–02 will be published shortly.

  Mr. Chope
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if it is the policy of the Government that small businesses should have priority in the determination of their appeals against the 2000 rating list; and if he will make a statement. [155036]

  Dawn Primarolo
  Appeals are programmed so that properties of a similar type are considered together but the Valuation Office will give priority to appeals where the ratepayer would otherwise suffer hardship.

  Foot and Mouth
  Mr. Wigley
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will undertake to make resources available to the

  Highest qualification of working age1 people by sex, region and age; United Kingdom; summer 2000; not seasonally adjusted

  Thousand

  All persons2

  Degree or equivalent

  Qualification intermediate between A-level and degree

  GCE A level or equivalent

  GCSE grades A-C or equivalent

  Other qualifications

  No qualification

  All persons

  All of working age

  United Kingdom

  38,348

  5,474

  3,018

  8,568

  7,908

  5,041

  5,930

  Great Britain

  35,327

  5,348

  2,955

  8,324

  7,693

  4,953

  5,689

  England

  30,418

  4,705

  2,408

  7,013

  6,796

  4,367

  4,792

  North East

  1,573

  145

  127

  388

  360

  225

  314

  North West

  4,181

  547

  382

  1,057

  944

  481

  734

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  3,080

  380

  260

  757

  680

  435

  532

  East Midlands

  2,573

  336

  198

  607

  588

  347

  448

  West Midlands

  3,241

  405

  253

  671

  722

  491

  658

  Eastern

  3,305

  494

  237

  768

  802

  481

  520

  London

  4,624

  1,066

  293

  857

  808

  864

  685

  South East

  4,914

  880

  405

  1,202

  1,159

  667

  551

  South West

  2,925

  453

  270

  707

  724

  395

  354

  Wales

  1,751

  215

  164

  366

  426

  228

  342

  Scotland

  3,160

  428

  383

  945

  470

  358

  534

  Northern Ireland

  1,109

  126

  65

  244

  215

  88

  262

  462W
  National Assembly for Wales, in addition to funding under the Barnett formula, to enable financial support to be given to tourism and agriculture-related businesses that have suffered losses as a result of the effects of foot and mouth disease. [154841]

  Mr. Andrew Smith
  The Government reported on the work of the Rural Task Force provisionally on 20 March. The funding arrangements for the devolved Administrations were set out in the Statement of Funding Policy published in July 2000.

  Uitilities Regulators
  Mr. Gibb
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to his answer of 6 March 2001,Official Report, column 163W, how many members or former members of staff of Offer, Ofgas and Ofgem will receive redundancy and severance payments which form part of the total £4.4 million. [152968]

  Mr. Andrew Smith
  Sixty-eight.

  Educational Qualifications
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the highest qualification achieved in each region and nation of the UK was using Labour Force Survey data for summer 2000, broken clown(a) into the (i) 16 to 49 and (ii) over 50 age groups and (b) by gender. [154816]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician. I have asked him to reply.

  Letter from Len Cook to Mr. Jim Cousins, dated 22 March 2001:

  As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your recent question on the highest qualifications achieved in each region and nation of the UK from Labour Force Survey data (154816).

  The Labour Force Survey collects information on qualification levels. The table overleaf shows the number of people of working age by sex, region and age in the UK for Summer (June to August) 2000, according to their level of highest qualification.
  463W

  Highest qualification of working age1 people by sex, region and age; United Kingdom; summer 2000; not seasonally adjusted

  Thousand

  All persons2

  Degree or equivalent

  Qualification intermediate between A-level and degree

  GCE A level or equivalent

  GCSE grades A-C or equivalent

  Other qualifications

  No qualification

  16–49

  United Kingdom

  27,703

  4,439

  2,288

  8,582

  6,852

  3,636

  3,621

  Great Britain

  26,901

  4,332

  2,217

  6,361

  6,854

  3,570

  3,452

  England

  23,176

  3,817

  1,779

  5,351

  5,881

  3,171

  2,921

  North East

  1,195

  114

  94

  287

  328

  170

  188

  North West

  3,168

  441

  283

  793

  826

  339

  462

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  2,345

  305

  196

  569

  592

  314

  337

  East Midlands

  1,937

  288

  148

  484

  514

  248

  287

  West Midlands

  2,441

  329

  181

  513

  627

  351

  404

  Eastern

  2,487

  389

  183

  581

  686

  326

  304

  London

  3,725

  933

  226

  692

  717

  671

  443

  South East

  3,708

  863

  297

  922

  974

  480

  315

  South West

  2,168

  358

  192

  531

  597

  273

  201

  Wales

  1,303

  165

  119

  284

  362

  158

  207

  Scotland

  2,422

  350

  318

  726

  431

  241

  324

  Northern Ireland

  802

  106

  50

  201

  197

  66

  169

  50–59/64

  United Kingdom

  8,634

  1,038

  752

  2,008

  1,058

  1,405

  2,309

  Great Britain

  8,426

  1,018

  736

  1,963

  1,038

  1,383

  2,217

  England

  7,240

  887

  627

  1,882

  934

  1,195

  1,871

  North East

  377

  31

  33

  99

  32

  55

  125

  North West

  1,012

  106

  99

  264

  117

  142

  272

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  735

  74

  63

  188

  88

  121

  195

  East Midlands

  636

  69

  52

  143

  85

  99

  181

  West Midlands

  799

  76

  72

  158

  95

  140

  251

  Eastern

  818

  105

  55

  187

  118

  135

  216

  London

  899

  133

  67

  166

  89

  193

  242

  South East

  1,206

  197

  108

  280

  188

  187

  235

  South West

  757

  96

  78

  176

  127

  122

  153

  Wales

  449

  51

  45

  82

  65

  70

  135

  Scotland

  737

  78

  65

  219

  39

  117

  210

  Northern Ireland

  217

  20

  16

  43

  18

  22

  92

  Men

  All of working age

  United Kingdom

  19,039

  3,177

  1,427

  5,671

  3,260

  2,540

  2,734

  Great Britain

  18,514

  3,105

  1,401

  5,510

  3,171

  2,504

  2,803

  England

  15,956

  2,749

  1,145

  4,633

  2,803

  2,201

  2,229

  North East

  823

  85

  63

  270

  141

  111

  141

  North West

  2,198

  313

  177

  739

  371

  226

  342

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  1,629

  217

  118

  517

  293

  218

  244

  East Midlands

  1,353

  196

  103

  408

  251

  174

  199

  West Midlands

  1,712

  248

  120

  451

  294

  268

  306

  Eastern

  1,732

  282

  119

  507

  326

  236

  251

  London

  2,403

  614

  122

  523

  348

  437

  327

  South East

  2,571

  527

  195

  758

  480

  328

  259

  South West

  1,535

  289

  129

  462

  297

  203

  160

  Wales

  922

  117

  84

  254

  182

  125

  155

  Scotland

  1,836

  239

  173

  624

  187

  178

  218

  Northern Ireland

  525

  72

  26

  161

  89

  35

  132

  16–49

  United Kingdom

  14,046

  2,447

  1,049

  4,050

  2,825

  1,835

  1,648

  Great Britain

  13,845

  2,388

  1,029

  3,926

  2,743

  1,806

  1,566

  England

  11,770

  2,120

  827

  3,293

  2,417

  1,598

  1,347

  North East

  803

  82

  47

  187

  130

  84

  82

  North West

  1,160

  239

  122

  522

  325

  161

  216

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  1,202

  166

  87

  364

  257

  150

  158

  East Midlands

  983

  144

  73

  290

  216

  125

  115

  West Midlands

  1,248

  192

  80

  320

  256

  190

  184

  Eastern

  1,260

  210

  89

  356

  280

  170

  145

  London

  1,890

  524

  96

  398

  309

  332

  205

  South East

  1,877

  385

  143

  537

  400

  241

  151

  South West

  1,099

  198

  89

  319

  245

  145

  92

  Wales

  662

  84

  62

  186

  154

  87

  86

  Scotland

  1,213

  184

  140

  447

  172

  121

  133

  Northern Ireland

  401

  58

  20

  124

  82

  28

  82

  464W 465W

  Highest qualification of working age1 people by sex, region and age; United Kingdom; summer 2000; not seasonally adjusted

  Thousand

  All persons2

  Degree or equivalent

  Qualification intermediate between A-level and degree

  GCE A level or equivalent

  GCSE grades A-C or equivalent

  Other qualifications

  No qualification

  50–59/64

  United Kingdom

  4,992

  731

  378

  1,621

  436

  705

  1,086

  Great Britain

  4,868

  716

  372

  1,585

  428

  698

  1,036

  England

  4,186

  629

  318

  1,339

  385

  802

  882

  North East

  219

  23

  15

  83

  12

  27

  58

  North West

  588

  74

  54

  217

  46

  65

  126

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  427

  50

  31

  153

  38

  68

  87

  East Midlands

  370

  52

  30

  118

  35

  48

  84

  West Midlands

  487

  58

  39

  131

  38

  78

  122

  Eastern

  472

  72

  29

  151

  46

  66

  106

  London

  512

  90

  27

  125

  40

  105

  121

  South East

  694

  141

  52

  218

  80

  87

  108

  South West

  436

  71

  40

  144

  52

  58

  69

  Wales

  260

  33

  22

  68

  28

  38

  70

  Scotland

  422

  54

  33

  177

  14

  58

  85

  Northern Ireland

  124

  14

  3—

  37

  3—

  3—

  50

  Women

  All of working age

  United Kingdom

  17,307

  2,297

  1,591

  2,897

  4,647

  2,502

  3,196

  Great Britain

  16,813

  2,243

  1,552

  2,813

  4,521

  2,449

  3,066

  England

  14,459

  1,955

  1,261

  2,380

  3,993

  2,166

  2,583

  North East

  750

  59

  64

  116

  218

  114

  173

  North West

  1,983

  234

  186

  318

  572

  255

  392

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  1,451

  163

  142

  240

  386

  218

  288

  East Midlands

  1,220

  140

  95

  200

  348

  173

  249

  West Midlands

  1,528

  157

  134

  220

  428

  223

  350

  Eastern

  1,573

  212

  119

  261

  476

  225

  269

  London

  2,222

  453

  171

  335

  458

  427

  358

  South East

  2,343

  353

  210

  447

  879

  338

  291

  South West

  1,390

  184

  141

  245

  427

  192

  194

  Wales

  830

  99

  80

  112

  245

  103

  187

  Scotland

  1,524

  189

  210

  321

  284

  180

  316

  Northern Ireland

  494

  54

  39

  84

  126

  53

  130

  16–49

  United Kingdom

  13,657

  1,992

  1,217

  2,512

  4,027

  1,802

  1,973

  Great Britain

  13,256

  1,944

  1,188

  2,435

  3,911

  1,764

  1,885

  England

  11,405

  1,697

  952

  2,058

  3,444

  1,573

  1,574

  North East

  592

  52

  47

  100

  198

  86

  106

  North West

  1,558

  202

  141

  271

  501

  178

  246

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  1,143

  139

  110

  205

  335

  164

  180

  East Midlands

  954

  122

  73

  175

  298

  122

  153

  West Midlands

  1,195

  137

  101

  193

  371

  161

  220

  Eastern

  1,227

  179

  93

  224

  406

  156

  159

  London

  1,835

  409

  131

  294

  409

  339

  237

  South East

  1,831

  298

  155

  385

  574

  238

  164

  South West

  1,070

  159

  103

  212

  352

  128

  109

  Wales

  641

  81

  57

  98

  208

  70

  121

  Scotland

  1.209

  166

  178

  279

  259

  120

  190

  Northern Ireland

  401

  48

  29

  77

  116

  38

  87

  50–59/64

  United Kingdom

  3,850

  305

  373

  385

  821

  700

  1,223

  Great Britain

  3,557

  299

  364

  378

  611

  685

  1,180

  England

  3,054

  259

  309

  323

  549

  593

  989

  North East

  158

  3—

  18

  16

  20

  28

  67

  North West

  424

  33

  45

  47

  71

  77

  145

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  308

  24

  32

  35

  52

  54

  108

  East Midlands

  288

  17

  22

  25

  51

  51

  97

  West Midlands

  333

  20

  33

  27

  57

  62

  130

  Eastern

  346

  34

  26

  37

  70

  69

  110

  London

  386

  44

  40

  41

  49

  88

  121

  South East

  512

  55

  56

  62

  105

  100

  127

  South West

  321

  25

  38

  33

  75

  64

  85

  Wales

  189

  18

  23

  14

  36

  32

  66

  Scotland

  315

  23

  32

  42

  25

  80

  126

  Northern Ireland

  93

  3—

  3—

  3—

  10

  15

  43

  1 Men aged 16–64 and women aged 16–59.

  2 Includes people who did not state their highest qualification.

  3 Figure too small for reliable estimate.

  466W

  Economic Activity
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will place in the Library an estimate of the activity rates of(a) men, (b) women and (c) men and women in each region and nation of the UK for the (i) 45 to 49, (ii) 50 to 54, (iii) 55 to 59 and (iv) 60 to 64 age groups. [1548111

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician. I have asked him to reply.

  Letter from Len Cook to Mr. Jim Cousins, dated 22 March 2001

  As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your parliamentary question about the activity rates by region and nation of the UK for males and females of various age groups (154811).

  Information about economic activity is collected by the Labour Force Survey (LFS). The table overleaf shows the economic activity rates by age and sex for each region and nation of the UK for autumn (September to November) 2000.

  In the LFS, economically active people are those aged 16 and over who are either in employment or who are International Labour Organisation (ILO) unemployed.

  Economic activity rate by age, sex and region; United Kingdom: autumn 2000; not seasonally adjusted

  Percentage economically active

  Aged

  45–49

  10–54

  55–59

  60–64

  All persons

  United Kingdom

  84.6

  79.1

  66.7

  38.4

  Great Britain

  84.8

  79.3

  66.9

  38.7

  England

  85.1

  80.0

  68.0

  39.6

  North East

  77.4

  73.9

  56.1

  27.1

  North West

  83.1

  73.5

  59.6

  34.9

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  83.5

  80.2

  68.1

  36.6

  East Midlands

  87.4

  81.8

  69.7

  38.8

  West Midlands

  81.2

  78.8

  66.3

  38.3

  Eastern

  87.2

  83.8

  72.1

  44.9

  London

  82.6

  77.1

  67.2

  40.3

  South East

  88.7

  83.8

  74.9

  45.6

  South West

  91.4

  84.8

  70.8

  42.3

  Wales

  81.8

  70.0

  55.6

  32.4

  Scotland

  83.1

  77.2

  63.0

  33.9

  Northern Ireland

  77.4

  72.2

  58.3

  27.5

  Men

  United Kingdom

  90.0

  85.8

  74.9

  50.9

  Great Britain

  90.2

  85.9

  75.1

  51.3

  England

  90.5

  86.7

  76.1

  53.0

  North East

  88.4

  82.6

  64.0

  36.5

  North West

  86.2

  80.1

  66.7

  46.7

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  88.4

  84.1

  76.4

  48.4

  East Midlands

  92.3

  88.1

  79.4

  57.3

  West Midlands

  87.6

  85.5

  74.0

  50.7

  Eastern

  93.0

  90.7

  81.4

  57.9

  London

  89.8

  84.7

  74.0

  54.1

  South East

  93.9

  91.0

  82.0

  59.9

  South West

  94.1

  91.1

  80.7

  56.0

  Wales

  88.9

  76.7

  64.1

  35.2

  Scotland

  88.2

  83.9

  72.1

  45.3

  Northern Ireland

  82.8

  81.9

  69.9

  35.2

  Women

  United Kingdom

  79.2

  72.4

  58.6

  26.5

  Great Britain

  79.4

  72.6

  58.9

  26.7

  England

  79.8

  73.4

  60.1

  26.8

  North East

  66.4

  65.1

  48.3

  18.4

  North West

  80.0

  66.9

  52.7

  23.7

  Yorkshire and Humberside

  78.5

  76.2

  59.8

  25.2

  East Midlands

  82.6

  75.4

  60.0

  20.6

  West Midlands

  74.7

  72.1

  58.7

  26.2

  Eastern

  81.5

  76.9

  63.0

  32.3

  London

  75.4

  69.8

  60.7

  27.1

  468W

  Economic activity rate by age, sex and region; United Kingdom: autumn 2000; not seasonally adjusted

  Percentage economically active

  Aged

  45–49

  50–54

  55–59

  60–64

  South East

  83.5

  76.6

  67.9

  31.7

  South West

  88.8

  78.7

  61.1

  29.3

  Wales

  74.9

  63.3

  47.3

  29.7

  Scotland

  78.0

  70.6

  54.4

  23.7

  Northern Ireland

  71.9

  62.7

  47.2

  1—

  1 Sample size too small for reliable estimate

  Source:

  ONS Labour Force Survey

  Earnings Statistics
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list the average weekly earnings for full-time(a) male and (b) female employees in each region and nation of the UK; and if he will index all such earnings to a base in which 100 represents the average weekly earnings in each category. [154815]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician. I have asked him to reply.

  Letter from Len Cook to Mr. Jim Cousins, dated 22 March 2001:

  As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your recent question on the average weekly earnings for males and females in each region and nation of the United Kingdom (154815).

  The New Earnings Survey (NES), carried out in April of each year, is the most comprehensive source of earnings information in Great Britain. The tables show the weekly earnings for the United Kingdom and each region and nation within it. It also shows an index based on the United Kingdom as 100 for each category. The figures provided are for full-time employees on adult rates of pay, whose pay for the survey period was not affected by absence.

  Average gross weekly pay (£) New Earnings Survey, United Kingdom, April 2000

  Male

  Female

  (£)

  Index

  (£)

  Index

  United Kingdom

  451.6

  100

  336.7

  100

  England

  459.2

  102

  341.5

  101

  Wales

  400.5

  89

  313.7

  93

  Scotland

  423.0

  94

  316.1

  94

  Northern Ireland

  393.3

  87

  307.3

  91

  North East

  398.9

  88

  306.0

  91

  North West

  428.6

  95

  312.8

  93

  Yorkshire and the Humber

  409.9

  91

  308.8

  92

  East Midlands

  407.0

  90

  301.1

  89

  West Midlands

  425.3

  94

  311.2

  92

  South West

  418.2

  93

  309.8

  92

  East

  455.5

  101

  333.8

  99

  London

  593.0

  131

  434.3

  129

  South East

  482.1

  107

  353.1

  105

LORD CHANCELLOR'S DEPARTMENT

  Jury Service
  Sir Nicholas Lyell
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many citizens have performed jury service in England and Wales in each of the past five years for which figures are available. [155061]
  469W
  Jane Kennedy
  Jurors are selected on a random basis from among those people who are registered on the electoral rolls for England and Wales. No figures on juror numbers are held centrally. However, the combined attendance and non-attendance days have been used to estimate the numbers of jurors performing jury services over the past five years.

  1996—146,000

  1997—147,000

  1998—139,000

  1999—134,000

  2000—132,000

  Notes

  1. Estimates rounded to nearest 1,000

  2. They do not indicate numbers originally summoned

  Departmental Policies (Ceredigion)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if she will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Ceredigion constituency, the effects on Ceredigion of the Lord Chancellor's Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154985]

  Jane Kennedy
  The Lord Chancellor's Department is responsible for the administration of the courts and for legal services. We have taken steps to improve the management and effectiveness of the services we provide and to meet customer needs, including working closely with other agencies to provide a fair, swift and effective system of justice, to improve the availability of affordable and good quality legal services and to improve the lives of children and help build and sustain strong families.

  Work is scheduled to start on a local Community Legal Service Partnership in Ceredigion from this summer. Across Ceredigion contracts have been awarded to local law firms for 2001–02 with a total value of £94,000, and these contracts include categories such as family, debt, housing and welfare benefits. Contracts with Aberystwyth and Cardigan Citizens Advice Bureaux and Shelter Cymru will also benefit local residents.

  The Legal Services Commission is considering expressions of interest in the provision of bilingual telephone advice services for financially eligible clients in Ceredigion, in acknowledgement of the fact that this is a rural area with significant numbers of people unable to access easily services delivered through offices in the larger towns. An announcement on the award of a telephone contract for Ceredigion is anticipated within the next two months.

  Departmental Policies (Ynys MÔn)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if she will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Ynys MÔn constituency, the effects on Ynys MÔn of the Lord Chancellor's Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [1549861

  Jane Kennedy
  The Lord Chancellor's Department is responsible for the administration of the courts and for legal services. We have taken steps to improve the management and effectiveness of the services we provide and to meet customer needs, including working closely 470W
  with other agencies to provide a fair, swift and effective system of justice, to improve the availability of affordable and good quality legal services and to improve the lives of children and help build and sustain strong families.

  The Anglesey Community Legal Service Partnership (CLSP), which covers the Ynys MÔn constituency area, is one of 165 CLSPs throughout England and Wales. Across Anglesey, the Legal Services Commission (LSC) has awarded local law firms contracts for 2001–02 with a total value of £91,000. Contracts awarded to Ynys MÔn Citizens' Advice Bureaux and Shelter Cymru will also benefit local residents. The contracts cover a range of categories such as family, debt, housing and welfare benefits.

  Departmental Policies(Meirionnydd Nant Conwy)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if she will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Meirionnydd Nant Conwy constituency, the effects on Meirionnydd Nant Conwy of the Lord Chancellor's Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154989]

  Jane Kennedy
  The Lord Chancellor's Department is responsible for the administration of the courts and for legal services. We have taken steps to improve the management and effectiveness of the services we provide and to meet customer needs, including working closely with other agencies to provide a fair, swift and effective system of justice, to improve the availability of affordable and good quality legal services and to improve the lives of children and help build and sustain strong families.

  Meirionnydd Nant Conwy falls within the Gwynedd Community Legal Service Partnership (CLSP) area. Across Gwynedd, contracts have been awarded to local law firms for 2001–02 with a total value of £197,000. These cover categories of law including family, debt, housing and welfare benefits. Contracts with Gwynedd CAB, Shelter Cymru and Bangor Disablement Welfare Rights will also benefit local residents.

  The Legal Services Commission is considering expressions of interest in the provision of bilingual telephone advice services for financially eligible clients in Gwynedd, in acknowledgement of the fact that this is a large rural area with significant numbers of people unable easily to access services delivered through offices in the larger towns. An announcement on the award of a telephone contract for Gwynedd is anticipated within the next two months.

  Departmental Policies (Caernarfon)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if she will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Caernarfon constituency, the effects on Caernarfon of the Lord Chancellor's Department' s policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154988]

  Jane Kennedy
  The Lord Chancellor's Department is responsible for the Administration of the courts and for legal services. We have taken steps to improve the management and effectiveness of the services we provide and to meet customer needs, including working closely
  471W
  with other agencies to provide a fair, swift and effective system of justice, to improve the availability of affordable and good quality legal services and to improve the lives of children and help build and sustain strong families.

  Caernarfon falls within the Gwynedd Community Legal Service Partnership (CLSP) area. Across Gwynedd, contracts have been awarded to local law firms for 2001–02 with a total value of £197,000. These cover categories of law including family, debt, housing and welfare benefits. Contracts with Gwynedd CAB, Shelter Cymru and Bangor Disablement Welfare Rights will also benefit local residents.

  The Legal Services Commission is considering expressions of interest in the provision of bilingual telephone advice services for financially eligible clients in Gwynedd, in acknowledgement of the fact that this is a large rural area with significant numbers of people unable easily to access services delivered through offices in the larger towns. An announcement on the award of a telephone contract for Gwynedd is anticipated within the next two months.

  Family Visit Appeals
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many(a) oral and (b) paper-only family visit appeals were received by the Immigration Appellate Authority in February. [155572]

  Jane Kennedy
  In February 2001, the Immigration Appellate Authority received 65 cases for oral hearing and 67 cases for paper-only hearing.

  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many family visit appeals were(a) determined, (b) allowed and (c) dismissed by the Immigration appellate Authority (i) at an oral hearing and (ii) on the papers only, in February. [155573]

  Jane Kennedy
  The breakdown of family visit appeals determined, allowed and dismissed by the Immigration Appellate Authority in February 2001 is:

  Oral cases

  Paper cases

  Determined

  13

  57

  Allowed

  12

  17

  Dismissed

  1

  40

CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT

  Lottery Funding
  Sir Sydney Chapman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will make a statement about funding for arts buildings allocated from the national lottery. [153877]

  Mr. Alan Howarth
  Between 1995 and 2000 the Arts Council of England, through its Capital Programme, has awarded £913,752,038 to projects with a building element.
  472W
  Mr. St. Aubyn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will make a statement about the speed with which lottery funding reaches the good causes. [153880]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  All Lottery funds left after paying expenses allowed under the legislation are allocated immediately to one of the 15 National Lottery distributing bodies. The distributing bodies make payments to award recipients as funds are required.

  Lottery Liaison Officers
  Mr. Barnes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will make a statement on his Department's assistance to lottery liaison officers employed by local authorities. [153879]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  My Department recognises the important role which local authority Lottery liaison officers can play in attracting Lottery funding into their areas, and is supporting the Chief Cultural and Leisure Officers Association in their plans to draw up best practice guidance. The guidance will focus on what Lottery liaison officers can do to help small organisations and community groups secure Lottery funding. We also encourage our Lottery distribution bodies to work closely with Lottery liaison officers to ensure that they are kept up to date on new Lottery funding initiatives and programmes.

  Olympic Games 2012
  Mr. Jack
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assessment his Department has made of the facilities required for the United Kingdom to host the Olympic games in 2012. [153881]

  Kate Hoey
  My Department has not made any assessment of the facilities required to host the 2012 Olympic Games. The British Olympic Association (BOA) have primary responsibility for UK bids and have not yet taken a decision on whether to bid for 2012. However, we have seen a draft of the BOA' s feasibility report on what is required for a possible London bid for 2012. The Government will consider with the BOA, the Mayor, the Greater London Authority and other interested parties what further work will be needed to assess the costs and requirements of a London bid.

  Foot and Mouth
  20. Mr. Fearn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assistance his Department offers to hoteliers and bed-and-breakfast businesses which have been affected by the recent outbreak of foot and mouth disease. [153882]

  Janet Anderson
  My right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment and Head of the Rural Task Force announced on 20 March a preliminary package of measures to alleviate immediate financial hardship of small businesses, including tourism businesses, in rural areas. My right hon. Friend also announced that extra funding will be made available to promote rural attractions. The Rural Task Force will continue its work and we will want to consider any further Government response in the light of the latest developments.
  473W
  Mr. Peter Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will list the meetings and conferences organised by his Department and agencies of his Department which have been(a) cancelled and (b) postponed owing to foot and mouth disease; and if he will make a statement. [155359]

  Mr. Chris Smith [holding answer 23 March 2001]
  No meetings or conferences have been cancelled or postponed by my Department or by the Royal Parks Agency. On the contrary, Ministers and officials in my Department have held many additional meetings, particularly with representatives of the tourism and leisure sectors, to explore ways of dealing with the consequences of the foot and mouth outbreak.

  Mr. Clifton-Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what estimate he has made of the effect on tourism of the foot and mouth epidemic. [153890]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  I refer the hon. Member to my statement in the House on 14 March 2001,Official Report, columns 1021–36.

  Church Repairs (Grants)
  Maria Eagle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport when he will make an announcement on grants to places of worship which need repair. [153883]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  The new grant scheme for listed places of worship will be a considerable help to churches and congregations around the country. My Department is now in the process of consulting interested parties on how best to deliver the new scheme. I hope to make an announcement about the availability of the grants as early in the new financial year as possible.

  Sports Coaching
  Mr. Bailey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what action he is taking to improve sports coaching. [153884]

  Kate Hoey
  The recently published Government's Plan for Sport indicates that we are establishing a Coaching Task Force to review the future role of the National Coaching Foundation, to conduct, during this year, an independent international benchmarking exercise on coach education and to consider the feasibility of an investment programme to create 3,000 full-time paid coaching posts by 2005.

  Millennium Dome
  Mr. Paterson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will make a statement on the future of the Millennium Dome. [153885]

  Janet Anderson
  The Government are currently conducting market testing prior to launching a new competition. Details of the timetable and process for that competition will be announced as soon as possible after market testing is complete.

  Mr. Fabricant
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will make a statement on the cost of maintaining the Dome at Greenwich. [153876]
  474W
  Janet Anderson
  Following decommissioning it is estimated that the running costs of the Dome will be up to –500,000 per month.

  Mr. Gray
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (1) if the sponsorship of the Millennium Dome falls within the Guidance on Sponsorship of Government Activities and Events; [153326]

  (2) if he will investigate the sponsorship of the Millennium Dome in relation to the Guidance on Sponsorship of Government Activities and Events [153312]

  Janet Anderson
  [holding answer 21 March 2001]Responsibility for negotiating and securing sponsorship rested with the New Millennium Experience Company (NMEC), an executive Non-Departmental Public Body (NDPB). As an NDPB, the NMEC is bound by specific rules and guidance on regularity and propriety in the stewardship of public funds in line with the principles set out in the sponsorship guidance.

  Wembley Stadium
  24. Mr. Fallon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will make a statement on Wembley stadium. [153886]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave earlier today to the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Mr. Flight), Official Report, column 672.

  UK Film Industry
  25. Ms Ward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what recent assessment he has made of levels of inward investment in the UK film industry. [153887]

  Janet Anderson
  Britain is an increasingly popular location for film production. A record 28 feature films produced by foreign companies were made in Britain last year, with budgets totalling –366 million, an increase of 9 per cent. on the previous year. Total inward investment in film and television productions was –539 million last year, a 33 per cent. increase on the previous year.

  Mrs. Betty Williams
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what estimate he has made of the impact of the extension of the film tax concessions on the industry. [153888]

  Janet Anderson
  The Government's long-term aim is to create a more sustainable and better capitalised film industry. Film tax reliefs have already had a significant impact, attracting hundreds of millions of pounds of investment. The Chancellor's announcement that Section 48 reliefs for the film industry will be extended until July 2005 will give the industry sufficient time to build on these encouraging developments.

  Arts Council
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture. Media and Sport what Arts Council money has been distributed in Thurrock in the past five years. [153889]

  Mr. Alan Howarth
  East England Arts is contributing –19,900 over three y ears to help Thurrock unitary authority to fund an Arts Development Officer. In addition Thurrock
  475W
  has received –5,620 grant in aid funding and a further –15,055 from the Lottery funded Arts for Everyone scheme.

  Football Foundation
  Mr. Pond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assistance the Football Foundation can provide to small local clubs. [153869]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  Football clubs may apply to the Football Foundation for funding for grass roots initiatives which promote social inclusion or benefit local communities, for education projects, or for stadium improvement work. The Foundation has some –24 million to invest in football in 2000–01 and it is likely that the moneys available will more than treble from 2001–02 onwards. Decisions on applications are for the Foundation's Board, but it is likely that a substantial proportion of total funding will go to smaller clubs.

  New Millennium Experience Company
  Mr. Peter Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport for what reason the new Millennium Experience Company decided to make remuneration payments through on offshore account; and what the value was of such payments. [145565]

  Janet Anderson [holding answer 15 January 2001]
  NMEC has advised that during the course of 1999 the company took advice from its tax consultants, in discussion with the Inland Revenue, and concluded that, while it would operate with a clear presumption against payments to offshore accounts, it would consider each case on its merits and on the condition that requested arrangements were not for the purpose of tax avoidance.

  I refer to my letter of 19 December 2000 to the hon. Member, a copy of which has been placed in the Libraries of both Houses. NMEC has completed a further search of all its payment records as part of its preparation for solvent liquidation. NMEC has concluded that prior to 19 December 2000, and excluding payments net of tax, remuneration through offshore accounts was made in two cases, not one as previously advised, both to an Isle of Man address. The total value of these payments was –93,898.5.

  Separately, payments by cheque, handed over on site but payable to companies registered outside the UK, in respect of work undertaken by individuals filling headcount posts, totalled –138,423.

  Hinduja Brothers
  Mr. Baker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport on what date(a) his Department, (b) the NMEC and (c) Lord Falconer of Thoroton were informed of intelligence reports relating to the Hinduja brothers, referred to in paragraph 8.4 of the report of the Hammond inquiry.[153734]

  Janet Anderson
  [holding answer 14 March 2001]: Sir Anthony Hammond's report set out all the facts relevant to the subject of his inquiry. He confirmed that the intelligence material which had been collected was handled entirely properly in accordance with the statutory
  476W
  functions of the intelligence agencies. It is long-standing practice not to comment on the detail of intelligence matters.

  Departmental Policies (Ynys MÔn)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Ynys MÔn constituency, the effects on Ynys MÔn of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154978]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  Through their commitment to public service broadcasting, the Government have helped to foster an environment in which a creative, commercially successful broadcasting industry provides a wide range of UK-made, high quality, original programmes catering for all viewers and listeners. We have ensured a secured funding base for the BBC and S4C, while giving them the freedom to develop commercial operations which complement and support their public service remit. We have made it clear in the Communications White Paper that public service broadcasting will continue to have a key role to play in the digital future.

  The Government have also introduced free television licences for people aged 75 or over from 1 November last year. Information on the number of beneficiaries by constituency is not available, but estimates based on the 1991 Census indicate that there were approximately 5,300 people aged 75 or over living in the Ynys MÔn constituency.

  My Department sponsors the British Tourist Authority (BTA), which continues to promote Britain effectively as an attractive tourist destination for overseas visitors. The BTA's successful marketing activities are aimed at bringing benefits to all parts of the UK, including Ynys MÔn.

  According to the information supplied to us by the distributing bodies for the national lottery awards database, there have been 136 national lottery awards to Ynys MÔn, totalling £3,715,880 since 2 May 1997. Nine Millennium Award Winners have been identified from Ynys MÔn and between them they have received grants totalling £33,985.

  Departmental Policies (Ceredigion)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Ceredigion constituency, the effects on Ceredigion of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154981]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  Through their commitment to public service broadcasting, the Government have helped to foster an environment in which a creative, commercially successful broadcasting industry provides a wide range of UK-made, high quality, original programmes catering for all viewers and listeners. We have ensured a secured funding base for the BBC and S4C, while giving them the freedom to develop commercial operations which complement and support their public service remit. We have made it clear in the Communications White Paper that public service broadcasting will continue to have a key role to play in the digital future.
  477W
  The Government have also introduced free television licences for people aged 75 or over from 1 November last year. Information on the number of beneficiaries by constituency is not available, but estimates based on the 1991 Census indicate that there were approximately 4,800 people aged 75 or over living in the Ceredigion constituency.

  My Department sponsors the British Tourist Authority (BTA), which continues to promote Britain effectively as an attractive tourist destination for overseas visitors. The BTA's successful marketing activities are aimed at bringing benefits to all parts of the UK, including Ceredigion.

  According to the information supplied to us by the distributing bodies for the national lottery awards database, there have been 252 national lottery awards to Ceredigion, totalling £16,357,304, since 2 May 1997: this includes an award from the Millennium Festival of £12,000 for the Teifi River Festival. Thirty Millennium Award Winners have been identified from Ceredigion and between them they have received grants totalling £106,865.

  Departmental Policies (Caernarfon)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Caernarfon constituency, the effects on Caernarfon of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154979]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  Through their commitment to public service broadcasting, the Government have helped to foster an environment in which a creative, commercially successful broadcasting industry provides a wide range of UK-made, high quality, original programmes catering for all viewers and listeners. We have ensured a secured funding base for the BBC and S4C, while giving them the freedom to develop commercial operations which complement and support their public service remit. We have made it clear in the Communications White Paper that public service broadcasting will continue to have a key role to play in the digital future.

  The Government have also introduced free television licences for people aged 75 or over from 1 November last year. Information on the number of beneficiaries by constituency is not available, but estimates based on the 1991 Census indicate that there were approximately 5,300 people aged 75 or over living in the Caernarfon constituency.

  My Department sponsors the British Tourist Authority (BTA), which continues to promote Britain effectively as an attractive tourist destination for overseas visitors. The BTA's successful marketing activities are aimed at bringing benefits to all parts of the UK, including Caernarfon.

  According to the information supplied to us by the distributing bodies for the national lottery awards database, there have been 149 national lottery awards to Caernarfon, totalling £5,908,513 since 2 May 1997. Thirteen Millennium Award Winners have been identified from Caernarfon and between them they have received grants totalling £28,066.

  Departmental Policies (Meirionnydd Nant Conwy)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Meirionnydd Nant Conwy constituency, the effects on Meirionnydd Nant Conwy of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154980]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  Through their commitment to public service broadcasting, the Government have helped to foster an environment in which a creative, commercially successful broadcasting industry provides a wide range of UK-made, high quality, original programmes catering for all viewers and listeners. We have ensured a secured funding base for the BBC and S4C, while giving them the freedom to develop commercial operations which complement and support their public service remit. We have made it clear in the Communications White Paper that public service broadcasting will continue to have a key role to play in the digital future.

  The Government have also introduced free television licences for people aged 75 or over from 1 November last year. Information on the number of beneficiaries by constituency is not available, but estimates based on the 1991 Census indicate that there were approximately 3,800 people aged 75 or over living in the Meirionnydd Nant Conwy constituency.

  My Department sponsors the British Tourist Authority (BTA), which continues to promote Britain effectively as an attractive tourist destination for overseas visitors. The BTA's successful marketing activities are aimed at bringing benefits to all parts of the UK, including Meirionnydd Nant Conwy.

  According to the information supplied to us by the distributing bodies for the national lottery awards database, there have been 173 national lottery awards to Meirionnydd Nant Conwy, totalling £5,887,272, since 2 May 1997: this includes an award from the Millennium Festival of £80,000 for the Celtic Bowl Festival 2000. Ten Millennium Award Winners have been identified from Meirionnydd Nant Conwy and between them they have received grants totalling £41,389.

  Picketts Lock
  Mr. Peter Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what advice he has received from Sport England regarding the value for money represented by their(a) current and (b) future investment of Lottery funds in Picketts Lock; and if he will make a statement. [155366]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]: When making a lottery award, value for money is one of the factors Sport England and other lottery distributors must take account of.

  Lottery Commissioners
  Mr. Stunell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what plans he has to appoint a Lottery Commissioner from outside the South East Standard Planning Region; and if he will make a statement. [155422]

  Kate Hoey
  National Lottery Commissioners are appointed on the basis of their abilities. The most recent Commissioner, Timothy Hornsby, was appointed
  479W
  following an application process which fully complied with the processes and guidance of the Commissioner for Public Appointments (CPA). There was an agreed job specification, the post was advertised and the shortlisted candidates were interviewed by a panel which included independent assessors as required by the CPA.

  Regional Digital Multiplexes
  Mr. Baker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will make a statement on the decision by the Radio Authority to award all regional digital multiplexes to MXR. [155564]

  Janet Anderson
  Of the 23 local digital multiplex licences awarded so far, five have been deemed regional multiplexes by the Radio Authority. Of these, four have been granted to MXR and one further regional multiplex licence (for Central Scotland) awarded to Switch Digital. Decisions on the award of all independent radio licences are a matter for the Radio Authority, in accordance with the criteria set out in the Broadcasting Acts. The Authority publishes detailed assessments, setting out its reasons for all such licence awards.

  Creative Partnerships
  Mr. Ennis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will make a statement on his plans for Creative Partnerships. [153875]

  Mr. Alan Howarth
  I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave earlier today to my hon. Friend for Wirral, South (Mr. Chapman),Official Report, column 674.

  Departmental Policies (Edinburgh, South)
  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly s possible to the Edinburgh, South constituency, the effects on Edinburgh of the Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [155339]

  Mr. Chris Smith
  Through their Commitment to public service broadcasting, the Government have helped to foster an environment in which a creative, commercially successful broadcasting industry provides a wide range of UK-made, high quality, original programmes catering for all viewers and listeners. We have ensured a secure funding base for the BBC, enabling it to cater to all the nations and regions of the UK, while giving it the freedom to develop commercial operations which complement and support its public service remit. We have made it clear in the Communications White Paper that public service broadcasting will continue to have a key role to play in the digital future.

  The Government have also introduced free television licences for people aged 75 or over from 1 November last year. Information on the number of beneficiaries by constituency is not available, but estimates based on the 1991 Census indicate that there were approximately 6,700 people aged 75 or over living in Edinburgh, South constituency.

  My Department sponsors the British Tourist Authority (BTA), which continues to promote Britain effectively as an attractive tourist destination for overseas visitors. The BTA's successful marketing activities working in
  480W
  partnership with the Scottish Tourist Board are aimed at bringing benefits to all parts of the UK, including Edinburgh, South.

  According to the information supplied to us by the distributing bodies for the national lottery awards database, there have been 91 national lottery awards to Edinburgh, South, totalling £3,873,066 since 2 May 1997. Forty two Millennium Award Winners have been identified from Edinburgh, South and between them they have received grants totalling £139,233.

  New Opportunities Fund
  Gillian Merron
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if he will make a statement on the future programme of the New Opportunities Fund. [153878]

  Kate Hoey
  Proposals for the future programme of the New Opportunities Fund were set out in the consultation paper "New Opportunities from the Lottery". Those proposals received widespread support and a draft Order specifying the new initiatives and requiring the approval of both Houses was laid before Parliament on 1 March.

SOCIAL SECURITY

  Departmental Policies (Edinburgh, South)
  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Edinburgh, South constituency, the effects on Edinburgh of the Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [155342]

  Mr. Rooker
  The Department's policies and initiatives have made a significant contribution to the Government's overall objectives of:Eradicating child poverty in 20 years, and halving it within 10;
  Promoting work as the best form of welfare for people of working age while protecting the position of those in greatest need; and,
  Combating poverty and promoting security and independence in retirement for today's and tomorrow's pensioners.

  These goals are being pursued nationwide and our achievements are set out in our annual "Opportunity for all" reports. Our second report, "Opportunity for all—One year on: making a difference" (CM4865, September 2000), sets out what progress has been made in the past year, as well as highlighting what more needs to be done. Nationwide statistical information is necessarily more complete than constituency level data, but the following provides a comparative guide to the effect of the Department's policies and actions in the Edinburgh, South constituency and the City of Edinburgh local authority area since May 1997.

  Measures in our five Budgets so far will lift over 1.2 million children nationally out of poverty. These include record increases to Child Benefit, the introduction of the Working Families Tax Credit, increases in the income-related benefits, the minimum wage and tax changes.

  Child benefit will be worth £15.50 a week for the eldest child and £10.35 a week for other children from April 2001: nationally about 7 million families receive child

  481W
  benefit, and in Edinburgh, South 7,259 families benefit and in City of Edinburgh local authority area 47,558 families benefit.

  We now have the lowest unemployment rate in 25 years. The New Deals have helped lone parents, the young unemployed, the long-term unemployed, the over-50s and partners of the unemployed to move from benefit into work. In the period since May 1997 the number of people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance nationally has reduced from 1.562,400 to 960,600; in Edinburgh, South the number has reduced from 1,900 to 1.200, and in the City of Edinburgh local authority area from 13,000 to 7,400. Since May 1997 the number of lone parents who claim Income Support has decreased from 1,013,500 to 894,100 nationally; in Edinburgh, South the number has decreased from 1,300 to 1,000 and in the City of Edinburgh local authority area from 7,000 to 6,300.

  Older people are disproportionately affected by fuel poverty, so we have introduced Winter Fuel Payments to help with their heaviest fuel bill. This winter, the payment is £200 for households who qualify. Around 14,000 older people in Edinburgh, South have received a Winter Fuel Payment for this winter. Information on the number of Winter Fuel Payments received is not available by local authority area.

  To demonstrate our commitment to combating pensioner poverty, this year we will spend £4.5 billion extra in real terms on pensioners. Some 13,400 pensioners in Edinburgh, South, and 74,900 in the City of Edinburgh local authority area will benefit from the substantial increases in the basic State pension this April and next; this year's increase is £5 a week for single pensioners and £8 for couples. In addition we have introduced free TV licences for the over-75s of whom we estimate there are about 6,300 in Edinburgh, South and 31,100 in the City of Edinburgh local authority area. 2,200 pensioner families in Edinburgh, South and 11,300 in the City of Edinburgh local authority area are receiving the Minimum Income Guarantee, which we introduced in April 1999 to help our poorest pensioners. From April they will be at least £15 a week, or £800 a year, better off in real terms as a result of Government measures since 1997.

  Other reforms in the pipeline include: the new Pension Credit in 2003 designed to ensure that pensioners benefit from their savings; the launch of Stakeholder Pensions in

  Median average net disposable weekly household income by family type for lone parents in Great Britain

  £ per week

  Median average household income

  Before housing costs

  After housing costs

  Family type

  Income Support

  Working

  Income Support

  Working

  All Lone Parent Families (equivalised)

  164

  216

  113

  173

  Equivalent money values for different types of lone parent family

  1 child aged 5

  135

  177

  86

  132

  2 children aged 5, 11

  176

  231

  116

  177

  2 children aged 11

  182

  240

  121

  186

  3 children aged 5, 11, 16

  235

  309

  159

  243

  Notes

  1. All figures are estimates and are taken from the Households Below Average Income (HBAI data set which is derived from the Family Resources Survey (FRS). The FRS does not include Northern Ireland, and 1998–99 is the latest year for which data are available.

  2. The income measure used in HBAI is weekly net (disposable) equivalised household income (that is to say income that is adjusted to reflect the composition of the household). The equivalised income benchmark used for comparison purposes is the income of a couple with no children. The equivalent actual money values for different types of lone parent family have also been given.
  482W
  April this year; and the introduction of the State Second Pension in April 2002 both of which will help provide greater security for tomorrow's pensioners.

  Disability Living Allowance
  Mr. Boswell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) if he will break down the Disability Living Allowance awards for which deafness is the main disabling condition by(a) the rate of each component and (b) the age bands (i) 0 to 15, (ii) 16 to 24, (iii) 25 to 34, (iv) 35 to 44, (v) 45 to 54, (vi) 55 to 64 and (vii) 65 years and over; [155475]

  (2) if he will break down the Disability Living Allowance awards for which deafness is the main disabling condition by (a) the age bands (i) 0 to 15, (ii) 16 to 24, (iii) 25 to 34, (iv) 35 to 44. (v) 45 to 54, (vi) 55 to 64 and (vii) 65 years and over and (b) type of award, including (1) care component only, (2) mobility component only and (3) combined care and mobility components. [1554761

  Mr. Bayley
  Information is not available in the form requested.

  Regulations
  Mr. Viggers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will make a statement on the availability of the full regulations governing social security; and how many copies he holds which are available for consultation by the public. [155001]

  Mr. Rooker
  Regulations on Social Security are contained in Statutory Instruments which are published by The Stationery Office Ltd. and made available through their bookshops and libraries. They are also available on the internet at www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk.

  Average Income
  Ms Harman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what the average income is for a lone-parent family in London(a) on income support and (b) where the parent is in employment. [155005]

  Angela Eagle: The information is not available in the format requested. Such information as is available is in the table.
  483W
  3. The estimates are sample counts, which have been adjusted for non-response using multipurpose grossing factors that control for region, Council Tax band and a number of other demographic variables. Estimates are subject to both sampling error and to variability in non-response. All proportions are rounded to the nearest per cent.

  4. The estimates are presented on both a Before Housing Costs (BHC) and an After Housing Costs (AHC) basis in line with HBAI conventions.

  Source:

  Family Resources Survey 1998–99

  Ms Harman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what the average income of family with two children in London was(a) in 1996 and (b) at the latest date for which figures are available. [155006]

  Mr. Bayley
  The information requested is not available.

  Pensions Advertising Campaign
  Mrs. Lait
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) how much he estimates will have been spent on the current pensions advertising campaign by its conclusion; which media are being used and at what cost; what factors underlay the choice of media used; and if he will publish the brief to the agency responsible for the current pensions campaign; [154059]

  (2) what the objective and subjective criteria are for measuring the success of the current pensions advertising campaign; [154065]

  (3) pursant to his answer to the right hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field) of 12 March 2001,Official Report, column 458W, on pensions, if he will set out details of the working study of pension provision uptake; [154147]

  (4) what plans he has to monitor the new pension provisions for people who responded to the pension advertising campaign and who received copies of the new pension guide. [154064]

  Mr. Rooker
  The costs for developing, running and evaluating the pensions education campaign will be in the region of £6.5 million. We are advertising on TV, in the national press, in selected magazines and in the cinema.

  The broadcast media used for this campaign were selected to ensure that the new campaign made an impact and that the target audience was reached in the most effective way.

  The brief only formed a starting point for the agency and covered areas other than the current pensions education campaign.

  The campaign will be evaluated in a number of ways, including quantitative tracking research. We will also monitor hits to the website, numbers of orders placed and leaflets sent. Over the longer term we will be looking at take-up of different pension provision.

  A summary of quantitative tracking research on the pensions education marketing campaign will be placed in the Library in the summer.

  We are conducting quantitative tracking research on the campaign as well as longer term monitoring of pension provision.

  Mr. Willetts
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security, pursuant to his answer to the right hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field), of 12 March 2001,Official
  484W
  Report, column 458W, when the results of the tracking study on the current pensions advertising campaign will be available. [155405]

  Mr. Rooker
  A summary of quantitative tracking research on the pensions education marketing campaign will be placed in the Library in the summer.

  Pensions
  Mr. Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what weekly state second pension a person can expect to receive having worked for 40 years and with annual earnings of(a) £4,000, (b) £5,000, (c) £6,000,(d) £7,000, (e) £8,000, (f) £9,000, (g) £9,500, (h) £10,000, (i) £11,000, (j) £12,000, (k) £13,000, (l) £14,000 and (m) £15,000. [153788]

  Mr. Rooker
  [holding answer 15 March 2001]: A full working life for pensions purposes is 49 years for a man and 44 for a woman if she was born on or before 5 October 1950 (the full working life for women increases incrementally to 49 years as a result of the equalisation of state pension age).

  The table shows a comparison of figures:

  £

  For comparison

  Annual earnings

  State second pension entitlement on 40 year working life

  SERPS entitlement on 40 year working life

  State second pension entitlement on 49 year working life

  SERPS entitlement on 49 year working life

  £4,000

  50

  5

  59

  6

  £5,000

  50

  8

  59

  10

  £6,000

  50

  11

  59

  13

  £7,000

  50

  15

  59

  17

  £8,000

  50

  18

  59

  21

  £9,000

  50

  21

  59

  25

  £9,500

  50

  22

  59

  27

  £10,000

  50

  24

  59

  28

  £11,000

  51

  27

  61

  32

  £12,000

  52

  30

  63

  36

  £13,000

  54

  33

  65

  40

  £14,000

  55

  36

  66

  44

  £15,000

  57

  39

  68

  47

  Note:

  All figures expressed in 2001 earnings terms, and constant earnings terms

  Departmental Policies (Manchester, Gorton)
  Mr. Kaufman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the constituency, the effects on the Manchester, Gorton constituency of his Department's policies and actions since 22 November 2000. [154502]
  485W
  Mr. Rooker
  The Department's policies and initiatives have made a significant contribution to the Government's overall objectives of:Eradicating child poverty in 20 years, and halving it within 10;
  Promoting work as the best form of welfare for people of working age while protecting the position of those in greatest need; and
  Combating poverty and promoting security and independence in retirement for today's and tomorrow's pensioners.

  These goals are being pursued nationwide and our achievements are set out in our annual "Opportunity for all" reports. Our second report, "Opportunity for all—One year on: making a difference" (CM4865, September 2000), sets out what progress has been made in the past year, as well as highlighting what more needs to be done. Nationwide statistical information is necessarily more complete than constituency level data, but the following provides a comparative guide to the effect of the Department's policies and actions in Manchester, Gorton since May 1997.

  Measures in our five Budgets so far will lift over 1.2 million children nationally out of poverty. These include record increases to Child Benefit, the introduction of the Working Families Tax Credit, increases in the income-related benefits, the minimum wage and tax changes.

  Child Benefit will be worth £15.50 a week for the eldest child and £10.35 a week for other children from April 2001: nationally about 7 million families receive Child Benefit, and in Gorton 9,893 families benefit.

  We now have the lowest unemployment rate in 25 years. The New Deals have helped lone parents, the young unemployed, the long-term unemployed, the over-50s and partners of the unemployed to move from benefit into work. In the period since May 1997 the number of people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance nationally has reduced from 1,562,400 to 960,600; in Gorton the number has reduced from 4,700 to 2,900. Since May 1997 the number of lone parents who claim Income Support has decreased from 1,013,500 to 894,100 nationally and in Gorton from 3,400 to 3,000.

  Older people are disproportionately affected by fuel poverty, so we have introduced Winter Fuel Payments to help with their heaviest fuel bill. This winter, the payment is £200 for households who qualify. Around 10,900 older people in Gorton have received a Winter Fuel Payment for this winter.

  To demonstrate our commitment to combating pensioner poverty, this year we will spend £4.5 billion extra in real terms on pensioners. Some 11,000 pensioners in Gorton will benefit from the substantial increases in the basic State pension this April and next; this year's increase is £5 a week for single pensioners and £8 for couples. In addition we have introduced free TV licences for the over-75s of whom we estimate there are about 3,800 in Gorton. 4,400 pensioner families in Gorton are receiving the Minimum Income Guarantee, which we introduced in April 1999 to help our poorest pensioners. From April they will be at least £15 a week, or £800 a year, better off in real terms as a result of Government measures since 1997.

  Other reforms in the pipeline include: the new Pension Credit in 2003 designed to ensure that pensioners benefit from their savings; the launch of Stakeholder Pensions in
  486W
  April this year; and the introduction of the State Second Pension in April 2002 both of which will help provide greater security for tomorrow's pensioners.

  Redundancies (Paignton)
  Mr. Sanders
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what assessment he has made of the impact of 1,400 redundancies in Paignton, Devon, on benefit advice services. [154294]

  Angela Eagle
  This is a matter for Alexis Cleveland, the Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency. She will write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from Alexis Cleveland to Mr. Adrian Sanders, dated 23 March 2001:

  The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked me to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking what assessment he has made of the impact of 1,400 redundancies in Paignton, Devon. on benefit advice services.

  The potential redundancies in Paignton are in two tranches of 700, the first occurring in January and the second is imminent. The local Benefits Agency (BA) office, in consultation with Employment Service (ES) colleagues, has assessed the requirement to deal with the issues arising, including benefit advice.

  This was minimal with respect to the first tranche but is considered to be significant with regard to the second. BA and ES staff have analysed all potential requirements and are to discuss the appropriate response with the Company, Nortel Electronics, this week. Staff will be made available to deal with the emerging situation with little or no impact on service to other customers.

  I hope this is helpful

  Chemical Weapons
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will place in the Library copies of all the assessments conducted by the War Pensions Agency into the report produced by the US Institute of Medicine in 1993, "Veterans at Risk—the health effects of mustard gas and Lewisite". [154765]

  Mr. Bayley
  The report was studied by the War Pensions Agency but no formal evaluation of it took place.

  Departmental Policies (Truro and St. Austell)
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will set out, including statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Truro and St Austell constituency, the effects on Truro and St. Austell of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154532]

  Mr. Rooker
  The Department's policies and initiatives have made a significant contribution to the Government's overall objectives of Eradicating child poverty in 20 years, and halving it within 10;
  Promoting work as the best form of welfare for people of working age while protecting the position of those in greatest need; and,
  Combating poverty and promoting security and independence in retirement for today's and tomorrow's pensioners.

  These goals are being pursued nationwide and our achievements are set out in our annual "Opportunity for all" reports. Our second report, "Opportunity for all—One year on: making a difference" (CM4865, September 2000), sets out what progress has been made in the past year, as well as highlighting what more needs to be done.

  487W
  Nationwide statistical information is necessarily more complete than constituency level data, but the following provides a comparative guide to the effect of the Department's policies and actions in Truro and St. Austell since May 1997.

  Measures in our five Budgets so far will lift over 1.2 million children nationally out of poverty. These include record increases to Child Benefit, the introduction of the Working Families Tax Credit, increases in the income-related benefits, the minimum wage and tax changes.

  Child Benefit will be worth £15.50 a week for the eldest child and £10.35 a week for other children from April 2001: nationally about 7 million families receive Child Benefit, and in Truro and St. Austell 11,107 families benefit.

  We now have the lowest unemployment rate in 25 years. The New Deals have helped lone parents, the young unemployed, the long-tern unemployed, the over-50s and partners of the unemployed to move from benefit into work. In the period since May 1997 the number of people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance nationally has reduced from 1,562,400 to 960,600; in Truro and St. Austell the number has reduced from 2,800 to 1,800. Since May 1997 the number of lone parents who claim Income Support has decreased from 1,013,500 to 894,100 nationally and in Truro and St. Austell from 1,000 to 900.

  Older people are disproportionately affected by fuel poverty, so we have introduced Winter Fuel Payments to help with their heaviest fuel bill. This winter, the payment is £200 for households who qualify. Around 24,400 older people in Truro and St. Austell have received a Winter Fuel Payment for this winter.

  To demonstrate our commitment to combating pensioner poverty, this year we will spend £4.5 billion extra in real terms on pensioners. Some 22,900 pensioners in Truro and St. Austell will benefit from the substantial increases in the basic State pension this April and next; this year's increase is £5 a week for single pensioners and £8 for couples. In addition we have introduced free TV licences for the over-75s of whom we estimate there are about 10,000 in Truro and St. Austell. 3,000 pensioner families in Truro and St. Austell are receiving the Minimum Income Guarantee, which we introduced in April 1999 to help our poorest pensioners. From April they will be at least £15 a week, or £800 a year, better off in real terms as a result of Government measures since 1997.

  Other reforms in the pipeline include: the new Pension Credit in 2003 designed to ensure that pensioners benefit from their savings; the launch of Stakeholder Pensions in April this year; and the introduction of the State Second Pension in April 2002 both of which will help provide greater security for tomorrow's pensioners.

  Benefit Take-up
  Mr. Simon Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what action the Government are taking to ensure an improvement in benefits take-up. [151366]
  488W
  Mr. Rooker
  We actively encourage people to claim the benefits to which they are entitled. Recent activity has included a national TV advertising campaign for the Minimum Income Guarantee.

CHURCH COMMISSIONERS

  Clergy Stipends and Pensions
  Sir Sydney Chapman
  To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners, what financial contribution in(a) cash and (b) percentage terms the Church Commissioners made to clergy stipends and pensions in the last year. [153857]

  Mr. Stuart Bell
  The Church Commissioners fund all clergy pensions earned on service before 1998 in full. In 1999, the last year for which audited figures are available, the cost to the Commissioners was £87 million. They paid a further £17 million as part of their scheme to assist on a time-limited basis with the pension costs from 1998 which are now the responsibility of dioceses.

  The Commissioners also met 16 per cent. of the Church of England's total stipend bill in 1999. They paid over £20 million towards the stipends of parish clergy, much of it targeted towards dioceses most in need of financial help, and a further £6.6 million to meet those stipends of bishops and cathedral clergy for which they are responsible.

  Church Commissioners (Membership)
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners, what discussions he has had with the clergy about the categories of membership of the Church Commissioners. [153858]

  Mr. Stuart Bell
  None. The constitution and membership of the Church Commissioners are laid down by statute, as most recently stated in the National Institutions Measure 1998.

  Church Commission Rents
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners, what response the Commissioners have given to the representations made to them in the last six months on rent levels of Church Commission residential property in London SE1. [153859]

  Mr. Stuart Bell
  The Church Commissioners have responded fully to all representations made to them on this matter.

  The hon. Gentleman will have received a copy of the Commissioners' letter setting out the detailed consultation now taking place over letting policy on these estates with residents, clergy and local representatives. If he would like further information I shall be happy to provide it.

  Mr. David Heath
  To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners, if he will make a statement on the policy of the Church Commissioners in respect of agricultural land rents. [153860]
  489W
  Mr. Stuart Bell
  The Commissioners are required as a charity to seek the best returns on their assets for the benefit of the Church of England clergy, serving and retired. They also seek to act as responsible landlords.

  In the case of agricultural tenants, the Commissioners fully recognise the crisis in farming, and especially the problems caused by foot and mouth disease, and where there is hardship will consider how best to help. This is done on a case by case basis and tenants are encouraged to discuss their difficulties with agents or staff.

CABINET OFFICE

  Foot and Mouth
  Mr. Peter Ainsworth
  To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office if she will list the meetings and conferences organised by her Department and agencies of her Department which have been(a) cancelled and (b) postponed owing to foot and mouth disease; and if she will make a statement. [155362]

  Marjorie Mowlam
  This information is not held centrally and could be collated only at disproportionate cost.

  Correspondence
  Mrs. Virginia Bottomley
  To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, pursuant to her answer of 19 March 2001,Official Report, column 80W, how many letters from hon. Members did not receive substantive replies within nine months during the last three years. [155097]

  Marjorie Mowlam
  This information is not held centrally and can be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, a number of individual Departments do collect this information for their own records.

  I can confirm that, so far this year, the Cabinet Office has had only two late replies. Both of these were replied to within one and a half months of receipt.

NORTHERN IRELAND

  Ports Police
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what recent assessment he has made of(a) the contribution made by Port of Lame police to combating (i) organised crime, (ii) incidental theft, (iii) bootlegging and (iv) illegal immigration and (b) the extent to which these forces have been able to (1) collaborate with and (2) complement the work of (A) the Customs and Excise, (B) the Immigration Service and (C) the Special Branch; and if he will make a statement. [153924]

  Mr. Ingram
  Responsibility for the Port of Lame police now rests with the Northern Ireland Assembly under the control of the Department for Regional Development. It is therefore no longer a matter for the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what recent assessment he has made of(a) the contribution made of Belfast Harbour police to
  490W
  combating (i) organised crime, (ii) incidental theft, (iii) bootlegging and (iv) illegal immigration and (b) the extent to which these forces have been able to (1) collaborate with (2) and complement the work of (A) the Customs and Excise, (B) the immigration Service and (C) the Special Branch; and if he will make a statement. [153923]

  Mr. Ingram
  Responsibility for Belfast Harbour police now rests with the Northern Ireland Assembly under the control of the Department for Regional Development. It is therefore no longer a matter for the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

  Independent Commission of Inquiry (Bombings)
  Dr. Godman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he has received a request for(a) information and (b) documents from the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin, Monaghan and Dundalk bombings; and if he will make a statement. [154759] [154760] [154761]

  Dr. Reid
  I have received a request from the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Dublin, Monaghan and Dundalk bombings for all relevant information held by the UK Government relating to these incidents. This request has been shared with all relevant Government Departments and Agencies, who in response are currently researching archived records to establish what information they hold.

  I am also replying on behalf of the Secretary of State for Defence and the Home Secretary, of whom similar questions have been asked but who have not received separate requests from the Independent Commission of Inquiry.

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Correspondence
  Mr. Baker
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will establish for what reason assurances given by telephone by the office of the Minister of State to the hon. Member for Lewes on(a) 3 January and (b) 15 February that a reply to the hon. Member's letter of 22 September 2000 concerning his constituent Mr. George Tripp, would be dispatched shortly, have not N en implemented; [155563]

  (2) for what reason no reply had been received by 21 March by the hon. Member for Lewes to his letter of 22 September 2000 to the Minister of State, concerning his constituent Mr. George Tripp; and if he will make a statement. [155562]

  Mrs. Roche
  I replied to the hon. Member's letter on 22 March. I am sorry for the delay which seems to have been caused in part by the papers being misdirected within the Immigration and Nationality Directorate. It is normal practice for Private Office staff to monitor the progress of Ministers' cases and to chase outstanding replies. When they informed the hon. Member in January and February that a reply would be sent shortly, they were acting in good faith on the basis of available information. I am sorry that this information proved to be inaccurate. A draft
  491W
  reply was received in my Private Office at the beginning of March which I signed off. A further short delay was again caused by an apparent misdirection of the papers.

  Mr. Winnick
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the hon. Member for Walsall, North will receive a reply to his letter of 31 January regarding a constituent, Ref: 2093/1. [1534901

  Mrs. Roche
  [holding answer 13 March 2001]: I wrote to my hon. Friend on 23 March 2001. I am sorry I was unable to send him an earlier reply.

  Immigration
  Mr. Baker
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department under what circumstances immigration-related inquiries are required to be referred to a Minister's private office. [1543281

  Mrs. Roche
  [holding answer 19 March 2001]: The decision to make a Deportation Order is taken by a Minister in all cases. Any proposal to release a detainee from an Immigration Service detention centre following an application for a writ of habeas corpus must also be authorised at Ministerial level Immigration and nationality cases will otherwise be referred to Ministers if they are considered to involve significant policy issues, questions of security or if they are likely to be controversial or sensitive.

  Entry Clearance
  Mr. Godsiff
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many nationals of(a) Albania, (b) Algeria, (c) Angola, (d) Armenia, (e) Azerbaijan, (f) Bahrain, (g) Bangladesh, (h) Belarus, (i) Bulgaria, (j) Cambodia, (k) Cameroon, (l) China, (m) Columbia, (n) the Dominican Republic, (o)Ecuador (p) Egypt, (q) Fiji, (r) the Gambia, (s) Ethiopia, (t) Georgia, (u) Ghana, (v) Guyana, (w) India, (x) Indonesia, (y) Iran, (z) Ivory Coast, (aa) Jordan, (bb) Kenya, (cc) Kuwait (dd) Lebanon, (ee) Liberia, (ff) Libya, (gg) Macedonia (hh) Madagascar, (ii) Mongolia, (jj) Morocco, (kk) Mozambique, (11) Nepal, (mm) Pakistan, (nn) Peru, (oo) the Philippines, (pp) Romania, (qq) Russia, (rr) Saudi Arabia, (ss) Sengal, (tt) Sri Lanka, (uu) the Sudan, (vv) Syria, (ww) Taiwan, (xx) Tanzania, (yy) Thailand, (zz) Tunisia, (aaa) Turkey, (bbb) Yugoslavia, (ccc) Ukraine, (ddd) Vietnam and (eee ) Yemen applied for entry clearance to come to the United Kingdom for temporary purposes, including visitor and student applications in 2000; how many visas were issued for temporary purposes; how many recipients of these visas returned to their country of nationality before the visas expired; and how many applied (a) to remain permanently in the United Kingdom or (b) for political asylum. [1550251

  Mrs. Roche
  The available information is given in the table.

  Entry clearance data for 2000 are not yet available. No data are available on the numbers of persons who return to their country of nationality before their leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom expires. Information is not available on the number of holders of visas for temporary purposes who apply for asylum or for settlement. The information on grants of settlement includes persons who entered the United Kingdom with an entry clearance
  492W
  leading to settlement; and the data on asylum applications and those who entered by clandestine means include persons who held no entry clearance.

  Grants of settlement and applications for asylum 20001

  Nationality

  Grants of settlement2,3

  Applications 4 for asylum

  Albania

  110

  1,470

  Algeria

  980

  1,535

  Angola

  240

  765

  Armenia

  20

  85

  Azerbaijan

  50

  70

  Bahrain

  20

  5

  Bangladesh

  3,660

  725

  Belarus

  60

  555

  Bulgaria

  290

  85

  Cambodia

  10

  5

  Cameroon

  140

  335

  China

  1,640

  3,840

  Colombia

  630

  475

  Dominican Republic

  60

  —

  Ecuador

  100

  425

  Egypt

  470

  60

  Ethiopia

  2,700

  390

  Federal Republic of Yugoslavia5

  2,420

  5,695

  Fiji

  20

  *

  Gambia

  230

  40

  Georgia

  40

  220

  Ghana

  3,010

  255

  Guyana

  190

  5

  India

  7,770

  1,850

  Indonesia

  200

  45

  Iran

  1,790

  5,170

  Ivory Coast

  200

  420

  Jordan

  250

  15

  Kenya

  940

  430

  Kuwait

  50

  15

  Lebanon

  970

  270

  Liberia

  230

  50

  Libya

  340

  150

  Macedonia

  50

  55

  Madagascar

  6—

  *

  Mongolia

  10

  70

  Morocco

  580

  25

  Mozambique

  10

  5

  Nepal

  140

  605

  Pakistan

  10,800

  2,825

  Peru

  160

  10

  Philippines

  1,850

  25

  Romania

  310

  2,065

  Russia7

  1,180

  980

  Saudi Arabia

  50

  15

  Senegal

  30

  10

  Sri Lanka

  6,910

  6,035

  Sudan

  1,470

  390

  Syria

  220

  130

  Taiwan

  180

  10

  Tanzania

  380

  50

  Thailand

  910

  15

  Tunisia

  120

  15

  Turkey

  4,850

  3,925

  Ukraine

  380

  725

  Vietnam

  120

  180

  Yemen

  280

  180

  1 1999 data are provisional

  2 Excluding persons given indefinite leave to enter

  3 All settlement data are rounded to three significant figures or to the nearest 10 if less than 1,000

  4 Figures are rounded to the nearest 5 with * = 1 or 2, and exclude dependants

  5 Includes holders of passports of the former Yugoslavia

  6 Negligible (ie five or fewer)

  7 Includes holders of Soviet Union passports

  Departmental Policies
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Caernarfon constituency, the effects on Caernarfon of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997; [154943]

  (2) if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Ynys MÔn constituency, the effects on Ynys MÔn of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997; [154936]

  (3) if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Meirionnydd Nant Conwy constituency, the effects on Meirionnydd Nant Conwy of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997; [154942]

  (4) if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Ceredigion constituency, the effects on Ceredigion of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154944]

  Mr. Charles Clarke
  My hon. Friend asked questions regarding the four constituencies of Caernarfon, Meirionnydd Nant Conwy, Ynys MÔn and Ceredigion. The Home Office is working to build a safe, just and tolerant society in which the rights and responsibilities of individuals, families and communities are properly balanced, and the protection and security of the public are maintained. Detailed information on the impact of Home Office policies across the full range of responsibilities is set out in Home Office Annual Reports. A copy of the most recent Home Office Annual Report is available in the Library. Information on recorded crime and policing is also published. "Recorded Crime England and Wales, 12 months to September 2000" and "Police Service Strength England and Wales, 30 September 2000" can be found in the Library. The recorded crime statistics include information on recorded crime by Basic Command Unit and Crime and Disorder partnerships.

  The impact of Home Office policies and actions is not normally examined by constituency and the statistics which the Department collects, such as recorded crime, cannot be matched in the way requested although set out are some examples relating to the Caernarfon, Meirionnydd Nant Conwy, Ynys MÔn and Ceredigion constituencies or the immediate locality:

  Neighbourhood Warden Schemes

  Gwynedd county council has received £35,000 to provide one warden for the Maes Barcer estate, in the Caernarfon area, which has a higher than average incidence of crime and disorder. The bid relates very much to the council's overall housing strategy for improving the housing stock.

  Closed Circuit Television (CCTV)

  Conwy county borough council was awarded £65,000 for the Conwy Mobile Unit, which is a portable system consisting of four cameras to monitor crime and disorder 'hotspots' throughout Conwy.

  Gwynedd council was awarded £96,000 for the Bangor—Phase 2—Measgeirchen, a scheme that will provide eight cameras to cover the only access road to the estate and the main public, community and shopping facilities.
  494W
  Ceredigion county council was awarded approximately £206,000 for the Lampeter CCTV scheme, which will provide coverage for the Lampeter Town Centre, including three car parking areas, parts of the University campus and residential areas.

  Youth Offending

  The Youth Justice Board (YJB) is currently funding a Bail Support Scheme and three Intervention Schemes through the development fund in North and Mid Wales. A bail supervision scheme, Bail Information, Supervision and Support, is being run in Conwy, Wrexham, Flintshire, Denbighshire, Gwynedd and Ynys MÔn. The YJB is contributing approximately £200,000 to the scheme.

  North Wales Drug, Alcohol and Substance Abuse Treatment for Young People is being run in the six local authorities in the North of Wales (including Wrexham), by the North Wales health authority with the YJB contributing approximately £42,000.

  Mid Wales Restorative Justice Challenge Project is a joint effort by Powys/Ceredigion involving Mid Wales Youth Offending Team (YOT). It is targeting young offenders at all stages of the criminal justice process from Final Warnings to Action Plans, Reparation Orders and Supervision. The project envisages use of victim offender mediation and direct and indirect reparation as appropriate. It has been awarded a grant from the YJB of approximately £184,000.

  Mid Wales Cognitive Behaviour Programme targets high/medium risk repeat offenders. It is implementing 12 one and a half hour sessions designed to match young offenders learning style. There is CD Rom material and additional sessions for people with high criminogenic factors. A YJB grant has been awarded of approximately £84,000.

  The Central North Wales YOT is engaging in multi-agency responses to youth crime including: a Bail Supervision Scheme to target and reduce the number of young people at risk of re-offending while on bail; a community reparation scheme with 11 agencies supporting community reparation work resulting in 60 per cent. of reparation work being community based and reducing delays within the court process by producing 98 per cent. of court reports within the agreed time scales. The YOT has also developed a protocol with appropriate agencies with the aim of involving parents in the youth justice process. A trained worker is in place to develop the opportunities for victims of crime to become involved in indirect reparation.

  More generally, all of the policies of the Home Office will impact on the residents of Caernarfon, Meirionnydd Nant Conwy, Ynys MÔn and Ceredigion to a greater or lesser extent. For example: 376 Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships have been established; racial harassment and racially motivated crimes have been made criminal offences by the Crime and Disorder Act 1998; the asylum backlog has been cut from 103,495 at the end of January 2000 to 66,195 by the end of December 2000; and good progress is being made in reducing the incidence of fire deaths in England and Wales. They have dropped from 605 in 1997 to 534 in 1999.

  Information on the Home Office and its policies is also published on its website www.homeoffice.gov.uk.

  Justice and Home Affairs Council
  Mr. Hood
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the outcome of the Justice and Home Affairs Council held in Brussels on 15 to 16 March was; what the Government's voting record at the Council was; and if he will make a statement. [154788]

  Mr. Straw
  I. together with the Minister of State, Home Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Hornsey and Wood Green (Mrs. Roche), represented the United Kingdom at the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 15 and 16 March. The main matters dealt with at the meeting were as follows:

  A points

  The A points were approved as in document 6943–01 (a copy of which is in the Library), with the exception of item 2, Council Decision updating the Common Consular Instructions. The Government did not vote on those items in which the United Kingdom does not. participate.

  Mixed Committee

  Illegal Immigration via the Western Balkans

  The Council gave firm support for the United Kingdom, Commission and Italian initiatives. I reported that the United Kingdom was prepared to commit 10 immigration officers for 12 months to work in joint teams supporting Croatian and Bosnian border services, and urged others to provide similar resources. Five member states gave commitments to provide personnel.

  Directive and Framework Decision on preventing the facilitation of entry and residence of illegal immigrations

  Member states were divided on the level of penalty for facilitating illegal entry into the European Union (EU) and on the scope of an exemption for those acting with humanitarian motives. Although a majority of delegations were willing to accept as a compromise a Presidency proposal for a six year minimum maximum penalty where the offence involved specified aggravating circumstances, others argued for a higher penalty of between eight and 10 years. The Presidency sought, without success, to achieve consensus on an alternative approach involving agreement on a six year penalty by all, with those member states who wished to impose a 10 year penalty making a joint Declaration to do so. There was, however, agreement on making the offence of facilitation as defined in the Directive extraditable. It was also agreed that work should continue on the two draft instruments with a view to reaching political agreement at the May Council.

  Schengen Implementation in Nordic Countries

  The Mixed Committee noted that evaluations had been completed and border controls between the Nordic states, including Iceland and Norway, and the existing Schengen area would be lifted on 25 March.

  Main Agenda

  Proposal for a Council Directive on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between member states in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof

  The Presidency reported positively on progress. Outstanding issues on duration, decision making, access to asylum procedures and solidarity were to be dealt with by the Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) in time for adoption at the 28–29 May Justice Home Affairs Council.
  496W
  Council Regulation reserving to the Council: implementing powers with regard to certain detailed provisions and practical procedures for examining visa applications. Council Regulation reserving to the Council implementing powers with regard to certain detailed provisions and practical procedures for carrying out local border checks and surveillance

  These texts were remitted to COREPER.

  Civil crisis management

  Over lunch, the Council exchanged views with the High Representative, Javier Solana, as part of the preparations for the Police capabilities commitment conference on 10 May. Ministers stressed the importance of proper training of the police involved.

  Fight against drugs through law enforcement

  The Council held a public debate focused on the themes of criminal law, practical law enforcement and EU action with the candidate countries.

  The Council welcomed the Commission's intention to present a communication on drugs in April. This would include: proposals for evaluating the implementation of the EU Action Plan in 2002 and 2004; a drugs follow-up table; and an assessment of implementation of the joint action on synthetic drugs. It was important to maximise assistance to candidate countries through the Poland and Hungary Aid for Reconstruction of the Economy and Mesures d'Assistance programmes and to pursue early participation in the EU drugs observatory.

  The Council discussed harmonisation of legislation on drug trafficking and common penalties. A Commission proposal for a framework decision on harmonising drug trafficking legislation would be published in April.

  My hon. Friend the Minister of State drew attention to the priorities set out in the United Kingdom paper: an all encompassing drugs scoreboard; tough penalties to be agreed by the end of 2001; confiscation of convicted drug traffickers' passports and travel banning orders; speeding up the production of supply side indicators; agreement by the end of 2001 to the drug action plans for the candidate countries; and increased co-operation with Turkey.

  Crime prevention—towards a European crime prevention policy

  Political agreement was reached by unanimity on the draft Council Decision establishing the European Crime Prevention Network and Articles 1 to 4 of the Hippocrates funding programme, subject to consideration of the European Parliament's opinion on both texts which was expected in mid-April. The Presidency's paper on a European Crime Prevention Policy was agreed.

  Draft Framework Decision on the protection of the environment through criminal law

  The Council discussed handling of the draft framework decision in the light of the Commission's proposal for a directive, which sought to impose an obligation on member states to introduce criminal sanctions for breaches of existing Community environmental legislation. The majority of member states expressed support for the objectives of the draft framework decision. They accepted that consideration would need to be given to the issues raised by the Commission' s proposal but were clear that criminal sanctions were matters for the Third Pillar and argued for a clear declaration to that effect. The Presidency concluded that the Council had reached provisional agreement concerning the objectives and in principle the

  497W
  content of the framework decision, but would instruct officials to examine whether it was necessary to complement the framework decision in the light of the Commission's proposal.

  Fight against cybercrime

  The Commission presented its Communication on cybercrime. This envisages future legislation proposals to approximate member states' legislation on: child pornography on the internet; computer hacking and virus attacks; racist/xenophobic material on and off the internet; and mutual recognition of pre-trial order in cybercrime investigations.

  Candidate Countries

  On 16 March, an informal meeting was held in the margins of the Council with candidate countries, including Turkey, with the aim of strengthening practical co-operation; in particular discussion focused on the fight against organised crime, asylum and illegal immigration. The United Kingdom was represented by officials.

  Postal Votes
  Mr. Bob Russell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will issue guidance to political parties, agents and candidates on the provisions of the Representation of the People Act 2000 relating to breaches of the postal vote regulations; and if he will make a statement. [155470]

  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  The Representation of the People Act 2000 made no changes to the provisions for the security of postal votes. Electoral administrators are aware of those provisions and will see that they are enforced. It is the responsibility of political parties, agents and candidates to familiarise themselves with all aspects of electoral law which may affect them.

  Mr. McCabe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if(a) candidates and (b) their agents will have the right to a copy of the list of electors exercising their right to vote by post, and the address to which the ballot paper is to be sent, at least 24 hours prior to the despatch of absent votes to electors. [154797]

  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  Regulation 61(i) of the Representation of the People (England and Wales) Regulations 2001 provides that the registration officer shall, on request, supply a copy of the list of those electors who have been granted applications to vote by post to each candidate or their election agent at any time. However applications for postal votes can be received up until the sixth day before polling, so obviously a complete list of postal voters will not be available until after that date. Postal ballot papers will be despatched continuously from the date of close of nominations until shortly after the sixth day before polling day.

  Electoral Register
  Mr. McCabe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if electoral registration officers have been advised to suffix existing elector numbers to accommodate additions to the register. [154799]

  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  Electoral registration officers were advised by a Home Office Representation of the People Act 2000 (RPA) circular (RPA circular No. 437) on 20 February that they should ensure that all individuals 498W
  are inserted at the correct location in the register consistent with their address, and that no numbers should be re-used. Instead, existing elector numbers should be given a suffix to accommodate additions to the register. This will allow for identification of additions and cause little disruption to the already published numbering.

  Mr. McCabe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if the provisions for existing rights of inspection and copying of the ballot box register (marked register) used on polling day are to continue. [154800]

  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  There has been no change to the legal provisions for parliamentary and local elections governing the inspection and copying of the marked register used on polling day in those elections.

  Mr. McCabe
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if elected public representatives and registered political parties will be entitled to receive details of additions and deletions to the register as and when they are published by electoral registration officers; and if representatives and registered political parties will be entitled to a free copy of the register in data format up to four times a year. [154798]

  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  Paragraph 47 of the Representation of the People (England and Wales) Regulations 2001 provides for elected representatives, political parties, candidates and their agents to be supplied with one copy of the register that relates to the area they represent, or seek to represent. Unless the recipient requests otherwise, this copy will be in data format from which they may produce further copies. There is currently no provision for lists of amendments to the published electoral registers to be sold or supplied free of charge, though amendment regulations dealing with the sale and supply of the register which we hope to publish shortly will provide for it.

  Extradition
  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the grounds on which an individual subject to extradition could be transferred to another jurisdiction in his recently published proposals on extradition. [155079]

  Mr. Straw
  The consultation document, "The Law on Extradition: A Review", which I published on 12 March, makes proposals for extensive streamlining and reform of the present extradition legislation. It does not propose however to amend the fundamental grounds on which an individual subject to extradition proceedings can be transferred to another jurisdiction. These are that there is an extradition arrangement in place between the requesting state and the United Kingdom, and that the offence of which the individual has been accused or convicted is an extradition crime.

  The definition of extradition crime varies depending on the particular extradition arrangements in place; the bars to extradition also vary under different arrangements. The proposals for streamlining these provisions are summarised in Chapter II of the consultation document.

  Vets
  Mr. Burden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applicants awaiting
  499W
  processing of (a) immigration and asylum claims and (b) appeals, are qualified veterinary surgeons; and if he will list the countries of origin involved. [155436]

  Mrs. Roche
  The information requested is not held centrally and not systematically collected as part of the immigration and asylum application process and is therefore available only at disproportionate cost.

  A foreign national wishing to practise as a veterinary surgeon needs a work permit. Information on the number of applications for work permits from veterinary surgeons awaiting decision in the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) is not held centrally, but the number is likely to be very small. Arrangements have been made with the Department for Education and Employment for such applications to be highlighted and on arrival in IND they will be processed as a matter of priority.

  The criteria for recognition as a refugee, and hence the granting of asylum, are set out in the 1951 United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, extended in its application by the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees. The United Kingdom considers all asylum applications against these criteria and not on an applicant's occupation.

  Pub-watch Schemes
  Mr. Collins
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the impact of the Human Rights Act 1998 on pub-watch schemes; and if he will make a statement. [155559]

  Mr. Charles Clarke
  The Government are keen to promote pub-watch schemes which involve licensees working together to reduce alcohol-related violence and disorder on licensed premises. The schemes may involve information about known troublemakers being passed between local licensees for this purpose.

  We do not consider that these schemes, which are supported by the police, are in any way incompatible with the Human Rights Act 1998. The Act should not therefore have any impact on properly run schemes.

  Family Visit Appeals
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the net income from fees for family visit appeals since 2 October 2000 is; and what proportion of this net income relates to appeals which are outstanding. [155569]

  Mrs. Roche
  The exact figure is not available, because it is not yet clear how many appeals were lodged before the fees were reduced on 12 January. The Immigration Appellate Authorities are conducting an exercise to establish that information. At present we estimate the current figure for net income from fees for family visitor appeals in the period 2 October 2000 to 22 March 2001 is about £49,000. Of this, 39 per cent. relates to appeals which are currently outstanding and which may result in further refunds.

  Passports
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many passports were lost by the Immigration and Nationality Directorate in each of the last 10 years. [155565]
  500W
  Mrs. Roche
  The information requested is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  However, the Integrated Casework Directorate's (ICD's) Return of Passport Unit, which was set up in October 1999, issued 97 lost passport letters to applicants in the year 2000 and has issued 24 letters so far this year.

  Secure Units
  Mr. Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which local authority secure units have been suspended from use by the Youth Justice Board; for what reasons use of those secure units has been suspended; which secure units which had been suspended from use in the past are being used by the Youth Justice Board; and if he will make a statement. [155567]

  Mr. Charles Clarke
  The operation of these secure units is a matter for the local authorities concerned and the Department of Health which licenses them. The Youth Justice Board purchases places in most of them. It has ceased to do so, or decided not to start purchasing places, where the unit cannot meet the Board's contracting standards or concerns have been raised by the Board's monitors or the Social Services Inspectorate about the quality of care provided. The units affected during the past year are the Gladstone Unit in Liverpool, Stamford House in London and Stoke House in Coventry. Some places are now being purchased in each of them.

  Ports Police
  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will examine with the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, and HM Treasury, the impact on combating(a) organised crime, (b) incidental theft, (c) bootlegging and (d) illegal immigration of having (i) a dedicated ports police force for the whole of the United Kingdom's ports and (ii) the reintroduction of the British Transport Police at the UK's ports; and if he will make a statement. [153922]

  Mr. Charles Clarke
  The Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions is the lead Department for port police forces. I understand there are no plans at present to establish a dedicated ports police force for the whole of the United Kingdom or to bring ports policing under the control of the British Transport Police. The Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, my hon. Friend the Member for Streatham (Mr. Hill), announced a review of the current arrangements for ports police in an answer given on 8 March 2001,Official Report, column 276W. The review will identify which ports in England and Wales still utilise their own police forces, what powers they have and what functions they perform. It also aims to compare how the port police forces compare with Home Office forces in terms of accountability, report on the current situation and make recommendations for future options for the port police forces. The Home Office will be consulted in the course of this review.

  Mr. Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what recent assessment he has made of(a) the contribution made by Port of Liverpool police to combating (i) organised crime, (ii) incidental theft, (iii) bootlegging and (iv) illegal immigration and

  501W
  (b) the extent that these forces have been able to (1) collaborate with and (2) complement the work of (A) the Customs and Excise, (B) the Immigration Service and (C) the Special Branch; and if he will make a statement; [153925]

  (2) what recent assessment he has made of (a) the contribution made by Tees and Hartlepool police to combating (i) organised crime, (ii) incidental theft, (iii) bootlegging and (iv) illegal immigration and (b) the extent that these forces have been able to (1) collaborate with and (2) complement the work of (A) the Customs and Excise, (B) the Immigration Service and (C) the Special Branch; and if he will make a statement; [153926]

  (3) what recent assessment he has made of (a) the contribution made by Port of Tilbury police to combating (i) organised crime, (ii) incidental theft, (iii) bootlegging and (iv) illegal immigration and (b) the extent that these forces have been able to (1) collaborate with and (2) and complement the work of (A) the Customs and Excise, (B) the Immigration Service and (C) the Special Branch; and if he will make a statement; [153927]

  (4) what recent assessment he has made of (a) the contribution made by Port of Bristol Police to combating (i) organised crime, (ii) incidental theft, (iii) bootlegging and (iv) illegal immigration and (b) the extent that these forces have been able to (1) collaborate with and (2) and complement the work of (A) the Customs and Excise, (B) the Immigration Service and (C) the Special Branch; and if he will make a statement; [153928]

  (5) what recent assessment he has made of (a) the contribution made by Port of Devon police to combating (i) organised crime, (ii) incidental theft, (iii) bootlegging and (iv) illegal immigration and (b) the extent that these forces have been able to (1) collaborate with and (2) and complement the work of (A) the Customs and Excise, (B) the Immigration Service and (C) the Special Branch; and if he will make a statement; [153929]

  (6) what recent assessment he has made of (a) the contribution made by Port of Felixstowe police to combating (i) organised crime, (ii) incidental theft, (iii) bootlegging and (iv) illegal immigration and (b) the extent that these forces have been able to (1) collaborate with and (2) and complement the work of (A) the Customs and Excise, (B) the Immigration Service and (C) the Special Branch; and if he will make a statement. [153930]

  Mr. Charles Clarke
  None. The Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions is the lead Department for port police forces. The Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, my hon. Friend the Member for Streatham (Mr. Hill), announced a review of the current arrangements for ports police in an answer given on 8 March 2001,Official Report, column 276W. The review will identify which ports in England and Wales still utilise their own police forces, what powers they have and what functions they perform. It also aims to compare how the port police forces compare with Home Office forces in terms of accountability, report on the current situation and make recommendations for future options for the port police forces.

  Hilda Murrell
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects West Mercia Constabulary to be informed of the DNA test results by the Forensic Science Service in the case of Hilda Murrell; and if he will make a statement. [154270]

  Mr. Charles Clarke
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]I understand that the Forensic Science Service anticipate the results of the current round of DNA tests in the case of Hilda Murrell by the week beginning 23 April, and the West Mercia Constabulary will be informed shortly thereafter.

  Special Constables (Wales)
  Mr. Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how m my(a) funded and (b) actual specials were in post in each of the Welsh constabularies on (i) 31 March 1997 and (ii) the latest date for which figures are available. [154803]

  Mr. Charles Clarke [holding answer 22 March 2001]
  The Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate collect police personnel statistics, including those of the Special Constabulary.

  There are no national targets for specials and each of the Welsh constabularies has advised that it does not differentiate between funded and actual specials. The Special Constabulary strength figures for the Welsh constabularies for 31 March 1997 and 30 September 2000 (the latest figures available) are given in the table.

  March 1997

  September 2000

  Dyfed Powys

  283

  193

  Gwent

  157

  131

  North Wales

  341

  233

  South Wales

  361

  254

  Rural Parishes
  Mr. Breed
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what percentage of rural parishes do not have a police station. [153132]

  Mr. Charles Clarke
  Information on the number of rural parishes which do not have a police station is not held centrally.

  Refrigerants
  Mr. Laurence Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department to what extent the Home Office building at 50 Queen Anne's Gate uses hydrofluorocarbons for(a) refrigeration and (b) air conditioning; what amounts of hydrofluorocarbons have been purchased in each year since 1995; and what plans he has to phase out the (i) purchase and (ii) use of hydrofluorocarbons. [153020]

  Mr. Straw
  [holding answer 9 March 2001]Hydrofluorocarbons are used in domestic fridges at tea
  503W
  points and freezer cabinets and fridges in the staff restaurant area. They are also used as refrigerants in the air-conditioning systems.

  Figures supplied by our maintenance contractor on the purchase of hydrofluorocarbons are:

  2000—10 kg

  2001—840 kg.

  The information for the years 1995–99 is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Our policy is that hydrofluorocarbons should be used only where other safe, technically feasible, cost effective and environmentally acceptable alternatives do not exist.

  Mr. Laurence Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what his Department's policy is regarding the purchase of(a) hydrocarbons and (b) other environmentally benign refrigerants to meet all the refrigeration and other energy needs of buildings and premises (i) owned and (ii) leased by his Department; and if he will make a statement. [153019]

  Mr. Straw
  [holding answer 9 March 2001]The Home Office does not have a specific policy on the purchase of hydrocarbons. However, my Department's policy is to ensure that no products are purchased which contain chlorofluorocarbons and—except where existing systems cannot be easily converted—no hydrochlorofluoro-carbons, halons, carbon tetrachloride, 111 trichloroethane or any other ozone-depleting substances. The policy also states that hydrofluorocarbons should only be used where other safe, technically feasible, cost effective and environmentally acceptable alternatives do not exist.

  Mr. Laurence Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which buildings and premises(a) owned and (b) leased by his Department use (i) chlorofluorocarbons and (ii) hydrochlorofluorocarbons for refrigeration and other energy needs; and if he will give details of such use and the reasons for it. [153016]

  Mr. Straw
  [holding answer 9 March 20011 Information on the use of chlorofluorocarbons and hydrochlorofluorocarbons is not recorded centrally. My Department's policy is to ensure that we do not purchase any products which use chlorofluorocarbons and, except where existing systems cannot be easily converted, hydrochlorofluorocarbons.

EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT

  After-school and Holiday Clubs (Northern Region)
  Mr. Kemp
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment how many(a) after school clubs and (b) holiday play scheme places there were in the Northern Region in (i) 1996 and (ii) at the latest date for which figures are available. [155010]

  Ms Hodge
  The available information on out-of-school clubs1 and holiday scheme places in the North East region is as follows.

  In March 1996 there were 70 out of school clubs providing 2,267 places and 143 holiday schemes providing 3,784 places.
  504W
  In March 2000 there were 200 out of school clubs providing 6,615 places and 692 holiday schemes providing 26,541 places2.
  1 Data on after school clubs are not available separately. The data on out-of-school clubs include before and after school clubs.
  2 Holiday scheme figures prior to 1998 may not be directly comparable to 2000 because of changes in the instructions given to providers for recording places in 1999.

  Child Care Tax Credit
  Ms Coffey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what discussions he has had with Treasury Ministers about the extension of the Child Care Tax Credit to cover formal child care in the home; and if he will make a statement. [154565]

  Ms Hodge
  My right hon. Friend the Chancellor announced in the Budget recently that the Government are considering this matter, in particular to help families who may need care in the home because they are shiftworkers or have children with disabilities. I keep in close touch with my hon. Friend the Paymaster General on this issue.

  Departmental Policies (Manchester, Gorton)
  Mr. Kaufman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the constituency, the effects on the Manchester, Gorton constituency of his Department's policies and actions since 22 November 2000. [154503]

  Mr. Wills
  Outlined are details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Manchester, Gorton constituency and the Manchester LEA.

  Excellence In Cities (EIC)

  This paragraph updates the information on EIC which was provided in November 2000.

  Manchester was designated an Excellence in Cities area in Phase 1 of the programme. The Partnership covers all 23 secondary schools in the city. The partnership now has:
  21 Learning Support Units;
  Three Beacon schools and one specialist school approved under the Excellence in Cities programme;
  Six clusters of secondary schools working together to support gifted and talented pupils;
  65 Learning Mentors all of whom have had local and national training;
  Three City Learning Centres operating with a fourth to open later this year;
  One small Education Action Zone operating from September 2000 and a further two are to start in September.

  The Manchester partnership also has an approved plan for primary EIC with 54 primary schools involved. The Learning Mentor strand and programmes for Gifted and Talented pupils are already under way with three Primary Learning Support Units planned to open this academic year.

  Manchester is also included in the Excellence Challenge programme with planning to be completed by June 2001 for implementation in September 2001.

  Performance Indicators

  As per PQ 136171.
  505W
  Funding per pupil

  In Manchester LEA, funding per pupil has increased by £610 in real terms between 1997–98 and 2000–01.

  Capital funding

  £000

  2001–02

  ACG

  9,946

  VA grant

  4,002

  Science labs

  221

  Access at 85 per cent.

  465

  Security

  100

  Seed challenge

  297

  NDS condition funding

  1,157

  NDS devolved formula capital

  1,630

  Further Education

  Student numbers at all FEFC funded institutions where home postcode is in the local authority district of Manchester.

  1999–2000

  Full-time

  Part-time

  FEFC funded

  16–18

  5,393

  1,800

  Adult

  3,643

  24,838

  Non-FEFC funded

  16–18

  163

  723

  Adult

  642

  1,722

  Modern Apprenticeships

  Since 22 November 2000, we know of 13 starts on Modern Apprenticeships (seven on Foundation Modern Apprenticeships and six on Advanced Modern Apprenticeships) in the Gorton constituency (as at 31 December 2000).

  For comparison, known starts on Modern Apprenticeships for the period 2 May 1997 to 21 November 2000, broken down by financial year, are:

  Financial year

  Foundation Modern Apprenticeships1

  Advanced Modern Apprenticeships2

  Total

  1997–98

  0

  85

  85

  1998–99

  42

  111

  153

  1999–2000

  112

  144

  256

  117

  107

  224

  2000–013

  —

  —

  —

  Total

  271

  447

  718

  1 Foundation Modern Apprenticeships, formerly known as National Traineeships, were introduced nationally in September 1997.

  2 Advanced Modern Apprenticeships. formerly known as Modern Apprenticeships, were introduced nationally in September 1995.

  3 To 21 November 2000.

  Notes:

  1. The Trainee Database System (TDS), from which these data are taken, is less complete than Management Information supplied by the Department by Training and Enterprise Councils (TECs) (around 95 per cent.).

  2. In addition, the postcode information on the TDS, from which parliamentary constituency data are compiled, are 95 per cent. complete.

  3. TEC Management Information does not provide information at parliamentary constituency level.

  506W

  4. Data for the period 21 November to 31 December 2000 may be less than 95 per cent. complete due to some notifications of training starts not yet being received from TECs.

  Source:

  WBTYP trainee database

  New Deal for Young People

  In the Gorton constituency, 1,968 young people have joined the New Deal to end December 2000. 843 have found jobs, 604 of which are sustained.

  Labour market statistics

  The working age employment rate in Manchester in autumn 2000 was 60.4 per cent., below the UK rate of 74.7 per cent. The rite in autumn 1997 was 55.8 per cent.

  The claimant unemployment rate has fallen from 25.0 per cent. in February 1997 to 13.0 per cent. in February 2001 in the Gorton constituency.

  Departmental Policies (Ceredigion)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Ceredigion constituency, the effects on Ceredigion of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [1549751

  Mr. Wills
  Outlined are details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Ceredigion constituency. The Welsh Assembly will be able to provide details of education policies.

  Modern Apprenticeships

  Numbers of known starts on modern apprenticeships for the requested constituency since 2 May 1997 (as at 30 November 2000) are as follows, broken down by financial year:

  Ceredigion

  Financial year

  Foundation modern apprenticeships1

  Advanced modern apprenticeships2

  Total

  1997–98

  0

  134

  134

  1998–99

  46

  98

  144

  1999–2000

  168

  64

  232

  2000–013

  138

  44

  182

  —

  —

  —

  Total

  352

  340

  692

  1 Foundation modern apprenticeships, formerly known as national traineeships, were introduced nationally in September 1997.

  2 Advanced modern apprenticeships, formerly known as modern apprenticeships, were introduced nationally in September 1995.

  3 To date

  Notes:

  1. The Trainee Database System (TDS), from which these data are taken, is less complete than Management Information supplied to the Department by Training and Enterprise Councils (TECs) (around 95 per cent.).

  2. In addition, the postcode information on the TDS, from which parliamentary constituency data are compiled, are 95 per cent. complete.

  3. TEC Management information does not provide information at parliamentary constituency level.

  Source:

  WBTYP trainee database
  507W
  New Deal for Young People

  In the Ceredigion constituency, 704 young people have joined the New Deal to end December 2000. 341 have found jobs, 282 of which are sustained.

  Labour market statistics

  The claimant unemployment rate has fallen from 5.8 per cent. in February 1997 to 4.2 per cent. in February 2001 in the Ceredigion constituency.

  Employment zone

  The constituencies of Caernarfon, Ynys MÔn and Meirionnydd Nant Conwy are covered by the North West Wales Employment Zone. The zone began operating in May 2000 and by December 2000, 882 people had started on the Employment Zone. Of these people 37 had entered employment by December 2000.

  Departmental Policies (Sutton and Cheam)
  Mr. Burstow
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, including statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Sutton and Cheam constituency, the effects on Sutton and Cheam of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154412]

  Mr. Wills
  [holding answer 21 March 2001]Outlined are details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Sutton and Cheam constituency and Sutton LEA.

  Beacon Schools

  There is one Beacon school in Sutton LEA—St. Elphege's RC Infant School which was awarded Beacon status September 2000.

  Specialist School

  School

  St. Philomenas Catholic High School

  Specialism

  Technology

  Start

  September 1997

  Sutton and Cheam

  No

  Capital funding

  £000

  2001–02

  2000–01

  1999–2000

  1998–99

  1997–98

  ACG

  3,902

  4,411

  2,848

  4,021

  3,563

  SCA

  —

  477

  191

  64

  1,452

  NDS

  —

  2,462

  564

  516

  602

  VA Grant

  197

  95

  296

  57

  44

  Seed

  153

  136

  —

  —

  PPP

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Formula Capital

  —

  1,128

  —

  —

  —

  NgFL

  —

  518

  337

  241

  —

  Science labs

  147

  147

  —

  —

  —

  SSLU

  32

  37

  —

  —

  —

  Access at 85 per cent.

  232

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Security

  37

  52

  52

  37

  30

  Class size

  —

  109

  365

  288

  —

  Outside toilets

  —

  —

  —

  10

  —

  Energy efficiency

  —

  —

  —

  35

  —

  Assistance with AMP

  —

  —

  20

  —

  —

  Nursery provision

  —

  —

  —

  —

  —

  Note:

  The allocation for 2001–02 also includes £621,000 for NDS Devolved Formula Capital and £432,000 NDS Condition Funding
  508W

  Infant class size

  Number

  Allocations (£ million) Capital and Revenue

  2.4

  January 1997 (number of children in infant class sizes of 31 or over)

  1,657

  September 2000 (number of children in infant class sizes of 31 or over)

  31

  Performance indicators—Key Stage 2 results

  Percentage

  2000

  1999

  1998

  1997

  Pupils achieving level 4 and above

  English

  LEA

  80

  78

  68

  70

  England

  75

  71

  65

  63

  Maths

  LEA

  74

  73

  61

  66

  England

  72

  69

  59

  62

  Science

  LEA

  88

  82

  70

  73

  England

  85

  78

  69

  69

  GCSE/GNVQ Results

  5+A*-C

  LEA average

  63.4

  60.1

  57.9

  54.7

  England average

  49.2

  47.9

  46.3

  45.1

  5+A*-G

  LEA average

  94.1

  93.9

  91.6

  91.6

  England average

  88.9

  88.5

  87.5

  86.4

  No passes

  LEA average

  3.5

  3.2

  4.5

  5.0

  England average

  5.6

  6.0

  6.6

  7.7

  A/AS level, advanced GNVQ

  Average points for two or more A/AS levels

  LEA average

  20.9

  20.3

  20.3

  19.1

  England average

  18.5

  18.2

  17.8

  17.3

  A/AS average per entry

  LEA average

  6.1

  6.0

  6.0

  5.6

  England average

  5.5

  5.5

  5.4

  5.3

  Average point score GNVQs

  LEA average

  8.8

  9.4

  8.3

  n/a

  England average

  10.1

  9.9

  9.6

  n/a

  Funding per pupil

  In Sutton LEA, funding per pupil has increased by £180 in real terms between 1997–98 and 2000–01.
  509W
  Further Education

  Student number at all FEFC funded institutions where home postcode is in the local authority district of Sutton.

  1996–97 to 1999–2000

  16–18

  Adult

  Full-time

  Part-time

  Full-time

  Part-time

  FEFC funded

  1996–97

  1,260

  595

  629

  6,981

  1997–98

  1,242

  643

  564

  7,457

  1998–99

  1,205

  550

  518

  7,064

  1999–2000

  1,198

  571

  486

  6,235

  Non-FEFC funded

  1996–97

  33

  95

  158

  357

  1997–98

  33

  112

  174

  354

  1998–99

  35

  143

  179

  399

  1999–2000

  44

  248

  214

  1,549

  Modern Apprenticeships

  Since 2 May 1997, we know of 565 starts on Modern Apprenticeships in the Sutton and Cheam constituency (as at 31 December 2000). Broken down by financial year these are:

  Financial year

  Foundation Modern Apprenticeships1

  Advanced Modern Apprenticeships2

  Total

  1997–98

  2

  90

  92

  1998–99

  34

  98

  132

  1999–2000

  82

  99

  181

  2000–013

  80

  80

  160

  Total

  198

  367

  565

  1 Foundation Modern Apprenticeships, formerly known as National Traineeships, were introduced nationally in September 1997.

  2 Advanced Modern Apprenticeships, formerly known as Modern Apprenticeships, were introduced nationally in September 1995.

  3 To date.

  Notes:

  1. The Trainee Database System (TDS), from which these data are taken, is less complete than Management Information supplied to the Department by Training and Enterprise Councils (TECs) (around 95 per cent).

  2. In addition, the postcode information on TDS, from which parliamentary constituency data are compiled, are 95 per cent. complete.

  3. TEC Management Information does not provide information at parliamentary constituency level.

  Source:

  WBTYP trainee database.

  New Deal for Young People

  In the Sutton and Cheam constituency, 260 young people have joined the New Deal to end December 2000. 150 have found jobs, 115 of which are sustained.

  Labour Market Statistics

  The working age employment rate in Sutton in autumn 2000 was 84.5 per cent., above the UK rate of 74.7 per cent. The rate in autumn 1997 was 82.1 per cent.

  The claimant unemployment rate has fallen from 4.3 per cent. in February 1997 to 1.7 per cent. in February 2001 in the Sutton and Cheam constituency.

  Departmental Policies (Caernarfon)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, with 510W
  statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Caernarfon constituency, the effects on Caernarfon of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154976]

  Mr. Wills
  Outlined are details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Caernarfon constituency. The Welsh Assembly will be able to provide details of education policies.

  Modern Apprenticeships

  Numbers of known starts on Modern Apprenticeships for the requested constituency since 2 May 1997 (as at 30 November 2000) are as follows, broken down by financial year:

  Caernarfon

  Financial year

  Foundation Modern Apprenticeships1

  Advanced Modern Apprenticeships2

  Total

  1997–98

  0

  64

  64

  1998–99

  27

  76

  103

  1999–2000

  206

  65

  271

  2000–013

  147

  35

  182

  Total

  380

  240

  620

  1 Foundation Modern Apprenticeships, formerly known as National Traineeships, were introduced nationally in September 1997.

  2 Advanced Modern Apprenticeships, formerly known as Modern Apprenticeships, were introduced nationally in September 1995.

  3 To date

  Notes:

  1. The Trainee Database System (TDS), from which these data are taken, is less complete than Management Information supplied to the Department by Training and Enterprise Councils (TECs) (around 95 per cent.)

  2. In addition, the postcode information on the TDS, from which parliamentary constituency data are compiled, are 95 per cent. complete.

  3. TEC Management Information does not provide information at parliamentary constituency level.

  Source:

  WBTYP trainee database

  New Deal for Young People

  In the Caernarfon constituency, 818 young people have joined the New Deal to end December 2000. 497 have found jobs, 406 of which are sustained.

  Labour market statistics

  The claimant unemployment rate has fallen from: 10.7 per cent. in February 1997 to 6.0 per cent. in February 2001 in the Caernarfon constituency.

  Employment zone

  The constituencies of Caernarfon, Yns MÔn and Meirionnydd Nant Conwy are covered by the North West Wales Employment Zone. The zone began operating in May 2000 and by December 2000, 882 people had started on the Employment Zone. Of these people 37 had entered employment by December 2000.

  Departmental Policies (Meirionnydd Nant Conwy)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Meirionnydd Nant Conwy constituency, the effects on Meirionnydd Nant Conwy of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [1549771
  511W
  Mr. Wills
  Outlined are details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Meirionnydd Nant Conwy constituency. The Welsh Assembly will be able to provide details of education policies.

  Modern Apprenticeships

  Numbers of known starts on Modern Apprenticeships for the requested constituency since 2 May 1997 (as at 30 November 2000) are as follows, broken down by financial year:

  Meirionnydd Nant Conwy

  Financial year

  Foundation Modern Apprenticeships1

  Advanced Modern Apprenticeships2

  Total

  1997–98

  0

  40

  40

  1998–99

  32

  48

  80

  1999–2000

  135

  49

  184

  2000–013

  91

  44

  135

  Total

  258

  181

  439

  1 Foundation Modern Apprenticeships, formerly known as National Traineeships, were introduced nationally in September 1997.

  2 Advanced Modern Apprenticeships, formerly known as Modern Apprenticeships, were introduced nationally m September 1995.

  3 To date

  Notes:

  1. The Trainee Database System (TDS), form which these data are taken, is less complete than Management Information supplied to the Department by Training and Enterprise Councils (TECs) (around 95 per cent.).

  2. In addition, the postcode information on the TDS, from which parliamentary constituency data are compiled, are 95 per cent. complete.

  3. TEC Management Information does not provide information at parliamentary constituency level.

  Source:

  WBTYP trainee database

  New Deal for Young People

  In the Meirionnydd Nant Conwy constituency, 443 young people have joined the New Deal to end December 2000. 253 have found jobs, 201 of which are sustained.

  Labour market statistics

  The working age employment rate in Denbighshire UA in autumn 2000 was 72.7 per cent., below the UK rate of 74.7 per cent. The rate in autumn 1997 was 72.2 per cent.

  The claimant unemployment rate has fallen from:

  8.7 per cent. in February 1997 to 5.4 per cent. in February 2001 in the Clwyd, South constituency.

  Employment zone

  The constituencies of Caernarfon, Ynys MÔn and Meirionnydd Nant Conwy are covered by the North West Wales Employment Zone. The zone began operating in May 2000 and by December 2000, 882 people had started on the Employment Zone. Of these people 37 had entered employment by December 2000.

  Departmental Policies (Ynys MÔn)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Ynys MÔn constituency, the effects on Ynys MÔn of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154974]
  512W
  Mr. Wills
  Outlined are details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Ynys MÔn constituency. The Welsh Assembly will be able to provide details of education policies.

  Modern Apprenticeships

  Numbers of known starts on Modern Apprenticeships for the requested constituency since 2 May 1997 (as at 30 November 2000) are as follows, broken down by financial year.

  Ynys MÔn

  Financial year

  Foundation Modern Apprenticeships1

  Advanced Modern Apprenticeships2

  Total

  1997–98

  3

  102

  105

  1998–99

  87

  68

  155

  1999–2000

  361

  87

  448

  2000 –013

  195

  67

  262

  Total

  646

  324

  970

  1 Foundation Modern Apprenticeships, formerly known as National Traineeships, were introduced nationally in September 1997

  2 Advanced Modern Apprenticeships, formerly known as Modem Apprenticeships, were introduced nationally in September 1995.

  3 To date

  Notes:

  1. The Trainee Database System (TDS), from which these data are taken, is less complete than Management Information supplied to the Department by Training and Enterprise Councils (TECs) (around 95 per cent.)

  2. In addition, the postcode information on the TDS, from which parliamentary constituency data are compiled, are 95 per cent. complete.

  3. TEC Management Information does not provide information at parliamentary constituency level.

  Source:

  WBTYP trainee database

  New Deal for Young People

  In the Ynys MÔn constituency, 1,091 young people have joined the New Deal to end December 2000. 580 have found jobs, 462 of which are sustained.

  Labour market statistics

  The claimant unemployment rate has fallen from 12.3 per cent. in February 1997 to 9.0 per cent. in February 2001 in the Ynys MÔn constituency.

  Employment zone and Action Teams

  The constituencies of Caernarfon, Ynys MÔn and Meirionnydd Nant Conwy are covered by the North West Wales Employment Zone. The zone began operating in May 2000 and by December 2000, 882 people had started on the Employment Zone. Of these people 37 had entered employment by December 2000.

  The North West Wales Action Team for Jobs operated in Holyhead, which lies within the Ynys MÔn constituency. The Action Team began operating in October 2000: by February 2001 the Team had a caseload of 140 people and 15 people had entered employment.

  Departmental Policies (Edinburgh, South)
  Mr. Nigel Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Edinburgh, South constituency, the effects on Edinburgh of the Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [155340]
  513W
  Mr. Wills
  Outlined are details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Edinburgh, South constituency. For education matters I refer my hon. Friend to the Scottish Parliament.

  Modern Apprenticeships

  Scottish Office will provide.

  New Deal for Young People

  In the Edinburgh, South constituency, 586 young people have joined the New Deal to the end December 2000. 298 have found jobs, 232 of which are sustained.

  Labour Market Statistics

  The working age employment rate in City of Edinburgh in autumn 2000 was 81.8 per cent., above the UK rate of 74.7 per cent. The rate in autumn 1997 was 73.2 per cent.

  The claimant unemployment rate has fallen from 7.9 per cent. in February 1997 to 4.4 per cent. in February 2001 in the Edinburgh, South constituency.

  Departmental Policies (Lincoln)
  Gillian Merron
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Lincoln constituency, the effects on Lincoln of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [152980]

  Mr. Wills
  [holding answer 20 March 2001]Details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Lincoln constituency and Lincolnshire LEA have been placed in the Library.

  Departmental Policies (Stourbridge and Dudley)
  Ms Shipley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to(a) Stourbridge and (b) the metropolitan borough of Dudley the effects on the area of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154730]

  Mr. Wills
  [holding answer 20 March 2001]Details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Stourbridge constituency and the metropolitan borough of Dudley and Dudley LEA have been placed in the Library.

  Departmental Policies (Lancaster and Wyre)
  Mr. Dawson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Lancaster and Wyre constituency, the effect on Lancaster and Wyre of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154685]

  Mr. Wills
  [holding answer 21 March 2001]Details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Lancaster and Wyre constituency and the Lancashire LEA have been placed in the Library.

  Departmental Policies (Battersea)
  Mr. Linton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to Battersea, the effects of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154821]
  514W
  Mr. Wills
  Details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Battersea constituency and the Wandsworth LEA have been placed in the Library.

  Departmental Policies (Truro and St. Austell)
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, including statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Truro and St. Austell constituency, the effects on Truro and St. Austell of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154534]

  Mr. Wills
  Details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Truro and St. Austell constituency and Cornwall LEA have been placed in the Library.

  Departmental Policies (Chichester)
  Mr. Martyn Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, with statistical information relating as directly as possible to the Chichester constituency, the effects on Chichester of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [155279]

  Mr. Wills
  Details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Chichester constituency and West Sussex LEA have been placed in the Library.

  Departmental Policies (Walthamstow)
  Mr. Gerrard
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will set out, including statistical information relating as directly as possible to the constituency, the effect on the Walthamstow constituency of his Department's policies and actions since 2 May 1997. [154174]

  Mr. Wills
  Details of the effects of a range of the Department's policies on the Walthamstow constituency and the Waltham Forest LEA have been placed in the Library.

  New Deal
  Mr. Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment how many cohorts had their first interview for the New Deal for 18 to 24-years-olds in(a) January and (b) April 1998. [154931]

  Ms Jowell
  In January 1998, 4,030 young people had an initial New Deal interview in the 12 Pathfinder areas. In April 1998, the first month that the programme was rolled out nationally, 13,200 young people had an initial interview.

  Education Action Zones
  Mrs. May
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if he will list, for each education action zone(a) the lead LEA, (b) the schools in the zones, (c) the parliamentary constituencies covered by each zone, (d) the date of the zone's inauguration, (e) the total public funding given to each zone to date, (f) the public funding budgeted to be given to the zone in future, (g) the total private funding obtained by each zone and (h) the date of (i) inspection and (ii) audit of each zone's efficiency and effectiveness. [153280]
  515W
  Ms Estelle Morris
  [holding answer 12 March 20011 The information requested for each of the 73 large Education Action Zones (EAZs), is contained in tables, copies of which have been placed in the Library, with the exception of(h) (ii) which is an ongoing process. EAZs do not have 'lead LEAs'. The table lists the Partner LEAs.

  This funding has led to improvements in the standards of education. In the 25 first round zones which have been running the longest, the proportion of 7-year-olds reaching level 2 in reading, writing and maths has increased by 7,. 6 and 8 percentage points respectively since 1998, compared with national increases of 4, 4 and 6 percentage points over the same period. The proportion of 11-year-olds achieving level 4 in English, maths and science has increased by 12, 16 and 20 percentage points respectively, compared with 10, 14 and 16 percentage points nationally.

  Pledged private sector sponsorship for all Education Action Zones now runs at over £37 million; some £36 million of this is for large zones.

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

  BSE
  Mr. Paice
  To ask the Minster of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what the longest period of time is in which existing stocks of rendered specified risk material and over-30-months scheme material have been stored. [152065]

  Ms Quin
  [holding answer 5 March 2001]The longest period of time to date in which existing stocks of rendered OTMS material (which includes SRM from over-30months cattle) have been stored is 4 years 9 months, i.e. from the start of the scheme in May 1996.

  Foot and Mouth
  Mr. Laurence Robertson
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what veterinary advice he has received regarding the level of threat posed to the spreading of foot and mouth disease by the holding of horseracing meetings; and if he will make a statement. [152162]

  Ms Quin
  [holding answer 5 March 2001]Veterinary advice to Ministers is that no meeting should be held within an officially designated Protection Zone. This is an area of at least 3 kilometres around an infected premises.

  We have provided veterinary support in drawing up advice for use by the British Horseracing Board regarding the conditions under which race meetings in other parts of the country may be held.

  Mr. Luff
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what discussions he has had with British Waterways about the precautions necessary to prevent the spread of foot and mouth disease; and if he will make a statement. [153842]

  Ms Quin
  [holding answer 15 March 2001]The Ministry has had a number of contacts with British Waterways at a local level and these have been constructive. In the light of the developing situation, British Waterways has commissioned a detailed risk 516W
  assessment from the ADAS consultancy. This will ensure that a consistent policy is implemented on access to British Waterways land. The Ministry is assisting ADAS and the results of the study will be made available on the MAFF website http://www.maff.gov.uk/.

  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what precautions are in place with regard to the transport of animals for rendering during the foot and mouth outbreak. [153971]

  Ms Quin
  The lorries involved in transport to rendering plants are specially designed to be leakproof. This is checked by filling them partially with water and tilting them to 30 degrees to check for leaks. Dead animals do not excrete the virus. The carcases are all individually disinfected and covered in the lorries with plastic sheeting. This is weighed down with straw or sawdust which is heavily disinfected. The lorry is then covered with a tight-fitting tarpaulin. These precautions reduce the risk of spreading infection to an extremely low level.

  Mr. Pickles
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will introduce regulations to allow the burial of carcases as an alternative to burning for the disposal of animals culled as part of the precautions against foot and mouth. [153952]

  Ms Quin
  Burial is our preferred method of disposal where environmental conditions permit. Unfortunately, the high watertable across much of the country has precluded its use in many cases. We will use the full range of safe disposal routes available to us.

  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has received on the level of prices for meat at abattoirs during the foot and mouth crisis. [1542831

  Ms Quin
  Regular, vigorous representations on the price of red meat have been received from all sectors of the industry since the outbreak of foot and mouth disease. However, since official deadweight price reporting of cattle has recommenced and the exchange of information on sheep and pig prices has improved, the level has reduced significantly. Issues relating to pricing policies and unfair competition are a matter for the Director General of Fair Trading.

  Mr. Öpik
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) what arrangements he has made to ensure animals are being slaughtered at the closest possible abattoir to the point of origin of the stock; and if he will make a statement; [154395]

  (2) what measures he has taken to reduce the transportation of carcases and stock across country in the light of the current foot and mouth outbreak; and if he will make a statement. [154394]

  Mr. Morley
  For the duration of the outbreak, we are using the weekly foot and mouth disease stakeholders meetings to stress the need to keep journeys as short as possible. All movement is banned subject to restricted and limited journeys under licence. Where necessary to move animals for welfare reasons, then this is subject to strict controls.

  For the longer term, we agree that we will need to look very closely at long distance livestock movements, both on animal health and welfare grounds.
  517W
  Mr. Peter Ainsworth
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list the meetings and conferences organised by his Department and agencies of his Department which have been(a) cancelled and (b) postponed owing to foot and mouth disease; and if he will make a statement. [155372]

  Ms Quin
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]This information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Foot and Mouth (Devon)
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will grant a licence to Mr. Leslie Barons of Beneknowle Farm, Diptford, South Devon, to bring back 130 in-lamb ewes, 140 couples and 110 ewe-lambs from Home Farm, Churstow, Devon, to Beneknowle Farm. [154435]

  Ms Quin
  [holding answer 19 March 2001]Mr. Barons did not meet the criteria for the Occupational Movement Scheme and the Local Movement Scheme. The Longer Distance Movement Licence Scheme is now in place and will hopefully meet the needs he has.

  Pig Swill
  Mr. Öpik
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what plans he has to control the imports of pig swill from overseas; and if he will make a statement. [154009]

  Ms Quin
  Imports from third countries of pig swill containing animal products are not allowed into Great Britain. Any such imports would require an import licence and none have been issued.

  Timber
  Ms Walley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if his Department's annual report on timber procurement to the Committee of Green Ministers will be published. [152112]

  Ms Quin
  My right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment stated on 28 July 2000,Official Report, columns 947–48W, that each central Government Department must in future report annually on its timber purchases. This should explain what steps are being taken to buy timber and timber-related products from sustainable and legal sources; the quantity and types of purchase; and what assurances were received that the source of timber was sustainable and legal.

  The Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions will be issuing to Departments, around the end of March 2001, the questionnaire on greening government progress. It will include some basic questions on timber procurement. The report from Green Ministers, due to be published in November, will make specific reference to timber procurement.

  Departments will decide for themselves what detailed information they will maintain on timber purchases and whether some or all of that information will be published separately from the Green Ministers' report.

  The interdepartmental working group on timber procurement will monitor the whole process and will assist Departments and their agencies in working with
  518W
  timber producers and suppliers; give guidance on best purchasing practice; set progressive overall targets for governmental purchases of timber from assured sustainable and legal sources; and agree appropriate targets for individual departments and their agencies.

  On behalf of the interdepartmental working group on timber procurement, the DETR is planning to commission work which will identify the quantities and species of timber being sold to Government, the major suppliers and the options for assisting Departments. Promulgation of guidance and advice to buyers would follow, probably before the end of 2001.

  Ms Walley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how much certified timber has been purchased by his Department over the past six months; and what proportion of total timber purchases this represents. [152115]

  Ms Quin
  At present, Departments do not yet have systems in place to provide data on the proportion of certified timber purchased over the last six months. The interdepartmental timber working group is working to develop a common reporting template which will form the basis for future reporting on timber procurement. An annual report will be provided in line with the answer given on 28 July 2000,Official Report, columns 947–48W, by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment.

  Hides and Skins (Exports)
  Mrs. Browning
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what discussions he has had with the European Commission concerning the export of hides and skins; and if he will make a statement. [153429]

  Ms Quin
  [holding answer 12 March 2001]My officials have had discussions with the European Commission arid other member states on all aspects of the exports of animal products, in the light of the current UK foot-and-mouth disease outbreak. In respect of hides and skins, a significant amendment to the Commission Decision has been negotiated which allows them to be traded without the need for official certification if they have been tanned.

  Meat Imports
  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is used for system inspection of meat imported from(a) European Union countries and (b) other countries; and who pays for the inspection. [153678]

  Ms Quin
  Meat imported from other European Union countries may circulate freely within the single market, but is subject to random checks at the point of destination within the United Kingdom. If that destination is a licensed meat cutting plant or a cold store, inspections are carried out by the Meat Hygiene Service (MHS), and the costs of inspection are charged to the operator of that premises. If it is a meat products or meat preparations establishment, inspection is carried out either by the MHS, where the establishment is co-located with a slaughterhouse or cutting plant (in which case the costs of inspection are paid by the Food Standards Agency) or by the local authority in other cases (when the costs are met by the local authority). Depending on the perceived health risk, checks at destination may be random or 100 per cent. Following the
  519W
  recent identification of specified risk material in imports of meat from Germany and the current foot and mouth disease problems in the UK, the Meat Hygiene Service has been instructed to step up levels of inspection at cutting plants and cold stores to ensure that increased volumes of imports can be checked for the necessary he health marks and correct documentation.

  All meat imported from third countries into the UK must enter, and is subject to veterinary inspections at, designated UK Border Inspection Posts (BIP). All consignments are subject to documentary and identity checks and at least 20 per cent. of consignments are subject to physical checks in accordance with EU legislation. These checks ensure that conditions of import have been complied with and that the products have remained in a satisfactory condition during transport. The inspection services at the BIP are the responsibility of the local authority. UK and EC legislation requires that costs incurred by the local authority while carrying out checks are recovered from the importer.

  Farmers (Private Insurance)
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) what estimate he has made of the proportion of livestock farmers who have privately insured against foot and mouth disease; [153730]

  (2) what efforts his Department has made to increase the take-up of private insurance cover for foot and mouth and other major livestock diseases. [153731]

  Ms Quin [holding answer 14 March 2001]
  At the outset of last year's outbreak of Classical Swine Fever, my right hon. Friend the Minister established a joint Government/industry working party to consider what measures the livestock industry could take to protect itself in future against the commercial consequences of animal disease outbreaks. Government compensation is the value of animals slaughtered and does not extend to consequential losses caused by movement restrictions. The NFU and others from the livestock industry agreed to join the working party to examine the practicalities and specifics of such measures, including insurance arrangements. The working party report was due to be completed in the spring, although this may now be slightly delayed while attention is concentrated on eradicating the present foot and mouth outbreaks.

  As part of this work, consultants were engaged to assess what types of animal disease insurance cover are presently available and the level of uptake. From this it is clear that the number and scope of available insurance products is very limited, that these are not widely purchased by farmers and that they tend to concentrate on a few diseases such as bovine TB and foot and mouth. We have made no formal estimate of the proportion of livestock farmers who have privately insured against foot and mouth disease. However NFU Mutual, the largest provider of agricultural insurance, estimate that around 10 per cent. of farmers have policies covering the disease.

  CAP Grants (Shropshire)
  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will list for each 520W
  year since 1979 the total grants paid to farmers in Shropshire under the Common Agricultural Policy; and if he will make a statement. [154467]

  Ms Quin
  The table sets out total subsidies under the CAP paid to farmers in Shropshire by MAFF in calendar years 1993 to 2001. For 2001, all information received up to and including 15 March is included. Information for years before 1993 could have been obtained only at a disproportionate cost. In some cases, amounts include an element of national as well as EU funding. Farmers also benefit from expenditure on market support measures, even though this is not paid directly to them.

  £million

  1993

  19.87

  1994

  33.35

  1995

  33.70

  1996

  52.86

  1997

  42.10

  1998

  42.45

  1999

  38.04

  2000

  42.92

  2001

  15.14

  1 To 15 March

  Endocrine Disrupting Pesticides
  Joan Ruddock
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what his policy is in relation to the endocrine disrupting pesticides listed by the European Commission and reported upon by the Royal Society in June 2000. [154257]

  Ms Quin
  We are playing a major role in the EU programme to review all substances used as plant protection products which includes those listed by the EU Commission as endocrine disrupting pesticides. This review programme will ensure the safety of all plant protection products as regards workers, consumers and the environment. Any substance failing to meet the high standards of safety demanded will be withdrawn from the market; 18 already have been or are being withdrawn.

  Hand-carried Imported Foodstuffs
  Mr. Gale
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of controls over the (1) importing of bushmeat hand-carried by visitors to the United Kingdom; [154246]

  (2) importing of general meat and meat products hand-carried by visitors to the United Kingdom. [154247]

  Ms Quin
  [holding answers 19 March 2001]It is illegal for individuals to import fresh meat from third countries into the United Kingdom unless it is fully cooked in a hermetically sealed container and weighs no more than 1kg.

  This applies equally to 'wild game meat' which we take to include bushmeat although there is no working definition of the latter term. Where we have advised of the possibility of illegal imports of meat, the relevant enforcement authorities have been alerted and the appropriate action taken. Where illegal meat has been identified, it has been seized and destroyed. No single assessment of the effectiveness of these procedures, based

  521W
  on centralised data, is available as a number of authorities, at local level, may find themselves in a position to deal with an illegal import.

  Dichlorvos
  Mr. Swayne
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assessment has been made of the impact on the horticultural industry of the withdrawal of Dichlorvos; and if he will make a statement. [154561]

  Ms Quin
  The Advisory Committee on Pesticides is to consider the review of dichlorvos at its next meeting on 5 April 2001. To assist the Committee in its task it will be informed of the implications for growers were dichlorvos to be lost.

  Bovine Carcases
  Mr. Beith
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if, for the duration of the foot and mouth restrictions, he will delay the implementation of the EU scheme for sampling all bovine carcases of animals more than 30-months-old; what modifications have been made to the scheme following his discussions with farming, trade and hunt kennel representatives; and if he will make a statement. [154716]

  Ms Quin
  [holding answer 20 March 2001]We will shortly be consulting publicly with interested organisations on our proposals and will take account of comments received before reaching final decisions.

  Farming Bankruptcies
  Mr. Flynn
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what changes have taken place in each of the past 15 years in the number of farming bankruptcies; what percentage such changes represented in each year of the total number of farmers; and what the percentage change in each year was. [154075]

  Ms Quin
  [holding answer 20 March 2001]Data on farming bankruptcies for England and Wales and what percentage of farmers, partners and directors this represents are given in the table (data solely on the number of farmer are not available). The last year for which bankruptcy figures are available for the whole year is 19991. Figures for the first three quarters of last year show a decrease in total farming bankruptcies of 10 per cent. on the same period in 1999.

  1 Final quarter 2000 data will be available in May 2001

  Number of bankruptcies1 in the agricultural and horticultural sector: England and Wales 1986 to 2000

  Percentage

  Year

  Total bankruptcies

  Bankruptcies as a proportion of farmers2

  Annual change in bankruptcies

  1986

  258

  0.1

  +8

  1987

  298

  0.1

  +16

  1988

  236

  0.1

  -21

  1989

  220

  0.1

  -7

  1990

  309

  0.1

  +40

  1991

  401

  0.2

  +30

  1992

  504

  0.2

  +26

  1993

  434

  0.2

  -14

  1994

  397

  0.2

  -9

  1995

  317

  0.1

  -20

  1996

  257

  0.1

  -19

  1997

  206

  0.1

  -20

  522W

  Number of bankruptcies1 in the agricultural and horticultural sector: England and Wales 1986 to 2000

  Percentage

  Year

  Total bankruptcies

  Bankruptcies as a proportion of farmers2

  Annual change in bankruptcies

  1998

  222

  0.1

  +8

  1999

  258

  0.1

  +16

  2000

  3181

  —

  —

  1 Includes bankruptcies of self-employed individuals and company insolvencies (Source: Department of Trade and Industry)

  2 Includes directors and business partners who also work on farm holdings (Source: June Agricultural and Horticultural Census). Data from 1998 onwards are not comparable to those for earlier years due to fundamental changes to the labour questions in the Agricultural and Horticultural Census

  3 First three quarters only

  Avilamycin
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what guidance he has given on the use of avilamycin in animals intended for human consumption; and what the possible consequences for human antibiotic protection are. [154808]

  Ms Quin
  [holding answer 22 March 2001]Avilamycin is an anti-microbial growth promoter authorised throughout the European Union as a feed additive under Directive 70/524/EC. This Directive includes a provision that before a feed additive can be authorised it must be shown not to adversely affect human health, animal health or the environment at the level permitted in feedingstuffs.

  Avilamycin is in a class of antibiotics that are not currently authorised for use as human medicines nor does it select for cross-resistance to any currently authorised human antimicrobial. In any future discussions on the use of avilamycin, the Government will continue to be guided by the principles established in the Report of the Joint Committee on the use of antibiotics in animal husbandry and veterinary medicines (The Swann Report) of 1969. This report proposed that antibiotics authorised for growth promotion should be restricted to those which have little or no application as therapeutic agents in man or animals, and which will not impair the efficacy of prescribed therapeutic drugs through the development of resistant strains of organisms.

  Rendering
  Ms Walley
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he will make the Rendering (Fluid Treatment) England Order 2001. [155071]

  Ms Quin
  [holding answer 22 March 2001]My officials are currently finalising the legislation in light of the comments received in the public consultation process.

  Genetically Modified Organisms
  Mr. Yeo
  To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what scientific research into the phenomenon of gene stacking in genetically modified crops in natural conditions(a) he has evaluated and (b) has been brought to the attention of (i) ACRE and (ii) ACNFP; and when. 11532381

  Mr. Meacher
  I have been asked to reply.
  523W
  Gene stacking refers to plants with traits from more than one genetic modification which may be developed intentionally or created unintentionally in the environment through cross-pollination between two different genetically modified (GM) plants.

  The Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE) always considers any risks associated with gene stacking when it advises on the release or marketing of GM plants. ACRE assesses the potential for gene stacking to occur both in neighbouring crops of the same or sexually compatible species and in compatible wild plants at or around the release site. The potential for gene stacking is well controlled for research releases of GM plants and for the few GM crops which have Europe-wide approval for placing on the market. However the regulatory authorities both here and in the European Union are aware that the potential for gene stacking will increase should there be widespread cultivation of GM crops and the implications must be well understood.

  ACRE considered the potential problems of both intentional and unintentional gene stacking in 1998 and have kept abreast of developments. There are relatively few scientific reports of this phenomenon occurring in natural conditions, but my Department has funded its own research on the implications of gene stacking for risk assessment. A scientific report commissioned from the John Innes Centre entitled 'impact of multiple herbicide tolerance in GM plants' is in the final stages of preparation and will be published shortly. ACRE is aware of this study and will advise on its implications and whether further work is needed.

  The extent to which gene stacking could impact on food safety is an issue for the Food Standards Agency and the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes (ACNFP). Any GM crop that is to be used for food production must be considered for approval under the EC Novel Foods Regulation (EC 258–97). The ACNFP is aware of a number of applications for GM crops containing stacked genes which are currently being considered under the EC Novel Foods Regulation by other Member States. Each of these applications will be considered in due course by the AONFP on a case by case basis.

DEFENCE

  Foot and Mouth
  Mr. Duncan Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list units in the armed forces on standby, as a result of a request from the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to deal with foot and mouth. [155599]

  Mr. Spellar
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Aberavon (Sir J. Morris) on 23 March 2001,Official Report, columns 365–66W. In addition, at the request of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Joint Headquarters have been established at MAFF HQ in London and at MAFF regional offices. The role of these Headquarters is to co-ordinate logistic and other support to MAFF, drawn from appropriate civil and military resources. The Ministry of Defence is playing an
  524W
  important role in these Headquarters. Teams of armed forces personnel are also helping to co-ordinate the administration of slaughter, and the transport and disposal of carcases in affected areas. Other forces are on standby in case gaps are revealed. The armed forces contribution to the operation is being directed by Land Command under Commander in Chief Land.

  Mr. Key
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many service personnel, from which units, are assisting the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food with the foot and mouth outbreak; where they are deployed and in what numbers; and if he will make a statement on their role. [155163]

  Mr. Spellar
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Aberavon (Sir J. Morris) on 23 March 2001,Official Report, columns 365–66W.

  Mr. Peter Ainsworth
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the meetings and conferences organised by his Department and agencies of his Department which have been(a) cancelled and (b) postponed owing to foot and mouth disease; and if he will make a statement. [155367]

  Mr. Spellar
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]The information is not held centrally and could be collated only at disproportionate cost.

  Mr. Ruane
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the countries from which his Department has bought meat in the past year; and which of them have recently experienced endemic foot and mouth disease in their national herd. [155256]

  Dr. Moonie
  [holding answer 23 March 2001]In the past year my Department has bought meat from: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Denmark, France, the Republic of Ireland, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain and Uruguay as well as the United Kingdom. Of these only Brazil has recently experienced endemic foot and mouth disease. All meat imported into the UK for human consumption, however, must comply with Community import rules. These permit the importation of meat from some countries where foot and mouth is present but only where the veterinary authorities have contained the disease in specific regions. EC rules permit imports only from those regions where there is considered not to be a risk to human or animal health. These controls currently apply to Brazil and Uruguay.

  Somme Barracks (Cyprus)
  Mr. Key
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the Somme barracks restaurant (building 35) at Episkopi on Cyprus was closed; for what reason; what alternative feeding arrangements were made; and when the restaurant will reopen. [154003]

  Mr. Spellar
  [holding answer 20 March 2001]The Somme (SIC) barracks restaurant (building 35) at Episkopi is in fact situated in Salamanca barracks within Episkopi Garrison. It is one of two Garrison canteens. The decision to close the restaurant was taken in March 1997 and closure effected in February 1998.
  525W
  While building 35 was closed for refurbishment, as an interim measure, all feeding arrangements were carried out in the remaining Garrison canteen (building 13). There was no reduction in the total canteen meals required or received and it was planned that when the refurbishment was complete all troops would then move back to building 35 for feeding and building 13 would be demolished.

  The planned completion date for building 35 is September 2001.

  National Missile Defence
  Mr. Caton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) for what purpose Fylingdales was upgraded in 1992; [155103]

  (2) what alterations have been (a) undertaken and (b) planned at United Kingdom sites to facilitate a contribution to the US Government's proposed National Missile Defence System; [155144]

  (3) what recent discussions there have been between representatives of the United Kingdom and US Governments about the use of sites in Britain as part of the United States proposed National Missile Defence System; [155134]

  (4) if the US Administration requested the use of sites in Britain as part of its proposed National Missile Defence System. [155133]

  Mr. Hoon
  We continue to discuss all aspects of missile defence regularly with the US and others, but we have received no request for the use of sites in the UK as part of a proposed system. Nor have any alterations been undertaken, or currently planned, at sites in the UK for missile defence purposes. The new US administration have not put forward specific proposals on what form any missile defence system might take, so it remains too early to say definitively whether or not alterations at sites in the UK will be proposed as part of such a system.

  In the early 1990s, the "golf balls" at RAF Fylingdales were replaced with a new phased array radar because they had become obsolete and difficult to maintain. The function of the site as part of the Ballistic Missile Early Warning System did not change, and the replacement was

  Consultant speciality

  Operational and retained task

  Current manning—consultants including those in command and staff posts

  Percentage shortfall

  Anaesthetists

  120

  28

  77

  General Physicians

  51

  21

  59

  Dermatology

  0

  3

  —

  Paediatrics

  5

  2

  60

  Genito-Urinary Medicine

  0

  1

  —

  Neurology

  1

  1

  0

  General Surgeons

  44

  20

  55

  Obstetrics and Gynaecology1

  3

  0

  100

  Urology

  0

  2

  —

  Orthopaedics

  28

  11

  61

  Burns and Plastics

  10

  3

  70

  Accident and Emergency

  23

  3

  87

  Psychiatrists

  35

  12

  66

  Ophthalmics

  10

  3

  70

  Oral and Maxillofacial

  10

  8

  20

  Ear, Nose and Throat

  10

  3

  70

  Rheumatology and Rehabilitation

  7

  5

  29

  Radiologists

  11

  9

  18

  Pathologists

  6

  6

  0

  Chemical Pathology

  4

  0

  100

  526W
  not related to US missile defence proposals. The Relay Ground Station for the Space Based Infra Red System (SBIRS) currently under construction at RAF Menwith Hill is regarded by the US as necessary regardless of any missile defence proposals and is being pursued as a separate project.

  Helicopter Flights (Greater London)
  Dr. Tonge
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) at what height the Chinook helicopter flew over Kew, Surrey, on 11 April 2000; [155167]

  (2) what instructions are given to military helicopters on training flights regarding low flying in built-up areas, with special reference to the Kew Bridge/M4 junction at Chiswick; [155166]

  (3) what recent discussions he has had with military authorities concerning the behaviour of Chinook helicopters operating over Greater London. [155168]

  Dr. Moonie
  The Kew Bridge/M4 junction lies within the Thames Valley Avoidance Area and flights over the whole Greater London area are controlled by Heathrow Radar Control. Helicopters must be flown strictly within specific routes and heights unless otherwise directed by the Heathrow Radar Controller.

  The Chinook helicopter which flew over Kew on 11 April 2000 did not fly below 750 feet (not 700 feet as I stated to the hon. Member in my letter of 17 February). Neither I nor my Ministerial colleagues have had any discussions with military authorities about the behaviour of Chinook helicopters operating over Greater London.

  Defence Medical Services
  Mr. Viggers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the establishment is for each branch of consultant in the Defence Medical Services; how many are serving in each branch; and what percentage shortfall there is in each case. [155002]

  Dr. Moonie
  The number of consultants against the operational and retained task requirement and the percentage of posts not filled as at 1 January 2001, is shown in the table:
  527W

  Consultant speciality

  Operational and retained task

  Current manning—consultants including those in command and staff posts

  Percentage shortfall

  Haematologist

  4

  1

  75

  Histopathology

  0

  1

  —

  Microbiology

  6

  3

  50

  Occupational Medicine

  50

  31

  38

  Public Health

  1

  7

  0

  Dental Restorative

  0

  1

  —

  1 This speciality is being re-established in the regular Defence Medical Services

  Porton Down
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 14 December 2000,Official Report, columns 22–23W, on Porton Down volunteers, if the research to establish the definitive numbers of Porton Down volunteers who have taken part in nerve agent studies will assess whether these studies breached the 1947 Nuremberg code of ethics governing scientific research. [154782]

  Dr. Moonie
  Research into nerve agent studies at Porton Down will consider the ethical standards of the time.

  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has received a report from the Operation Antler team of the Wiltshire police regarding its inquiries; and if he will make a statement. [154796]

  Dr. Moonie
  The Ministry of Defence has not received a report from the Wiltshire police concerning Operation Antler, but remains in contact with the inquiry team.

  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will place in the Library a list of technical reports which have been compiled by the chemical defence establishment at Porton Down to describe and record the results of its nerve agent studies involving service volunteers, specifying the title and date of each report. [154783]

  Dr. Moonie
  It will take some time to draw up such a list and I will therefore write to the hon. Member setting out such information as is available and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.

  US-UK Strategic Defence Initiative
  Mr. Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 6 March 2001,Official Report, column 176W, regarding the US-UK strategic defence initiative, which areas of research each of the letters of offer and acceptance covers; and what the contract numbers are of each of the letters of offer and acceptance signed since 1 May 1997 [154794]

  Mr. Hoon
  All five letters of offer and acceptance cover research into the diverse nature of the ballistic missile threat and the feasibility of countering it with missile defence systems based on technologies currently available. Contract numbers are HQ0006–98-C-0015, HQ0006–99-C-007, HQ0006–99-C-0004. HQ0006–00-C0003 and HQ0006–01-C-0002.

  Freemasons
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations led him to suspend JS DC1 88/00. [155584]

  Mr. Spellar
  Representations were received from solicitors acting for the United Grand Lodge of England. I subsequently authorised a temporary withdrawal of the Instruction concerned pending a review of policy towards societies such as Freemasons.

  Defence Diversification Councils
  Mr. Salmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress has been made in establishing defence diversification councils. [155093]

  Dr. Moonie
  The Defence Diversification Agency, established in 1999, is making excellent progress. A consultative period to consider the future of the Agency has just ended. We shall be considering the views put to us before reaching final decisions. As stated in the Consultative Document, we shall consider further the establishment of a defence diversification council, or similar group, in the light of experience of the new organisation.

  Iraq
  Mr. Hilary Benn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on how many occasions in the last two years military aircraft from the Turkish air force have entered the no-fly zone in northern Iraq. [155064]

  Mr. Hoon
  The northern no-fly zone was established on humanitarian grounds in an effort to prevent Saddam Hussein from repressing the Kurdish civilian population from the air. The zone was not established to monitor the activity of our NATO allies. We therefore routinely collect information only on the activity of Iraqi aircraft.

  RAF Bases (Commercial Development)
  Caroline Flint
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps he has taken to promote the regeneration of former RAF bases for commercial aviation use. [152703]

  Dr. Moonie
  [pursuant to his reply, 19 March 2001, c. 10–11]I must correct an error regarding the current position on planning. The planning application for the former RAF Finningley has not been called in for determination by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). The correct position is that the planning application has been approved by the local authority and that DETR is now considering whether or not to call in the application.

Preamble
The House met at half-past two of the clock: The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Guildford.

Working Families' Tax Credit
Lord Goodhart Lord Goodhart asked Her Majesty's Government:
What is their response to the report of the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux, published on 27th February, on working families' tax credit.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, working families' tax credit is a success in making work pay for families on low to middle incomes and in tackling child poverty. Over 1.1 million families receive it—300,000 more than claimed its predecessor, family credit. Working families' tax credit is boosting incomes, paying on average an extra £76.86 a week to families looking after 2.2 million children. We welcome NACAB's recognition of the contribution made by working families' tax credit to making work pay and tackling child poverty.
Lord Goodhart: My Lords, in the light of the NACAB report will the Government reconsider their insistence on payment of the tax credit through employers? Will the noble Lord accept, as we forecast during the debates on the Bill in your Lordships' House, that the payment system throws unnecessary administrative burdens on small employers and, as the NACAB report has shown, is actually detrimental to a significant number of employees?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, we do not accept that argument. We did not accept it at the time
2
and it has not proved true now. The only evidence that has been produced in favour of removing what is called a burden on employers is from the Better Regulation Task Force. We very much respect that body but it reported before the working families' tax credit came into effect. Of course, if there is evidence of particular burdens on particular kinds of employers, we shall listen carefully to that.
Baroness Carnegy of Lour: My Lords, the citizens advice bureaux, which have had a great deal of contact with people who are having problems with working families' tax credit, maintain that some 371,000 people who the Government expected would be able to claim the credit have not done so. Is it the case that the effect that credit has on housing benefit, council tax benefit and on help with school clothes may well mean that people would be less well off if they receive the working families' tax credit and therefore they are failing to claim it? If that is the case, are the Government disappointed?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, that is not the case. No one is worse off as a result of receiving working families' tax credit. Indeed, the tapers have been so devised that everyone is better off to some extent as a result of working families' tax credit; in other words, they do not lose as much in housing benefit or council tax credit as they would if they were not receiving working families' tax credit. That is in contrast to the previous family credit system. As regards free school meals, those were consolidated into the benefit, not when working families' tax credit was introduced but when family credit was introduced.
Lord Saatchi: My Lords, does the Minister agree that if a company held on to money which it knew belonged to its customers, that would be considered a pretty poor show? But is that not what the Government do on a grand scale by devising complicated tax credits such as the one we are discussing and then not paying them to millions of people? Will he tell the House how many billions of

3
pounds the Government are saving this year by the non-payment of tax credits and allowances to families who are entitled to them?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, nothing. It is simply not the case that the Government are holding on to money. If the noble Lord, Lord Saatchi, refers to the fact that employers pay working families' tax credit—which, indeed, they do—they offset it against the money which they receive in the form of national insurance contributions. If any employers have particular cash flow problems, they can have that dealt with by arrangement with the Inland Revenue. The Revenue does not benefit.

Haemophilia Treatment
2.40 p.m.
Lord Morris of Manchester Lord Morris of Manchester asked Her Majesty's Government:
What new help they are considering for people with haemophilia who have been infected with life-threatening illnesses by contaminated National Health Service blood products.
Lord Burlison: My Lords, in England all new haemophilia patients and children under 16 are treated with recombinant clotting factors. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland provide, or are in the process of providing, recombinant clotting factors for all haemophilia patients. The Government are currently considering whether all adult haemophilia patients in England should also be treated with recombinant clotting factors when sufficient supplies are available.
Lord Morris of Manchester: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. As he knows, this Question is about what doctors of the highest distinction have described as "the worst treatment disaster in the history of the NHS". Is my noble friend also aware of the High Court's landmark ruling today that the National Blood Authority was negligent in supplying blood contaminated with hepatitis C and has awarded significant compensation? Will the unmistakable logic of that ruling now be applied to haemophilia patients given hepatitis C by contaminated NHS blood products?
Moreover, is it not cruelly unfair to deny safer recombinant blood products to English patients with haemophilia aged over 16 when there is now no such restriction in Scotland and Wales? Does not this take the "N" out of NHS?
Lord Burlison: My Lords, first, I pay tribute to my noble friend's work for the cause of those throughout the United Kingdom suffering from haemophilia. I congratulate him on his role as president of the Haemophilia Society. I am sure that it could have no finer advocate.
4
The case referred to was brought by a number of claimants infected by hepatitis C through blood transfusions against the National Blood Authority under the consumer protection legislation of 1988. The judgment is about 350 pages long and very detailed. It would be inappropriate for me to comment further until the details of the judgment have been fully assessed.
My noble friend referred to the availability of recombinant treatment in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Recombinant treatment is currently available to new patients, those under 16 years of age, and patients outside those categories where prescribed. Not all haemophiliacs may want recombinant treatment. However, the Government are considering whether all haemophiliacs should be treated with recombinant clotting factors. We realise that there is a shortage and the Government are looking for additional suppliers.
Lord Clement-Jones: My Lords, haemophiliacs have little confidence in conventional blood products. What are the Government doing to tackle the serious shortage of the recombinant factor? When will the Government consider whether haemophiliacs in England above the age of 16 will be able to have recombinant factors?
Lord Burlison: My Lords, there is no evidence that recombinant factors are safer than plasma-based products. However, discussions on recombinant factors are ongoing. The Government are currently considering whether all adult haemophiliacs in England should be treated with the recombinant factor. It is an ongoing process. As soon as the Government have arrived at a decision they will inform those concerned.
Baroness Gardner of Parkes: My Lords, the Minister states that it is an ongoing process. I raised the matter in 1997 so it has been ongoing for a long time. What does the noble Lord mean when he states that there is no evidence that the recombinant factor is safer? Is it not correct that the recombinant factor is artificially produced and, therefore, cannot carry human blood contamination? How many haemophiliacs have died from HIV/AIDS and how many are currently diagnosed as having the condition?
Lord Burlison: My Lords, the noble Baroness poses a number of issues. I cannot respond in the detail that she may seek. The noble Baroness raised the issue as far back as 1997. Indeed, it was raised before that period. It has been a lengthy process. Like their predecessors, the Government decided that patients under 16—their parents were obviously worried about them—would have the recombinant factors afforded to them. Where it is prescribed, the treatment will be given. The Government are still considering whether to extend supply to all haemophiliacs in Britain. As soon as a decision is made, I am sure that the noble Baroness and this House will be informed.
Lord Walton of Detchant: My Lords, does the Minister agree that unlike earlier preparations such as Hemophil, which were derived from human blood products, the recombinant preparation is not made from human blood but is based upon genetically-produced factor VIII? Hence, it cannot in any circumstances transmit viral infection to those who receive it.. In view of the Government's commitment to reducing the lottery of postcode prescribing in the National Health Service, would it not be appropriate rapidly to make this preparation available to all patients with haemophilia in England, of whatever age?
Lord Burlison: My Lords, I do not question the noble Lord's interpretation of the recombinant factors. Indeed, I agree with what he said in that respect.
Prescribing recombinant factor VIII or IX for everyone is under consideration at present. However, some may not wish to have treatment with the recombinant factor. Supplies are not adequate at present to prescribe the recombinant factor for everyone concerned. The Government seek to ensure that resources are made available. As matters develop, they will be able to make a decision on the issue.
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, the Minister gave a full answer to part of the Question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Morris, but he said nothing about those who have been infected with life-threatening illnesses. What are the Government doing for those who have been infected with hepatitis C or HIV/AIDS? Are they considering compensation for such people, or at least special provision for their current needs?
Lord Burlison: My Lords, the policy on compensation has remained the same for many years. Compensation is paid only when National Health Service staff or those working in the NHS are at fault. Before 1985 it was not possible to make blood products free from hepatitis C in sufficient quantities to treat all haemophiliacs in Britain. There are no reported cases of classical or variant CJD transmitted by blood or blood products. All the evidence suggests that classical CJD is not spread by blood products. It is too soon to detect any potential transmission of variant CJD by that route, although the possibility cannot be ruled out entirely.
Earl Howe: My Lords, I should like to pick up on a point made by the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, which I am not sure that the Minister covered fully. What are the Government doing to address the serious shortage of recombinant products that has arisen in recent days?
Lord Burlison: My Lords, there is a shortage and the Government are seeking additional suppliers. I hope that there will be developments in that respect.

Channel Tunnel: Illegal Immigrants
2.52 p.m.
Lord Berkeley Lord Berkeley asked Her Majesty's Government:
Following the announcement of the suspension of most Channel Tunnel rail freight services due to the introduction of charges on operators of £2,000 per illegal immigrant from 1st March, what action they plan to take, in conjunction with the French authorities, to ensure that only those who are in a position to prevent illegal immigrants from boarding these trains are liable for these charges.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord Bassam of Brighton): My Lords,I am not aware of any suspension of Channel Tunnel rail freight services following the extension of the penalty provisions on 1st March this year. Liability for civil penalty arises when there is an involvement in a service or operation that has brought clandestine entrants to this country. We shall continue to work with the railway operators to improve security to prevent unauthorised persons travelling in rail freight wagons. There is close contact with the companies concerned at ministerial and official level and we shall continue to engage in constructive dialogue.
Lord Berkeley: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for that Answer and I declare an interest as chairman of the Rail Freight Group. He is correct in saying that there has been no suspension so far, but is he aware that the level of fines has reached £250,000 in three weeks? I am sure that he agrees that no company can stand such fines for ever. Is it not unfair to expect a British company to take action against the French state and the French railways when the British Government have failed to do so? Surely the key is for the two governments to reach agreement. The two railway companies would then comply in stopping the terrible trade in immigrants.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I am aware that since 1st March, £252,000 of civil liabilities have been placed on the rail companies in 23 penalty notices. It is interesting that as a product of that 126 clandestine entrants were detected. However, I cannot agree with the noble Lord's assumption. The companies jointly share the benefits and have a joint arrangement, so they jointly have to share the liabilities. That being the case, it is entirely proper that the civil penalty regime operates as it does.
Lord Brabazon of Tara: My Lords, in every other case involving the Immigration (Carriers' Liability) Act 1987, the operator has the opportunity to take precautions overseas against illegal immigrants coming in on their services. That is the case for the airlines, the shipping companies and other freight companies. In this case, it appears that the operators have no means to stop illegal immigrants coming in on the service. They can make an inspection only when the service gets into this country. The incentive for

7
them to declare illegal immigrants when they come into this country is being lost. At the moment they are doing it out of a spirit of co-operation with the Government. The alternative for the companies is simply to let the illegal immigrants slip into the undergrowth. Surely something must be done. The Government must co-operate with the French somehow to allow inspections in France before the carrier becomes liable for the fine.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I hear what the noble Lord says, but EWS and SNCF are working in co-operation with each other. They have always had joint liability. In addition to their joint liability under the new penalty provisions, EWS and SNCF are also liable for and share the costs of the detention and removal of illegal immigrants whom they have carried. In some cases, those costs could exceed £3,000 each time. That legislation has been on the statute books since 1971. The then Conservative Government took the view that liability should be shared. I invite the noble Lord to agree that our policy is consistent with that.
Lord Brabazon of Tara: My Lords, the noble Lord invites me to agree, but, as I have just said, in every other case the operator has the opportunity of dealing with the situation overseas. In this case, the operator has no such opportunity.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, because EWS and SNCF work together, they have the opportunity to design such measures. The Government have been working closely with our French colleagues. I am advised that SNCF has agreed to ensure that it fully plays its part. If it does so, it will have a defence against liability. That is the key issue at stake.
Lord Bradshaw: My Lords, I declare an interest. Does the Minister believe that there is any hope of the 80 per cent increase in rail freight set out in the 10-year transport plan being achieved unless there is a significant increase in freight traffic through the Channel Tunnel? Will he also confirm that under the minimum usage contract in the Channel Tunnel Act 1987, if freight trains cease to run through the tunnel Her Majesty's Government will become liable to pay Eurotunnel a large sum of money until 2006?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I am not the Minister for Transport, although I speak for Her Majesty's Government. I am not in a position to answer the noble Lord's second, more technical question. We take the view that the course that we have operated is right. Of course we wish to encourage more rail freight through the tunnel. That makes perfect good sense in terms of our national strategy. However, I do not believe that the civil penalty regime that we have in place should act as a serious deterrent. The rail freight companies have a responsibility for the safety and security of everything that they carry on their
8
wagons. That must include those who seek to travel on their wagons illegally. Proper enforcement of the law and the regulations is in everybody's interests.
Lord Lea of Crondall: My Lords, may I check that I have understood the Minister correctly? Will the new relationship between EWS and SNCF result in a prompt end to the current situation, in which an operator can commit an offence that it has no means of preventing? We want to get away from that situation as soon as we can.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, we take the view that both companies have an equal and shared liability. We seek to enforce that against both operating companies. They both have a responsibility and a defence against liability, which is to ensure that they can demonstrate that they have undertaken the necessary precautions.

Instruments of Torture
3 p.m.
Baroness Rendell of Babergh Baroness Rendell of Babergh asked Her Majesty's Government:
What is their attitude to the manufacture of instruments of torture.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal): My Lords, Her Majesty's Government deplore the manufacture of instruments of torture. On 28th July 1997 my right honourable friend Robin Cook announced a ban on the export and transhipment of equipment which might be used for torture. That included electric-shock batons, electric-shock shields, stun guns, Tasers, leg-irons, gang chains, shackles (excluding normal handcuffs) and electric-shock belts designed for the restraint of a human being.
With our EU partners we have agreed a list of non-military equipment that should be subject to export controls for human rights reasons. That list includes the equipment covered by my right honourable friend's July 1997 statement. The European Commission is now working on an instrument to introduce EU-wide controls on the export of such equipment.
Baroness Rendell of Babergh: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for her Answer. Does she agree that, since the 1980s, the number of countries which produce electric-shock equipment has increased fourfold to 130, and that some equipment—notably the electric-shock stun belt—appears to have no other use except as a torture-inflicting device?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I certainly agree with my noble friend that the continued production of such equipment is most regrettable and unwelcome. We continue to encourage other countries

9
to follow our lead and ban the export and transhipment of equipment that has been used for torture. I also agree with my noble friend that the use of stun belts could amount to cruel and inhuman treatment. We have also banned their export and transhipment. We continue to encourage other countries to follow our lead.
Baroness Sharples: My Lords, can the noble Baroness say how long is the list of instruments of torture?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I believe that I gave a fairly comprehensive list in my Answer. I could repeat them if the noble Baroness so wished, but all those items are included. It is most regrettable that legitimate instruments are sometimes converted in order to be used for such terrible means. We deplore that.
Lord Peston: My Lords, as my noble friend used the word "export", perhaps I may ask her whether she can assure the House that no companies producing these instruments abroad are owned by companies or nationals of our country. In other words, this matter concerns not only export but British ownership.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I am not able to give my noble friend a firm assurance on that. Certainly we hope that no companies which declare themselves as British are involved in that manner. However, my noble friend will know that British people have now taken up residence all over the world. I am not able to give your Lordships an assurance, but certainly I express the hope and aspiration that no British person is so engaged.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, can the noble Baroness at least give an assurance that the Government still intend to legislate against the procurement from third countries by British citizens or British companies operating from this country of torture equipment for export to countries that still use it?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, by virtue of the prohibition of the export of such equipment and the fact that it is illegal to use that equipment within the United Kingdom, I can assure the noble Lord that the ambit for those who manufacture it is very narrow indeed. For that reason, we do not believe that it has been necessary to ban the equipment. However, we have tried to ensure that it is not exported from our shores or used elsewhere.
Baroness Williams of Crosby: My Lords, in view of the fact that some equipment can, as the Minister said, be used for both torture and other, legitimate, purposes, do the Department of Trade and Industry or her own department keep a list of countries that use torture as one of their major weapons in maintaining
10
civil order? Could that be borne in mind when considering the export of dual-use instruments of torture?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I can reassure the noble Baroness that the concern of this Government is such that staff in overseas posts are taking on board instructions to watch out for the use of torture by their host governments and to make representations where credible reports are received of instruments being used for that purpose. Therefore, we are using our best endeavours to ensure that this issue is highlighted and that we garner as much support as possible for getting rid of such instruments.
Lord Haskel: My Lords, have the Government considered naming and shaming companies that manufacture instruments of torture?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, to the best of our knowledge, there are no such companies in this country. Therefore, the principle of naming and shaming does not apply. However, certainly we remonstrate with those whom we discover to have manufactured those goods.
We are trying to raise the profile of this issue globally. As my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary announced in December 2000, a new global lobbying campaign has been launched for the ratification of the UN Convention Against Torture. We are commissioning the publication of a torture reporting handbook to enable doctors, lawyers, NGOs and others who come face to face with torture to report it to the relevant international mechanism. Thirteen thousand copies have been distributed in English, French, Spanish, Russian and Arabic, and more than 3,000 copies have been downloaded from the web.
We are also supporting the secondment of a senior UK police officer to assist the work of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture. We are giving significant financial support. We hope that all that, together with the establishment of an International Criminal Court, legislation for which I am glad to say was passed by this House last week, will do much to bring this terrible situation to an end.

Business
3.6 p.m.
Lord Carter: My Lords, it may be for the convenience of the House to know that at a convenient moment after 3.30 p.m. my noble friend the Leader of the House will, with the leave of the House, repeat a Statement on the Stockholm European Summit.
It may also be for the convenience of the House if I say a few words about the procedure which I hope will be followed this afternoon in relation to the Hunting Bill. A number of noble Lords indicated to

11
me that they would have liked the three substantive amendments to be grouped together so that the House would hold a single debate followed by three votes. However, I have received strenuous representations from the Official Opposition, who would prefer three separate debates with a vote at the end of each.
As ever, I have tried to produce a solution which gives the House the best of both worlds. In order to meet the wishes of the Official Opposition, the three main amendments have not been grouped. However, I anticipate that many of your Lordships will wish to talk about the three options together and not be constrained to talk about each option separately. Therefore, I suggest that noble Lords who want to discuss the three options together with a single speech should do so when the House debates Amendment No. 1. I hope that the debate on Amendment No. 1 will thus be the substantial debate.
At the end of the first debate, the Committee will vote on option 1—the ban. Then my noble friend the Minister will move Amendment No. 2. At that stage it will be open to any noble Lord who wishes to focus particularly on self-regulation to speak to that amendment. At the end of that debate, we shall vote on option 2. Then the Minister will move Amendment No. 3. Any noble Lord who wishes to focus particularly on hunting under licence—or the so-called "middle way"—can speak at that point. At the end of that debate, we shall vote on option 3.
I know that noble Lords will make their own decisions about when and how to intervene. However, my instinct tells me that the first, more general debate on all three options is likely to be the most substantive. I hope that the debates on Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 will be shorter and more focused and that we shall be able to proceed with votes 2 and 3 without undue repetition or delay. I hope that that helps to clarify matters.
Lord Peston: My Lords, perhaps I may ask my noble friend a question. I am delighted to hear that, having been in this House exactly one day more than me, he still believes that our debates might well be focused. Can he clarify one matter about which there appears to be some confusion? Can we assume that every one of the three options will be voted on, no matter what the outcome of the vote on an earlier option? I was under the impression that that was so, but several people tell me that the result of early votes can pre-empt the later votes. Am I right that, for those who want to vote three times, we shall have three votes?
Lord Carter: Yes, my Lords. I tried to make the matter clear when we debated the procedural Motion approximately a fortnight ago. The three votes are on alternative clauses. No vote is able to pre-empt a subsequent vote. Therefore, there will be a vote on a ban; there will be a vote on self-regulation; and there will be a vote on hunting under licence. The clause which the Committee decides to adopt will remain in the Bill.

Hunting Bill
3.9 p.m.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill.
Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Bassam of Brighton.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House in Committee accordingly.
[The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (Lord Skelmersdale) in the Chair.]
Clause 1 [Hunting with dogs: prohibition]:
The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Skelmersdale): Notwithstanding what the Chief Whip has just said, I advise the Committee that if Amendment No. 1 is disagreed to, I cannot call Amendments Nos. 2 to 6.
Lord Bassam of Brighton Lord Bassam of Brighton moved Amendment No. 1:
Leave out Clause 1.
The noble Lord said: Although this amendment is not grouped with Amendments Nos. 2 and 3, I anticipate that many Members of the Committee will find it impossible to discuss the issue of the ban in isolation. In order to facilitate that, I therefore propose to address all three options in my opening remarks.
The amendments that we debate today would replace the ban on hunting, for which the Bill currently provides, with either self-regulation or statutory regulation. I hasten to point out that I am not suggesting that Members of the Committee should vote for, or against, any particular option. Rather, I am helping the Government to carry out their role as a neutral facilitator of debate and I recognise that the debate has to begin somewhere.
I will say a little more about the three options before the Committee in a moment. First, it may be helpful to remind Members of the Committee of the procedure that we are to follow. The Government's aim has been to ensure that your Lordships have the same choice between the options as did Members of another place and that you are able to express a clear view by voting on each of the options. The Motion that your Lordships passed on 13th March, the day after the Bill's Second Reading, enables precisely that to take place.
As I have explained, the Bill contains a single option, which is the one that was put forward by Deadline 2000 and which would have the effect of banning most hunting with dogs. That was the option selected by Members of another place. Included in the amendments standing in my name are the two other options—that is, the one put forward by the Countryside Alliance, which provides for a scheme involving the self-regulation of hunting, and the one put forward by the Middle Way Group, which provides for a scheme involving the statutory regulation of hunting.
As my noble friend the Captain of the Gentlemenat-Arms has just explained, at the end of this debate we will vote on whether option one—the ban—should remain in the Bill.
My noble and learned friend Lord Falconer of Thoroton will then move Amendment No. 2, which, if carried, would put the self-regulation option in the Bill and replace the ban option, if that had survived the first vote. When that amendment is moved, it is open to any Lord who wishes to speak to it to do so. At the end of that debate, there will be a second vote.
At the end of the second vote, my noble and learned friend will move Amendment No. 3, which, if carried, would put the statutory regulation option in the Bill, replacing any of the other options which may at that point have been in the Bill. Again, any noble Lord wishing to do so will be able to speak to that amendment. There will then follow the third and final vote.
To put it another way, there will be votes on the ban option, the self-regulation option and the statutory regulation option in that order, and the last one that receives a positive vote will be the chosen option.
I remind Members of the Committee that as a result of the procedural Motion that your Lordships adopted, the Bill will then be reprinted and recommitted to a Committee of your Lordships' House.
Lord Cope of Berkeley: I apologise for interrupting the Minister so soon, but we have already heard a difference of view between the noble Lord the Captain of the Gentlemen-at-Arms—the Chief Whip—and the Deputy Chairman, who explained to us that if Amendment No. 1 is disagreed to, no further votes can take place. What the Deputy Chairman said differed from the answer that was given to the noble Lord, Lord Peston, a few moments ago. I should be grateful if the Minister would confirm the situation.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My understanding of procedure is that which was outlined by my noble friend the Chief Whip. I thought that the procedure and the way in which Members of the Committee wish to proceed had been clarified during the debate that followed the Bill's Second Reading. I hope that we can proceed on those terms.
Viscount Astor: I am sorry to interrupt the Minister but if Amendment No. 1, which would leave out Clause 1, is not agreed to, how can one call Amendment No. 2, which also states, "Leave out Clause 1 ", because there would at that stage be no Clause 1 to leave out?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: I think that the answer is that Amendment No. 2 states, "Leave out Clause 1" as well. Amendment No. 2 also relates to the schedule, which is consequential. The three options will all be voted on. I am sure that Members of the Committee will have the opportunity, as they wish, to proceed in the way in which my noble friend the Chief Whip outlined.
14
Perhaps I could now say a little more—
The Earl of Erroll: I understood the Deputy Chairman to state quite categorically that were we to disagree to Amendment No. 1, the other amendments could not be called. This needs to be clarified but not by a member of the Government Front Bench. I am sure that this is not procedurally correct. The procedure is being altered today anyway. We need an explanation from the Chair.
The Deputy Chairman of Committees: I have been advised by the authorities of the House that, as I said originally, if Amendment No. 1 is disagreed to, I cannot call Amendments Nos. 2 to 6 by reason of pre-emption.
The Earl of Erroll: May I continue with this point, because I was the one who raised this matter? That totally differs from the opinion given by the Captain of the Gentlemen-at-Arms.
Lord Lea of Crondall: The Committee should be guided by what the House decided exactly two weeks ago on this very question.
Lord Mishcon: Would it not be appropriate, for the dignity of the House, for us to adjourn for five minutes while the matter is clarified?
Noble Lords: Hear, hear.
Lord Marsh: I ask a simple question. Whose authority prevails on this issue? We cannot proceed until we have an answer.
Lord Peyton of Yeovil: I energetically urge Members of the Committee to support the very sensible approach proposed by the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: It is clear that the Deputy Chairman's explanation, which was given in the presence of my noble friend the Chief Whip, is contrary to the advice given by the Chief Whip. All that the Deputy Chairman said was that the authorities had advised him. So far as I am concerned, one of those authorities must be the Chief Whip. The situation needs to be clarified. Denis, it is all yours!
Lord Carter: That last remark was certainly out of order. The advice that I gave the House earlier was given in good faith. The advice I received was that there would be three amendments and options, which were alternatives, and that there would be three votes. The first that I knew about this situation was when the Deputy Chairman advised the Committee that a decision on the first vote, which would be for us to accept a ban—I stress that—would mean that subsequent amendments and options were inconsistent. That was the first I had heard of that advice. The advice that I received previously was that there would be three clear votes and three alternatives.

15
Without wishing in any way to pre-empt the Committee's discussion—Members of the Committee will have their own views on our chances of voting for a ban—it remains, on the advice that I heard a few moments ago, that if the Committee voted for a ban, it would not then be possible, and it would be inconsistent, to consider the other two clauses. In the circumstances in which the Committee is likely to find itself, I suggest that we proceed with our debate and to a vote on a ban. In view of the outcome of that vote, we could then decide on the best thing to do.
Earl Ferrers: The noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, wisely suggested that as we are in a procedural muddle it would be easiest for the Committee to adjourn for five minutes in order for the position to be clarified. Everyone will then be content.
Lord Carter: I was outside the Chamber when the Motion was moved. I was not clear to which Motion my noble friend referred. But I am happy to accept the noble Earl's suggestion and move that the Committee should adjourn during pleasure for five minutes while we discuss the matter.
Lord Cope of Berkeley: If we were to adjourn for 10 minutes, the Statement could then follow immediately after the adjournment and the debate on the Committee stage could resume immediately after that. That may be more convenient.
Lord Carter: That is an extremely good idea. I beg to move that the House do now resume and, in moving the Motion, I suggest that the House does not take the Statement until 3.35 p.m.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
House resumed.
[The Sitting was suspended during pleasure from 3.20 p.m. to 3.35 p.m.]

European Council, Stockholm
3.35 p.m.
The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Jay of Paddington): My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister. The Statement is as follows:
"With permission, Mr Speaker, I should like to make a Statement about the Special European Council held in Stockholm from 22nd to 24th March.
"At Stockholm there was from all our partners sympathy over the outbreak of foot and mouth disease in Britain and support for the measures we are taking to contain and eradicate the disease. My right honourable friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will be making a Statement to the House tomorrow on the latest developments.
16
"The purpose of the council was to take forward the process of economic reform launched at Lisbon last year. This involved setting performance targets for the first time, benchmarking both between the nations of the EU and in respect of our main competitors outside Europe; and a massive programme of liberalisation in opening up our markets.
"As American growth slows, this policy is even more vital for growth and jobs in the future. Since March last year, 2.5 million new jobs have been created in the European Union. In the United Kingdom we have created over 1 million new jobs since 1997.
"The European Union spending on information and communications technology as a proportion of GDP has outstripped the United States for the first time. The proportion of homes with access to the Internet has doubled to 28 per cent. The figure for the United Kingdom is 41 per cent. But we must go further. Prior to the summit, we had agreed already rules for electronic commerce, which mean that a company registered in its home state can operate on the basis of those rules everywhere in the European Union. Rules allowing businesses to operate as a European company were agreed after years of negotiation. A programme has been agreed for the liberalisation of rail freight. We have now taken the final steps in telecoms liberalisation in a way which will bring full consumer choice, cheaper bills and cheaper Internet access.
"At Stockholm we further agreed to liberalise financial services and to stress openness, transparency and consultation with markets and their users. Consumers will benefit from cheaper financial services and businesses will be able to raise capital to start up and grow their own firms across Europe. The City and the CBI have welcomed this breakthrough as good for jobs in the United Kingdom and the rest of the European Union.
"We have made a commitment to open up the electricity and gas markets across the European Union. Most member states support the commission's proposed timetable of full energy liberalisation by 2005, with intermediate targets for commercial liberalisation of electricity by 2003, and 2004 for gas. That proposal goes forward. There is widespread support for it in the Council, and crucially it can be agreed by qualified majority vote. So, while I regret that France's difficulties in particular mean that we could not go further at Stockholm, the prospects for agreement at European level are good. Our aim is for the Council of Ministers to reach agreement before the end of the year.
"We agreed to reform competition policy and eliminate unfair state aids. For example, we expect British consumers will benefit from the changes to the so-called car block exemption in 18 months' time where our aim will be to secure a fall in UK car prices.

17
"We agreed to finalise this year's plan to deliver a Europe-wide patent. At present it can take nearly four years for a patent to be agreed right across the European Union, twice the time it takes in the USA and at five times the cost.
"Hopefully, we seek to agree in June the single European sky. This is a way of improving air traffic management in Europe, which will improve safety and reduce delays. A 25 per cent reduction in delays would save Europe's air transport industry and the public 2 billion euros a year.
"In addition, the council took further steps on employment, especially for women and the over-fifties; on vocational skills; and on new technologies including third generation mobile communications and biotechnology.
"On trade, we renewed our commitment to work towards a new world trade round later this year, an issue we will be pursuing when President Bush meets EU heads of government in Sweden in June.
"Taken together, these changes are further steps along the way to an efficient and competitive economy.
"President Putin of Russia met members of the European Council in Stockholm and I had a good separate bilateral meeting with him. Discussion focused on economic issues. We expressed our support for continued Russian economic reform and for Russia's bid to join the WTO. We also underlined the importance of further steps by Russia to improve the investment climate.
"President Trajkovski of Macedonia joined us in Stockholm at a critical moment for his country. We offered him our support and condemned the activity of armed Albanian extremists. Macedonia has started to build a multi-ethnic society and it is in all our interests that the country succeeds and does not polarise into separate Slav and Albanian communities.
"The United Kingdom has acted quickly to help to shore up democracy and peace in Macedonia. In Kosovo, NATO has diverted an extra 500 KFOR personnel to the Kosovo/Macedonia border and I can announce today two new steps. First, we are creating a new UK/Scandinavian battle group of some 400 troops from within our existing contingents for deployment by the KFOR commander to help to secure part of the Kosovo/ Macedonian border. Secondly, to reinforce KFOR's capacity to control Kosovo's borders, we are sending out a unit of Phoenix unmanned aerial vehicles, with its 120-strong support team, to provide extra aerial reconnaissance and intelligence-gathering assets to KFOR. The unit will be operational next month.
"The EU also reaffirmed strongly our joint commitment to the Nice Treaty and its ratification. Failure to ratify would put at risk the entire enlargement process. While we must, of course, go further in pursuing the policies of economic reform, the fact that this is now the clear economic focus of the EU is itself a huge advance. The agenda for it is
18
being led by the UK. Once again, it shows the advantages of constructive engagement and the folly of a policy of isolation.
"That is the approach which we took in Stockholm. It is a policy which is delivering economic reform in Europe and jobs for this country. It is the policy I propose to pursue with the support of this House and the country".
My Lords, that concludes the Statement.
3.42 p.m.
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, perhaps I may first express to the noble Baroness my deep shock when a couple of hours ago I heard of the sad death of Lord Cocks of Hartcliffe. He played an important role in this House and in another place. I expect that I speak for the whole House when I say that he will be greatly missed.
Noble Lords: Hear, hear!
Lord Strathclyde: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness the Leader of the House for repeating the Statement and for returning to the practice of making a Statement on the interim summits of EU leaders. There have been occasions in the past when this Government have not made a Statement to Parliament on interim summits. I greatly welcome her intervention and thank her for giving us the opportunity of a short debate.
Perhaps I may also say at the outset that we welcome the sympathy expressed by EU leaders over foot and mouth disease and the strong and swift action taken by some nations in response to the daily, ever more grave situation now facing our farmers. This is a subject to which I shall return in a few moments.
We note that the Council spent much of its time discussing international matters, including with President Putin. While there is no doubt that that has a useful place in such meetings, does the noble Baroness agree that the first priority at such summits should not be searching for a common EU foreign policy, but searching for greater EU prosperity?
Of course we welcome the clear statement of support for Macedonia and for the integrity of its borders. However, will the noble Baroness accept that the problem of violence against the integrity of Macedonia will not be dealt with by EU statements or missions but by robust action by NATO? Does that not reinforce the importance of no EU initiative on defence either competing with or confusing the central position and purpose of NATO?
Can the noble Baroness tell us whether evidence was presented in Stockholm as to whether any of the terrorists responsible for attacks within Macedonia have originated from Kosovo or have used arms supplied from Kosovo? Did President Putin express any concern on this point? What was our response to him?

19
Was there any discussion of the future status of Kosovo? What is the Government's policy on the future status of Kosovo? Will our judgment on this be affected in any way by the actions of those seeking to promote a greater Albania in the Balkans?
Is not the illusory nature of a common foreign policy shown up by the recent actions of President Chirac in putting out a red carpet for President Mugabe and by French opposition to continuing sanctions in Iraq? Did the Prime Minister have an opportunity to discuss some of those matters with the French? Did he press EU leaders to support sanctions against Saddam Hussein and end financial and political support for the racist and dictatorial Mugabe regime?
The declared purpose of the summit was to enhance the EU's competitiveness. Does the noble Baroness agree that in this light it was a conspicuous disappointment? Is she aware that we welcome those aspects of the summit's conclusions which genuinely move on the Lisbon agenda, including progress made on financial services liberalisation? While acknowledging the welcome statement by member states that they will push for a single market in financial services by the end of 2003, does the noble Baroness believe that that has any implications for current levels of stamp duty imposed by the Chancellor on sales of equity in the London market?
Noting the lengthy appendix to the conclusions on moves towards what is described as,
"further convergence of supervisory practices and regulatory standards",
in EU financial markets, can the noble Baroness tell the House of the UK Government's key objectives in these negotiations?
I see that the summit discussed the so-called demographic challenge of an ageing population. It noted the increasing pressure on pensions. Will the noble Baroness say whether any EU leaders expressed support in these discussions for the British Government's policy of forcing pensioners in retirement to buy annuities or for increasing taxation of pension savings by £5 billion a year in order to reduce incomes in old age? Is not that one example of pious words at the summit being completely undermined by misguided action at home?
Will the noble Baroness acknowledge that the high hopes of many in the Government after Lisbon a year ago have largely been dashed? Does she recall promising the House last March that, and I quote the Prime Minister, there had been a "sea change" in European economic thinking,
"away from heavy-handed intervention and regulation, towards a new approach based on enterprise, innovation and competition"?—[Official Report, Commons, 27/3/00; col. 210.]
Does not such rhetoric make the reality since then all the more disappointing? Why has there been so little progress on the liberalisation of energy markets, an issue of vital importance to British business, with all mention of clear deadlines blocked and removed from the communiqué?
20
Is it not worrying but predictable, as President Prodi said, that virtually the only movement made since Lisbon has been on what is called "the social agenda", with many key liberalisation measures still subject to delay?
As regards the proposed EU legislation on the application of VAT to e-commerce, described in paragraph 36 of the conclusions, can the noble Baroness assure the House that all elements of that policy will be subject to a national veto? As regards the broader economic scene. is it not striking that with the Japanese economy stalled and the US economy under serious threat, the euro is still receiving no vote of confidence from the markets?
Finally, does the noble Baroness accept that while the principles set out in the Stockholm communiqué on foot and mouth are the right ones—solidarity with farmers and others in rural communities and determination to contain and ultimately eradicate foot and mouth disease—the best way to meet those objectives in Britain would be to start to implement those measure for which the Opposition and many others have been calling for some weeks?
I look forward to hearing the noble Baroness's answers and I thank her for the confirmation that there will be a further Statement on foot and mouth disease tomorrow.
3.50 p.m.
Baroness Williams of Crosby: My Lords, I also thank the Leader of the House for repeating the Statement made in another place and giving this House an opportunity to ask questions about the outcome of the summit. First, from these Benches I repeat our sorrow at the unexpected and sudden death of Lord Cocks who could be regarded as a monument to freedom of expression. In this House he never spoke without believing deeply in what he said. He was never concerned to be in fashion or simply to repeat conventional opinions. We shall miss his exciting, imaginative and often quite unexpected interventions in our affairs.
I turn to the summit and ask the noble Baroness about foot and mouth disease. Is the Leader of the House able to say anything more about how far we are trying to follow the experience of other European countries which have adopted vaccination rather than slaughter as their major effort to deal with the disease? In particular, how far are we monitoring what Holland is doing, and what the Republic of Ireland plans to do, in this respect?
I turn specifically to the outcome of the Stockholm summit. I congratulate the Government on the steps forward they have taken on employment policy, particularly in relation to discrimination on the grounds of age and disability. We believe that to be a useful contribution to the work of the European Union. We also congratulate the noble Baroness on the liberalisation of financial services. In that context, can she tell the House the extent of progress in resolving the dispute with the European Parliament given that, as I understand it, the Parliament insists

21
upon a securities committee and greater transparency and many European banks are used for money-laundering as a result of organised crime and, in some cases, the deposit of looted state funds from developing world countries? Can the noble Baroness tell us more about the attitude of Her Majesty's Government to the European Parliament's emphasis on transparency in this field?
We on these Benches believe that the proposed unified system of air traffic control is a very useful step forward. However, will safety be considered in addition to the importance of liberalisation of the market, given discussion in this country on changes in air traffic control? Can the noble Baroness also say whether intensive negotiations will start on the issue of Gibraltar airport? As I understand it, that matter is holding up any further move towards integration of air traffic control which, as the Statement says, would clearly be of immense benefit to millions of passengers within Europe.
As to energy markets, there is perhaps some ambivalence in the response of the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition. Clearly, the differences in energy markets stem from countries which cling to their national vetoes regardless of the greater benefit to the European Union. Perhaps I may suggest politely that one cannot really have it both ways. On the one hand, one cannot insist on the separateness of all the member states with each wielding the veto in every possible situation, and, on the other hand, condemn them because they take such a position. It seems to me that Stockholm shows the independent national positions of member states as clearly as any drive towards integration.
In that context, perhaps I may ask the Leader of the House about discussions with regard to Macedonia. Almost nothing could exemplify more clearly the necessity of the move towards a rapid reaction force and a common foreign policy within the borders of Europe. It beggars description to consider what would happen if there was no European reaction to these events, and I commend the Government on strengthening the border by placing 400 troops within the structures and enhancing our patrols.
The excellent move at the Stockholm summit to induce the legal Albanian authorities in Kosovo to condemn terrorist activity by other Albanians on the Macedonia/Kosovo border is an extremely important step forward. Can the noble Baroness say whether the legal authorities will now try to make representations to those who lead the guerrilla activities to cease them immediately? Such action endangers the whole position o f the Kosovo Albanians themselves.
Finally, can the noble Baroness tell us something about the common letter, as I understand it, from Romano Prodi and Commissioner Christopher Patten with regard to consideration by the United States of withdrawing from the commitments of the Kyoto summit? Did the leaders at the Stockholm summit make it plain that they wanted to appeal to the United States to reconsider that extremely far-reaching and very disturbing decision, given the growing evidence
22
about global warming and the extreme dangers of a leading, powerful and influential country deciding to take no further steps to try to deal with that critical position?
3.55 p.m.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, I am grateful to both the noble Lord and the noble Baroness for their broad welcome of the Statement and the outcome of the Stockholm summit. First, on behalf of my colleagues on these Benches—in this case I believe that I speak also for my colleagues in the other place where Lord Cocks of Hartcliffe had a very distinguished career before he came to this place—we very much value the sympathy that has been expressed and wish the condolences of everybody in this House to be conveyed to Lord Cocks's family. The noble Baroness spoke about Lord Cocks's reputation in this House for freedom of expression, which I am sure we all support. I know from talking to many of those involved in his actions as Government Chief Whip in another place that tightness of discipline was perhaps another characteristic for which he was well known and admired throughout the parliamentary process. We shall all miss him very much.
I turn to the comments of the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, and the noble Baroness, Lady Williams, on the outcome of the Stockholm summit. The noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, referred to his opposition to the formation of a common European foreign policy and the steps that might have been perceived to have been taken to that end at Stockholm. I remind the noble Lord that it was the explicit concern of the Swedish presidency to concentrate on what it described as the "three Es"—employment, enlargement and environment—and this summit was devoted specifically to employment as a very clear follow-up to the Lisbon summit of the previous year. In that respect I should like to put down a marker in case there should ever again be a procedural question about informal summits. It had been said in advance in connection with the Lisbon summit that the work being done on employment in the EU would be responsive to annual assessments by the European Council. This meeting was the first of the assessments, and I believe that another is already planned in Barcelona next spring. I should be amazed if there was not a government Statement forthcoming on that process.
Before I turn to the emphasis of the summit on employment and prosperity, as the Lisbon process had set out, perhaps I may mention briefly the major foreign policy issues which have been raised—Macedonia and Kyoto, to which the noble Baroness, Lady Williams, referred. In reply to the noble Baroness, my briefing on this matter and the conversations that I have had over the weekend and this morning about the outcome of the Stockholm summit did not refer to the Kyoto process, and I am not aware that it was included in the agenda either formally or informally. I suspect that, as the

23
Gothenburg summit in June includes the environment as one of the issues, it might be raised at that time. If I learn any more I shall write to the noble Baroness.
As to Macedonia, I can go little further than the words of the Statement, except that the Government support with extreme urgency the democratic process in that part of the world. That is relevant to the matter raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Williams. The Albanian members of the coalition government in Albania are supportive of the action taken against the Albanian nationals within Macedonian borders. As I understand it, the three main parties in Kosovo are supportive of this, although naturally that perhaps does not go quite as far as condemnation of the activity of Albanian nationals that the noble Baroness suggested. But they are very much in support of what is happening in general in Macedonia in the democratic process.
On the broad issues regarding the main themes of the Lisbon summit—trade, prosperity and employment—the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, was perhaps slightly sceptical about whether there had been any precise outcomes. Perhaps I may repeat those outcomes mentioned in the Statement and reinforce some of the others. Since last year, 2.5 million new jobs have been created in the European Union. That is one of the achieved targets of the Lisbon agenda. Internet access has doubled within the year. That again is an achieved Lisbon goal. The spreading in the EU of information and communications technology—another very important part of the underpinning of the drive to improve skills across the European Union—has increased so far that last year for the first time as a proportion of GDP it outstripped that of the US. The agreement on common standards of protection against discrimination in the employment markets on the grounds of race, religion, disability, age and sexual orientation have been agreed. It has now been put into practice.
Therefore, there were specific outcomes. The Lisbon process is being taken forward in a way which is described as open co-ordination. The UK Government are certainly very supportive of that method. The attempts to introduce greater regulation to achieve either the social agenda or the goals on employability and employment and improving the skills base have proceeded much more to our liking through the open co-ordination process. We welcome that in terms of EU processes.
I was asked about the situation on financial services—the so-called Lamfalussi agreement. The Council endorsed the recommendations to achieve a target by 2003 of a single securities market. Progress in the financial services was very much part of our agenda on the broader economic issue. Clearly, if those arrangements are put in place and there is greater and more consistent access to capital markets and it is easier for British firms to raise capital for investment, it is likely that that will lead directly to creating more jobs and better growth as well as better choice and lower costs to consumers. That in turn will be very much part of the Lisbon long-term process.
24
The noble Baroness asked whether the European Parliament was concerned about the terms for the Lamfalussi deal. The European Parliament believes that these proposals are consistent with the institutional arrangements set out in the treaty. It is prepared to consider the deal within the broad terms of the treaty arrangements because it sees the desire to complete as soon as possible the single market in financial services as a legitimate target.
I confirm that on the "open sky" policy there are issues of safety and reducing the blockages on air traffic lanes and air traffic arrangements within Europe and the reduction in costs to which that will lead. Safety was specifically discussed.
The Prime Minister had a bilateral meeting with Prime Minister Aznar at the summit. Gibraltar and Gibraltar airport were on the agenda. As the noble Baroness and the noble Lord will realise from the Statement, the European Council agreed a position which did not exclude Gibraltar from the single sky policy. That was the concern that we had at the beginning. Indeed, the Prime Minister and Prime Minister Aznar are determined to try to resolve the matter in a bilateral way within the context of the general EU agreement.
On foot and mouth disease, I cannot really improve on the closing remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, when he underlined the fact that the European Union agreed with the position which the UK Government and others are taking to combat this terrible problem. Sympathy was expressed to the farmers in every country. I can confirm that there will be another Statement tomorrow afternoon by my noble friend Lady Hayman, repeating a Statement by my right honourable friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
The noble Baroness, Lady Williams, raised the question of the Dutch and vaccinations. It was decided at Stockholm that the EU generally agreed that slaughter was the preferred policy and that vaccination could be contemplated only as a temporary part of containment strategy. The Dutch will be going ahead with vaccinations. They will include animals within a two-kilometre range of any outbreak, although the animals may need to be culled even if they have been vaccinated within two months. The Dutch are going ahead on that basis, but the general agreement was that this was not the best policy to pursue at this stage.
4.5 p.m.
Lord Shore of Stepney: My Lords, I join others in thanking the Minister for that Statement. I also express my own sympathies and regret about the loss of our friend and colleague Lord Cocks.
Perhaps I may ask my noble friend to clarify one point on which there is likely to be some muddle. She referred to the "open sky policy" on one occasion. Can that be the European single sky policy of which we have heard before? Are we in fact welcoming the takeover of the control of British national airspace by a European body which considers there should be not only a Europe without frontiers in land, but a Europe

25
without frontiers also in the sky and in the sea? Does the Minister really believe that that should be welcomed? In a country where people fly not only to and from Europe but to the rest of the world, is it not a matter that should be view with great suspicion?
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, I must apologise to my noble friend Lord Shore if I said "open sky" when I meant "single sky". However, perhaps the optimist—my noble friend may not be one—would suggest that the two could overlap in terms of their ambitions, if not necessarily in terms of their titles.
As I said in repeating the Statement, so far as concerns the single sky proposal, the aim is to try to reduce the tremendous backlog—I am sure that the noble Lord will be aware of this if he travels by air within Europe—and the delays and cancellations which are caused by the system of having to agree slots across the European Union between national air traffic control systems. The proposal seeks to unblock that, but not, as the noble Baroness, Lady Williams, quite rightly pointed out, at any risk to the safety to that arrangement. It is simply very much an issue of trying to unblock the present "sky traffic jams"—if I may call them that—which occur all across Europe, particularly in the summer. The ambition is to try to improve that arrangement.
Lord Ezra: My Lords, the Minister referred to preparations for a further world trade round. Is it not a fact, however, that at the present time there are a number of trade issues in dispute between the United States and the European Union? Is it not important that those issues be resolved before engaging in a new trade round?
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, the Stockholm summit hopes that these two processes can work together. Indeed, that is the process being undertaken both at the Commission level and between the various governments concerned. There should not be any kind of isolated position with regard to individual examples of a breakdown in trade relations. Perhaps the noble Lord is thinking of the banana dispute. At the same time, that should be pursued in terms of its resolution while, none the less, continuing the preparation for, it is to be hoped, a more successful WTO round later in the year.
Lord Tebbit: My Lords, first, can the Minister be a little more specific in her reply to her noble friend Lord Shore on the subject of the air traffic control issue? Is the noble Baroness aware that the British air traffic control authorities have jurisdiction and control over the Atlantic airspace out to 30 degrees west? Is it the proposal of either the single or open sky policy that was discussed in Brussels that an authority in Brussels should control air traffic to 30 degrees west across the Atlantic?
Secondly, since it has now become the habit of the Prime Minister to discuss his options for general election dates with the president of the Commission,
26
can she suggest to him that he might discuss those option dates with the British public at large rather than just keeping it secret with fonctionnaires in Brussels?
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, as to the exact terminology of the single sky proposal, I have to defer, not surprisingly in matters of air traffic control, to the professional expertise of the noble Lord, Lord Tebbit, and say to him that I simply do not know whether the single sky would extend to 30 degrees west. I shall of course write to him on that subject if that information is available. It does not appear in the briefing that I have been given, but I shall pursue the matter and reply to the noble Lord.
On the question of the conversations in which the Prime Minister was supposed to engage that were overheard and eavesdropped on by the media, I understand that he was asked by Commissioner Prodi and responded in a polite fashion on the technicalities of when any decisions on a general election could be taken; certainly not on the question of an announced date.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, first, will my noble friend define for the benefit of the House as a whole what is a "single European sky"? I take a rather different view about Europe from my noble friend Lord Shore and the noble Lord, Lord Tebbit, but all of us are bemused by the expression "single European sky". I fear that my noble friend's statement that she is not responsible for that will not suffice. Secondly, I want to know whether, whatever it means, it was the unanimous view of all participants. Thirdly, what implications does that have for the debate that we are to have on Thursday about air traffic control?
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, I hope that my noble friend will forgive me. I did not say that I was not responsible for the policy. I am obviously not responsible for the policy. What I said was that the detail of the 30 degrees west issue, raised by the noble Lord, Lord Tebbit, in terms of the extension of air traffic control, was not one on which I had specific briefing. As far as I know, it was not specifically raised.
Perhaps I may repeat to my noble friend the exact terms of what was in the Stockholm understanding; namely, that the United Kingdom fully supported this initiative. If my noble friend does not approve of the overall title, I have already apologised to my noble friend Lord Shore for misspeaking when I said "the open skies". If he is concerned about "open" or "single" skies, that may simply be about the title. But I repeat what I said both to my noble friend Lord Shore and to the noble Lord, Lord Tebbit. This is seen as a rather mechanistic device that is crucial for improving the use and management of EU air space. That is why it is called for completion by the year 2004. I repeat my rather lay person's analogy that this is an attempt to remove the log-jam in European air traffic control across Europe, particularly that which develops on a seasonal basis.
The Lord Bishop of Hereford: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness the Leader of the House for repeating the Statement and associate myself and my colleagues on these Benches with the expressions of great sadness at the sudden death of Lord Cocks of Hartcliffe. His was a notable life in academic and political terms. He was for 17 years Member of Parliament for Bristol South and for 14 years he made notable, distinctive and robustly independent contributions in your Lordships' House.
The noble Baroness mentioned briefly in passing the liberalisation of rail freight. Perhaps I may press her to say a little more about that highly desirable development in European terms and to explain exactly what was decided at the summit.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, I am grateful to the right reverend Prelate for his expression of sympathy about the death of Lord Cocks. I am sure that his sympathy will be very welcome to the noble Lord's family. On the issue of rail freight, as I understand it, the proposal that has been agreed is simply a continuation of the earlier proposals to liberalise the arrangements for organising rail freight between the member countries, but no new initiatives or plans have been specifically agreed. As part of the post-Lisbon process of liberalising the arrangements for transport across the European Union, the intention is to attempt to speed up the proposals that are already under consideration.
Viscount Cranborne: My Lords, does the noble Baroness agree that the Statement seems to be rather long on aspirations that governments should agree to agree at a later date? That seems to apply in particular to the free market in financial services. Can the noble Baroness help the House a little further than perhaps the Statement does? Can she confirm that the principal country holding up the development of such a market is France? If that is so, why does her right honourable friend the Prime Minister think that the French attitude is likely to change from what it is at the moment?
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, the noble Viscount will be even more aware than I am that in European matters these things sometimes take time to unfold. The position of the UK Government on this and many other features of the post-Lisbon process is to take the lead in influencing and persuading colleagues in the European Union to take advantage of the process set up under Lisbon to revisit these matters, as I said to the noble Lord, Lord Strathclyde, on a regular basis so that bench-marks can be agreed, goals can be set and specific terms can be set in relation to a desire to move forward. For example, the agreed key priority on the Lamfalussi—the financial services ambition—is to agree the single securities market by 2003. That seems to be a very specific objective and one that can be bench-marked and checked as time goes on. I do not believe that there is any sense in which the French are specifically dragging their feet on this matter. It is really a question, as the noble Baroness,
28
Lady Williams, said, that might have run foul of some of the concerns of the European Parliament, but even those concerns seem to have been met.
Lord Wright of Richmond: My Lords, before raising a point with the noble Baroness, I am sure that all my noble friends on these Benches would want to associate themselves with the shock and regret that have been expressed at the death of Lord Cocks. In the light of press reports today that a European delegation, including Mr Christopher Patten, is to visit North Korea, can the noble Baroness say whether the subject of North Korea and the American decision to suspend negotiations with North Korea were discussed at Stockholm?
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his commiserations and sympathy on the death of Lord Cocks. On the question of the visit to the Korean peninsula, the presidency raised the issue of whether or not the Prime Minister of Sweden should undertake a mission to North Korea. The UK Government supported and are supporting such a mission. But in our view and in the view of our European Union colleagues at Stockholm, some conditions or preconditions need to be fulfilled before we can think that such a visit would be useful. Those were set out and have been understood by both the Swedish presidency and the other members of the European Union. They include, for example, that the Democratic Republic of Korea should undertake to have further meetings between itself and the government to the south and that the Swedish Prime Minister, were he to visit North Korea, should raise issues such as human rights and other matters that are relevant and important to the European Union.
Lord Pearson of Rannoch: My Lords, the Stockholm European Council was obviously just about as big a failure as it was possible to be for the Government and for the Lisbon agenda. Can the noble Baroness the Leader of the House tell us whether the Council did anything to correct the fundamental problems of the EU? For example, did the Council make any progress on reform of the common fisheries and agricultural policies? Did it even discuss transparent mechanisms to stop the colossal fraud and financial incompetence that are the well-known hallmarks of the European Union? If it did not discuss those matters, can the noble Baroness give us any idea when they will next be on the Council's agenda and when we may expect any progress at all in what are matters of real importance to the European Union?
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, I would never wish to be in any sense discourteous to the noble Lord, Lord Pearson, but I suspect that any agreement or understanding on any European summit basis about any issue would in his view always be a fairly considerable failure. Those are standards and benchmarks against which it is almost impossible to succeed. However, at the risk of exhausting the House, I am

29
bound to repeat those matters on which, in terms of the Lisbon process, the Government feel that progress was made at Stockholm.
Most specifically, I turn to the issue of employment. Millions of new jobs have been created as a result of the liberalisation of trade. The block on car manufacturers will be removed, leading to a lowering of prices in this country. The liberalisation and improvements in technology and communications skills will entirely underpin the improvement in employment prospects for people in this country. Indeed, I have to say to the noble Lord that, as regards the review of the Lisbon process, I can see clearly the ways in which the European process—and the Lisbon process in particular—directly help and assist people in this country in their ambitions and their wishes as regards better employment prospects, better skills, better processes and so forth. Furthermore, as Minister for Women, I am only too delighted that specific attention was given to the employment of women as a new ambition of the European summit.
The noble Lord, Lord Pearson, asked whether issues such as the CAP were considered. I hope I made it clear that this summit was directed specifically at employment, thus fulfilling its ambition under the Lisbon process agreement. Specific additional topics were addressed, such as the foot and mouth crisis, the question of Macedonia and the visit of President Putin, which offered an opportunity for matters to be discussed with the Russian Government. However, the primary ambition of this summit was to consider employment and employability.
Lord Lea of Crondall: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that many noble Lords welcome the progress being made towards stronger co-ordination of European air traffic control? Does she further recognise that, if we want to solve the problem of there being in place 15 or more air traffic control jurisdictions in Europe, and if we want to achieve better co-ordination with Germany, France, Belgium and so on, this has implications for the airspace over the United Kingdom?
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for again raising the issue of air traffic control. He is right to say that this whole process turns on better co-ordination.
Lord Grenfell: My Lords, perhaps I may begin by thanking my noble friend for repeating the Statement. Furthermore, perhaps I may associate myself with all that has been said about the late Lord Cocks of Hartcliffe. A loud and infectious laugh is something that no parliamentary chamber should be without and we shall deeply regret that loss, as well as his passing.
I should like to ask my noble friend a further question on the Lamfalussi report. If I heard her correctly, I believe she said that the difficulties being experienced between the Commission and the European Parliament looked as though they might be resolved. If that is the case, does she agree that the report of the summit perhaps should make that point
30
more clearly? In effect, every single press report on the summit has mentioned the fact that the Lamfalussi report is still hostage to the current problems between the Commission and the European Parliament, in particular as regards the right of the European Parliament to decide whether the Commission has overstepped its mandate. I believe that that has not yet been resolved. Can my noble friend tell the House whether she feels that real progress has been made on this? If that is the case, I am not sure that it has been reflected properly in the presidency conclusions.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. I fear that, although I had no intention to mislead, what I said earlier may have fallen more into the category of what I suspect that the noble Lord, Lord Pearson, would criticise as aspiration rather than anything else. However, it is true to say that, as I understand, there is no question that the Lamfalussi proposals are inconsistent with the institutional arrangements set out in the treaty. For that reason, the European Parliament may not be in a position of such senior prominence in relation to its further progress as perhaps had been thought in the past. As I am sure my noble friend is aware, it is also true to say that the European Parliament shares the wish to complete the European single market in financial services. That goal has been set to he achieved by the year 2003.
I cannot give my noble friend an exact report on the procedures of independent negotiation between the Commission and the European Parliament, but I understand that the picture is perhaps rather more optimistic than he may feel.

Business of the House: Hunting Bill.
4.24 p.m.
The Principal Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Tordoff): My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now make a statement on the procedure to be followed in the Committee on the Hunting Bill to be debated this afternoon.
It has been agreed through the usual channels, after advice from the House authorities that, irrespective of the result of the vote on Amendment No. 1, Amendments Nos. 2 and 3 will be called. There will be an opportunity, therefore, to vote on all three amendments, none of which will pre-empt the subsequent vote on the clauses. Accordingly, the procedure will be as has been announced by the noble Lord, Lord Carter.
The Earl of Longford: My Lords, I wish to spend a few moments in an effort to provide a solution to the problems which are causing the House so much trouble.
Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton: My Lords, would my noble friend care to wait for a few moments? I think that he may have misjudged the timing.

Hunting Bill
4.26 p.m.
House again in Committee on Clause 1, Amendment No. 1.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: Now that we have clarified the issue of procedure, I shall be able to make further progress in reminding noble Lords about the three options in front of us. As I have already indicated, the Government are neutral on this issue. My purpose is not to try to advocate or promote any of the options, but simply to give a brief and factual exposition of their purpose and effect.
Perhaps I may begin with the option currently contained in the Bill. Its purpose is to ban the hunting of wild mammals with dogs and to create a new criminal offence for that purpose. However, there are a number of exceptions. These cover the stalking and flushing out of hares, foxes and deer, rodent and rabbit hunting; the retrieval of hares that have been shot, recapturing escaped wild mammals and rescuing diseased or seriously injured wild mammals.
I should like to quash one suggestion before it gains any further currency; that is, that the formulation of the offence somehow reverses the burden of proof. The notion of a principal offence to which there are exceptions appears frequently in our legislation. Indeed, in another place, my ministerial colleague, Mr Mike O'Brien, was able to cite numerous examples which stretch back over 150 years, including, significantly, much of our animal welfare legislation. I can reassure noble Lords that, if this schedule were to be passed into law, no one would be convicted of an offence unless the prosecution was able to prove each and every element of the offence beyond reasonable doubt.
It may be helpful if I repeat some of the observations I made when opening the debate on Second Reading. I do so because some of the subsequent comments of noble Lords have appeared to call them into question. Let me stress the powers that are available to the police and to the courts under this option. They are modelled broadly on those contained in other animal welfare legislation. However, as I have explained, most such legislation provides for custodial penalties, so this option is less severe.
I should also mention that the police, in the person of the president of the Association of Chief Police Officers, has said that he does not anticipate that a ban on hunting would impose a significant additional burden on police resources, given that the police are already required to devote a significant amount of time and person power to policing hunting.
The next option on which noble Lords will be invited to vote later this evening is the one put forward by the Countryside Alliance. As I am sure that noble Lords are aware, it is based around the principle of self regulation. There is already in existence a body called the Independent Supervisory Authority for Hunting, known as ISAH. It is chaired by Sir Ronald Waterhouse, a former High Court judge, and
32
comprises the heads of the various hunting organisations such as the Master of Foxhounds Association.
On behalf of its members, ISAH oversees the rules and codes of conduct of the organisation. It has the power to visit and inspect hunts and can impose disciplinary sanctions on those whose conduct warrants it. ISAH is funded by contributions from member organisations. Membership of ISAH, or of any organisation affiliated to it, is entirely voluntary. That would remain the case if this option were to be passed into law. In other words, anyone would still be free to hunt outside the ISAH regulatory umbrella if they so chose.
However, the proponents of this approach want as much hunting as possible to take place under the auspices of ISAH to ensure that it is conducted in accordance with the appropriate codes of conduct. Accordingly, this option creates an incentive for all those who hunt to do so under the watchful eye of ISAH.
The Protection of Animals Act 1911 and the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996 both contain a number of offences relating to cruelty to animals. At present, both of these Acts contain specific exemptions for hunting, so a person cannot be prosecuted under these provisions if the alleged cruelty took place in the course of lawful hunting or coursing. This option would provide that these exemptions would apply only to what is termed "supervised" hunting, which is hunting undertaken under the ISAH regulatory umbrella. This is designed to ensure that there will be a strong incentive for everyone who goes hunting to do so, quite properly, under the auspices of ISAH.
I should at once repeat a point that I made at Second Reading: the Countryside Alliance does not believe that hunting, properly practised, is cruel, or that people undertaking hunting would be liable to conviction for cruelty offences but for these exemptions. It is worried about malicious or vexatious private prosecutions. To avoid being at risk from such prosecutions, the Countryside Alliance believes that people will want to continue to enjoy the protection of the statutory exemptions and would therefore seek to come under the ISAH umbrella.
Perhaps I may now turn to the final option that we will vote on later today. It has been put forward by the cross-party Middle Way Group, which seeks to introduce statutory regulation of hunting. The underlying principle is that in order to undertake hunting a licence would be required, either for an individual or an organised hunt or hare coursing event. Licences would be issued by a newly-created non-departmental public body to be known as the hunting authority.
The authority would be made up of between seven and 11 members, some of whom would represent the major interests—such as hunting, farmers and animal welfare—but the majority would have no vested interest at all. The authority would be able to attach conditions to licences and would be required to draw up codes of conduct which licence holders would be

33
obliged to follow. The authority would also be able to carry out inspections of hunting and of premises where animals are kept.
Once it is up and running, the cost of the authority would be met by licence fees. The idea is that fees should be set at a level which ensured that the authority neither made a profit nor a deficit. There would inevitably be some one-off start-up costs in setting up the authority, perhaps in the region of £500,000, which the taxpayer would have to bear.
Hunting without a licence or in breach of the terms or conditions of a licence would constitute a criminal offence, and the powers of the police and the courts to enforce this would be similar to those in the ban option, to which I have alluded. Not all hunting would be covered by the new regime and there would be activities that would constitute unrestricted hunting which could lawfully be carried out without the need for a licence. I understand that the Middle Way Group is considering whether it wishes to expand the list of activities which constitute unrestricted hunting to reflect the changes that were made to the Deadline 2000 option in another place. No doubt that is something the Committee will reflect on if this option is chosen.
Those are the options before the Committee. I look forward to an interesting and important debate on the merits of each. At the risk of labouring the point, I shall remind the Committee that there will be three votes today. The order of the votes will be the ban option, followed by the self-regulation option, followed by the statutory regulation option. Whichever is the last option to receive a majority vote will be the one that will be subject to detailed scrutiny when it is recommitted.
Finally, I emphasise once more that the Government are neutral. We have no preference; the choice rests with the Committee. As I am keen to hear what the Committee has to say, I shall bring my remarks to a close. I beg to move.
Lord Cope of Berkeley: The whole Bill—
The Earl of Longford: I want to offer—
Lord Cope of Berkeley: I give way to the noble Earl.
The Earl of Longford: I have twice attempted to speak. I suppose that I will be allowed to do so eventually. I want to offer a solution to the grave problem which afflicts this House and this nation on this subject. I favour drag hunting. I was brought up to look upon hunting as a noble activity. I still think that it is a noble activity where human beings are concerned. My father was a master of hounds; I was blooded as a boy. Later on, my father commanded yeomanry: he had six hunters.
I was brought up in an atmosphere of hunting and I sympathise to the full with those who see hunting as a part of life. Nevertheless, as time has gone on, I have begun to think about animal rights. We never heard about animal rights when I was a boy; when I was
34
blooded and my father was a master of hounds. When one thinks about animal rights, the pulling of a fox to pieces by hounds is essentially cruel. No statutory arrangements can alter that fact; it is a cruel event.
I therefore favour drag hunting. If anyone should say to me that drag hunting is not relevant because it is not banned, I would answer that it soon will be. If a ban is carried today, drag hunting will follow next. I am in favour of drag hunting.
Lord Carter: It may help if I inform the Committee that I have advised my noble friend that if he wishes to table an amendment to deal with drag hunting he will be able to do so when we recommit the Bill. Today we are discussing the three options. I explained to my noble friend that the House adopted, by a substantial majority, the Motion in favour of the procedure today to choose between the three options. When we have chosen an option and we recommit the Bill, it will be perfectly in order for my noble friend to table an amendment to deal with drag hunting.
Lord Cope of Berkeley: As the Committee knows, the whole Bill is to be dealt with on a free vote in our party, as in others, and therefore my remarks are personal and based on my long-standing support for hunting, which is well documented in another place.
Perhaps I may first say a word about the amendments and the grouping. The three options are very different and for each of them there are quite different considerations. Our soundings have suggested that it would he preferable to discuss them separately and decide on them separately so that we do not mix up the different considerations. Therefore, for the moment, I shall address my remarks primarily to Amendment No. 1 and to Amendment No. 4 and the schedule which goes with it.
As to the confusion about voting, the Committee believes that both the Chief Whip and my noble friend Lord Skelmersdale, who was chairing the Committee at the time, were trying to do their best; no one accuses them in any way of anything else. However, we now know where we stand.
With regard to the two subsequent options, I made clear a fortnight ago my preference for option two—for supervision, as it is called in the amendment—rather than direct state regulation. However, both options are complex and merit further discussion. I should have preferred the Committee to be faced with the decision between the three options after we had had the opportunity to discuss the details of those options, rather than plunging in straight away. However, the House decided otherwise.
I emphasise what the noble Lord, Lord Bassam, said: it is the option that the Committee approves last in the sequence of voting that will remain in the Bill for further discussion. The other two options, whichever they are, will not be subject to the recommittal to which the noble Lord the Captain of the Gentlemen-at-Arms, referred.

35
Perhaps I may make a point about the position of the Minister and the Government. It seemed to me that the Minister was trying, as it were, to wash his hands of responsibility for the provisions of the Bill and the different amendments before us, and thereby preparing to side-step questions about the effects of the Bill. However, the Bill and the amendments have been put before Parliament by Ministers. The name of the noble Lord, Lord Bassam, is on the front of this Bill and the name of the Home Secretary was on the front of the original Bill, with all three options contained within them.
Secondly, the Bill is being discussed in government time under a procedural Motion devised by the Government. Most importantly, the Government have a responsibility to guide this House to ensure that we pass good, workable, enforceable laws. We frequently hear Ministers in both Houses attempt to persuade Parliament by stating that such-and-such a provision is unworkable, unenforceable or undesirable from the Government's point of view. I confess to having done the same myself when I was a Minister.
Therefore, I hope that Ministers will do their best to answer points made by noble Lords on all three options in the course of these debates. Ministers are not simply facilitators; they must face up to their responsibilities to Parliament and the country. They must advise the Committee on all the information and advice available to them on the practical effects and considerations involved and on the legal drafting, while leaving the decision as to how to vote to each individual Peer.
I find it distasteful, to say the least, to be discussing this amendment today, when the countryside is plunged into such dreadful agony. It is very difficult to see what our countryside will be like when the present cataclysms are over. Some suggest that farming as we have known it cannot recover—at any rate in some parts of the country—or that farming will be substantially different from the way we have known it. It is said that even when the agony passes, a long, dark shadow will remain and that as yet unknown and immeasurable effects will stretch into the future.
It was not surprising that hunting was the first activity to stop entirely once the foot and mouth epidemic started, for it is intimately bound up with farming. However, the Government were determined to go ahead with the Bill. They wanted to push ahead with it even when it seemed certain that the election was to be held on 3rd May and that it had no chance of becoming law. Over the weekend there seemed to be a slight doubt about the election date because of the foot and mouth crisis. One might suppose that the timing of our discussions on the Bill would be rethought for the same reason. If the election is to be held on 3rd May, the Bill is going nowhere. If the election is not to be held on 3rd May, then there is plenty of time to discuss it and we do not need to press ahead in the present difficult circumstances. However, the Bill is listed on the Order Paper, so discuss it we must.
36
The Bill as it stands seems to lack clarity of purpose and definition. It never defines hunting—a serious omission given that that is what it is attempting to ban. Paragraph 24 of the schedule says something of what is included in the term "hunting", but it is not exclusive. Part II of the schedule sets out a variety of activities, which were mentioned by the Minister when he moved the amendment, which will not be offences, although they, too, are defined in a rather vague way.
Both this clause and the schedule attempt to impose a legal ban on all dogs, not only hounds, chasing certain other mammals. The provision does not solely relate to hunting and pink coats and horses. It would criminalise someone whose single dog chases a hare or follows the scent of a fox, mink or deer. Anyone who has walked dogs in the countryside can see the problems at once. It is natural for a dog to follow up scents that it comes across in the course of a walk, and even more natural for two dogs to do so because they encourage one another. I find it difficult to understand how one is to know, if one's dog first hits off a scent, whether it is the scent of a rabbit, a hare or some other forbidden mammal; it is perfectly legal to be in charge of a dog that is chasing a rabbit, a rat or other mammals. It seems that only dogs whose exercise is entirely confined to dragging their owners round parks on the end of a leash in the middle of a city can be sure of not getting their owners into trouble. The provision in the clause and in the schedule, if it were to be properly respected, would condemn all dogs to wear muzzles out of doors.
Nor is it easy to see how this provision is to be enforced by the police against an individual dog owner or dog walker. I suspect that only mounted police would be effective—which might be an interesting exchange for hunting—and they would need the permission of the landowner or occupier except where there were bridle paths as well as footpaths and they were open, which at the moment they are not.
I dislike legislation which is completely unenforceable in practice. It restricts those who are law-abiding, while allowing freedom to those who are prepared to disregard the law. If people are encouraged to disregard one law, they and everyone else come to have less respect for other laws. The progressive effect of that can already be seen in certain parts of our law. It is illustrated in the current government advertising campaign to encourage people to report benefit fraud.
People say that, on principle, the killing involved in hunting is wrong. I understand that, particularly when the proposition is put forward by vegetarians who avoid using leather. But if it is the killing that offends, why does not the Bill state that? An amendment could read: "Page 2, line 6, leave out 'hunts' and insert `kills'". The first part of the schedule would then read: "A person commits an offence if he kills a wild mammal with a dog". Such an amendment might need slightly more elaborate drafting but that would be the idea.
4.45 p.m.
The Earl of Longford: It is not just a matter of the killing; it is the particular way in which the fox is killed. It is pulled to pieces by hounds.
Lord Cope of Berkeley: Yes, exactly so. It is therefore not a question of being against the culling of foxes, but of being against the method. It is argued that the killing of foxes is necessary but that it should not be done by dogs. Not least, that would increase the cruelty involved in managing the numbers of foxes and other quarry species in the countryside. Shooting and snaring are more cruel, not least because they can, and sometimes do, leave wounded foxes, deer and other species to die slowly in agony, as we heard a fortnight ago.
Lord Tebbit: Will my noble friend allow me to intervene? The Bill is even more inconsistent than he suggests. The Bill does not prohibit the tearing apart by hounds or other dogs of all mammals, only of some cuddly ones. Rats may be torn apart—indeed, rodents of all kinds may be torn apart. It may come as a slight surprise to some Members of the Committee that that includes beavers but not mink. I would rather see a mink destroyed than a beaver.
Lord Cope of Berkeley: Clearly, I must discuss the definition of "cuddly" with my noble friend.
Lord Tebbit: That is easy: it is something like me!
Lord Cope of Berkeley: Certainly. That is why I welcome the discussion. However, I am not sure that I put all mammals on the same side of the line as the Bill does in this respect.
It seems to me that shooting and snaring are actually more cruel than hunting with hounds or with dogs.
Earl Peel: I trust that my noble friend will give way for just a moment. I hope that what my noble friend is saying is that snaring and shooting, if done inexpertly, is more cruel; but that, if done professionally, is no more cruel than fox hunting.
Lord Cope of Berkeley: I agree with my noble friend. However, it is extremely difficult to be expert in such matters. Indeed, even experts cannot always get it right. I believe that that applies both to shooting and, as a matter of fact, to snaring. Nevertheless, those other methods are not, as hunting is, in favour of the fit and strong foxes, or other species, with all the natural benefits to the breed that that involves.
I also notice that it is not an offence to kill or wound a fox when driving a car, even if that is done through carelessness, excessive speed or some other negligence. However, such accidents account for more cruelty and more lingering and horrible deaths than ever this Bill, as it stands, would stop. This clause and this schedule do not constitute a fox protection Bill; nor, indeed, do they constitute a deer protection, a hare protection or a mink protection Bill. Of course, such a measure could have been proposed. Presumably it would not be too
38
difficult to draft along the lines, for example, of the protection given to badgers, though that would no doubt raise the difficulties with which we are now faced in areas of the country, like my own, where TB in both cattle and badgers is a real problem.
Therefore, this is not primarily an animal welfare measure. Indeed, it is wholly unlike any existing animal welfare measure. There is no requirement within the Bill to show cruelty or unnecessary suffering as an essential part of the offence. However, Ministers in the other place referred frequently to "unnecessary suffering". Unless we amend the schedule, there is no requirement either to show intention on the part of the accused to perform the act of hunting—which, as I said, is not in any case defined—or the intention to cause cruelty or unnecessary suffering. It might be said that we could rely on the Crown Prosecution Service to use its discretion in deciding when to prosecute, but that would only add to its difficulties. In any event, others can also bring prosecutions, even if the only effect is to tie up the courts and scarce legal resources.
I believe that this clause and the schedule are, therefore, against the interests of the animals and the species concerned. After all, if those against hunting are so convinced of the cruelty involved, they can rely on the Bill put before us by the noble Lord, Lord Donoughue, a short while ago. When we come to a real Committee stage on this schedule to the Bill—indeed, if we do so—we shall need carefully to consider certain matters, including the exceptions to the basic offence. Potentially, the great disadvantage with the method of proceeding that we are using is that we may not be able to do so, even though this is the version of the Bill preferred by the Commons, and even though Members of another place did not discuss Parts 3 and 4 of the schedule at all because they ran out of time. According to some scenarios that have been suggested, those parts of the schedule are in danger of being passed into law without ever being discussed in Committee in either House of Parliament.
As I say, the Bill is silent about whether the "intention" to hunt is required. Therefore, it seems to create an absolute offence. That reading is supported by the existence of the various exceptions to the absolute offence. There are also problems in that respect. One of the exceptions is the use of a dog to flush out a fox, and then to shoot the fox. But if the dog happens to kill the fox in the course of flushing it out, an offence will have been committed. Moreover, if in the course of flushing out the fox, or whatever, the dog happens to go underground against the intentions of the owner, an offence will also have been committed.
If we were to have a full Committee stage, we should also want to consider the recommendations on the Bill as it stands from the Select Committee on Delegated Powers and Deregulation. In paragraph 3 of its report, the committee said that the removal of a defence that is provided for by paragraph 16 of the schedule,
"creates, in effect, new offences and alters the scope of the Bill. We do not accept that it is appropriate to delegate a power which allows such a fundamental change to be made".

39
If such a change is to be made, the committee suggests that further legislation should be laid before Parliament to deal with it. That is an extremely important report. We always pay close attention in this House to the reports of that committee.
The Minister referred to the burden of proof. I have seen legal opinion which is the exact opposite to that given to the noble Lord. There is a reverse burden of proof because of the exceptions. Someone can be convicted even if reasonable doubt exists as to whether he was within one of the exceptions. As I understand it, that is the nub of the point. The burden of proof is not usually reversed in our law unless there is extreme clarity as to the offence. Motoring offences like speeding and drink driving are examples of the precision of the offence and, hence, the reverse burden of proof.
However, there are further definitional problems with the Bill. No clear distinction is made in the Bill between "to hunt", "to pursue" and "to stalk". There is also the crime of not having the landowner's consent. One may be absolutely within the exceptions and creating no offence at all if, for example, one stalks and flushes out a fox—but not if one does not have the owner's consent. So the crime is not to flush out the fox, because that is in order; the crime is not to have the owner's consent. In those circumstances, it turns trespass into a crime.
In another place, Mr O'Brien, one of the Ministers involved, tried to set out the Bill on the basis of a moral case against inflicting cruelty for entertainment. That implies that the Bill is really aimed at the followers of a hunt, rather than at the professional huntsman going about his business of culling foxes with his hounds. I understand that case, but that is not what the Bill will do: as I have explained, it will stop anyone from using dogs to cull foxes, despite the fact that it is the least cruel method of achieving that aim, primarily because there are no wounded foxes.
There is also confusion in the drafting of the Bill about what constitutes "participation". Clearly, the huntsman—the person in charge of the hounds—participates. But do the followers participate? According to the Minister, mounted followers do participate, but not foot followers, unless the huntsman is on foot as he is in some packs. In that case, the foot followers do participate, while those in cars and riding bicycles following the mounted pack do not. The position is extremely confusing. The Minister in another place said that the Bill was not intended to catch spectators because they are passive. So the Bill is not really aimed at the entertainment aspect.
Finally, I do not believe that I need labour the point which was made very strongly in your Lordships' House at Second Reading, but I want to restate it. Each one of us is in a minority in some of the things we do. We do things that others do not wish to do. Some of us take part in, belong to or admire activities which others find distasteful or ridiculous. We practise religions with beliefs and ceremonies to which others find it difficult or impossible to give credence.
40
In Britain we have always prided ourselves on our toleration. Sometimes, as a matter of fact, we have even prided ourselves on our eccentrics, particularly if they happen to be Members of your Lordships' House. In this House we have rightly spent time recently debating, for example, racial discrimination, even though our laws against it are stronger and better enforced than in most other countries in Europe, Asia or elsewhere, and certainly they are stronger than the historical standards anywhere in the world. But that traditional toleration of a minority is being withdrawn in this Bill.
More than for most nations we see the countryside as essential to our national picture of ourselves, but this clause and schedule say to those who look after that countryside, "You cannot do what you think best. You must do as we, the majority, say". That is the proposition before us. I do not believe that this clause and schedule will help the welfare of the fox or any other animal. It will punish a minority of our fellow citizens who practise an ancient and skilful art deeply embedded in nature itself. We should reject this clause.
5 p.m.
Lord Carlile of Berriew: I propose to adopt the implicit suggestion of the noble Lord, Lord Carter, that one speech would do where three might be made during the course of the debate this afternoon.
When I drove away from rural Montgomeryshire last night it was no surprise to me to realise that I was going to speak in this Palace of Westminster in a debate on hunting. Like the noble Lord, Lord Cope, I have done it many times before, albeit in the other place. But this time it was different. I left rural Montgomeryshire after a week in which we have, for the first time in the 20-odd years I have lived there, smelled the powerful smell of burning pyres pervading the countryside. I can tell your Lordships that, although our towns and villages are not closed for business, whatever Mr Meacher says in another place the countryside is closed for business in rural Montgomeryshire at the moment. I add this: we who live in places like Berriew, which is my village, would discourage people coming on day trips to the countryside and tell them to keep off the lanes where they may spread the infection which many fear, for it has hit our area.
What was perhaps more of a surprise to me was that I found myself thinking that we were going to have a day of government time to debate rural matters in this House. A great deal of government time was spent debating these matters in the other place and in Standing Committee B. Having reflected on what would have been a pleasant surprise in most circumstances, I turned to different feelings very quickly. I share with the noble Lord, Lord Cope, a great degree of surprise that this Parliament should be debating this subject, which affects the livelihoods of farmers and people living in country areas, when they are down. They do not need to be kicked while they are down.

41
I say further to your Lordships that this Bill seeks to do more than merely affect the activities of farmers. It seeks to change centuries of evolving custom and practice. It seeks to change what has been effective and de facto self-regulation. I did not speak at Second Reading so I believe I can say this today: the Bill seeks to undermine the proper and balanced liberties of country people, one of whom I am proud to be.
Furthermore, I have a little free but probably unwelcome advice for the Government. In my view, their failure to bring to a close their discussion about elections is extremely insensitive at the present time. Just as people in my area do not understand why we are debating this subject today, which does affect the residual—for they will be the residue—economic interests of farmers, they also do not begin to understand how this Government, who need not hold an election for another year, really feel that they should continue keeping country people on tenterhooks with the obscene suggestion that a general election will be held while the countryside is in its present state.
We submit to the Government that now is the time to recognise that there is a crisis. It is no use pretending to the rest of Europe that there is not. The Government should put the country before the party and, on this occasion, they should put the countryside before the party. When this crisis is over there will be new priorities in the countryside. New leaders, new ideas and strategies will have to emerge from the chaos caused by foot and mouth. It is surely wrong that country people, where there are elections, will have to wait four years for the next local government elections before the new priorities can be put into effect. We say to the Government, by all means have your local elections and the general election on the same day, but not now. It is the wrong time.
I now turn to the banning proposal in the Bill. During the course of Standing Committee B in the other place (Official Report, 6/2/01; col. 386), the Minister; Jane Kennedy, was asked about Welsh gun packs by the honourable Member for Aylesbury, and I am pleased to say, by my successor, the honourable Member for Montgomeryshire. She replied,
"The hon Member for Aylesbury … asked if we intend to outlaw them, and the straight answer is no; gun packs"—
noble Lords should listen carefully—
"can fall within the exceptions".
That "can" reveals that she did not know the answer, and indeed nobody can. Like the noble Lord, Lord Cope, I draw the Committee's attention to Part 2 of the schedule to the Bill and particularly to paragraph 7. Let us imagine two situations. One can give dozens of examples from this paragraph and the noble Lord, Lord Cope, has given some. Let us suppose that a farmer stalks a fox in order to shoot it and while he is stalking it, his dog, acting on its instinct, follows the fox into some of the pretty impenetrable woodland we have in parts of Montgomeryshire.
Let us suppose that the dog follows the fox below ground. Is the farmer or is he not a criminal? Several legal minds have been applied to that question during
42
the course of today and have produced the helpful answer, "Don't know". Many lawyers like me will say "Don't know" and happily collect our fee for saying "Don't know about law like this". One should look at paragraph 7(2) which states,
"It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under paragraph 1 to prove that,
(b) the conditions in this paragraph were met".
If one looks at subparagraph (4) it states,
"The second condition is that the stalking or flushing out did not involve the use of a dog below ground".
Let us suppose that the farmer knows that his dog is likely to follow the fox into the wood but he does not want it to and he tries to stop it. Is he using the dog below ground? I see that even the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, looks puzzled by the question. It is not possible to give an easy answer. The burden of proving the defence is on him, the farmer. What if the magistrates consider the question and they do not have a clue? What if they are as bemused by the factual situation as they are by the Act of Parliament? What is the result? The magistrates do not have a clue; yet the farmer has failed to prove that he has a defence under the reverse onus of proof provision. Therefore, he is guilty of a criminal offence in a situation in which the magistrates do not have a clue on the facts. It is a complete absurdity.
The other example concerns subparagraph (7) of paragraph 7 in Part 2 of the schedule which states:
"The fourth condition is that the stalking or flushing out took place entirely on land … which he had been permitted to use".
A man may be out with his dog when his dog decides to go under an insecure fence 20 yards into someone else's land to flush out a fox. The man is then considered a criminal. Can this Chamber, or, indeed, these two Chambers, with their wonderful tradition of trying to ensure that we at least produce intelligible, enforceable, good law, really live with that kind of legislation?
The Bill as it stands, with the ban, is a complete muddle; it is unenforceable; it is thoroughly bad law and it has not been thought through. The quotation from Jane Kennedy, to which I referred earlier, is but an illustration of the difficulty that arises.
I turn to what I see around me in Berriew. I live on a hill. I have a small number of acres—I am sure far fewer than most Members of the Committee. If I walk up to the top of the hill with my wife—as we used to do before the foot and mouth disease outbreak—and look down over the next valley on a summer's evening, I can almost guarantee that at some point we shall see a fox in the countryside in front of us, untroubled, unpursued and unhurried. A delicate but well understood balance between farmers and foxes has been formed and preserved. It has taken a thousand years to achieve that balance, but it works.
The noble Lord, Lord Burns, in his report—I hope that I summarise it correctly—opined that other methods of killing foxes would be at least as cruel. That relates to the method of killing foxes; I want to reflect on numbers. As I said, I can see foxes almost at will, just as, incidentally, I can see badgers almost at

43
will. In our area we have wonderful wildlife and birdlife. If the hunting of foxes with dogs is banned and if farmers who pay their annual subscription to footpacks are not allowed to hunt and are not allowed to protect their flocks in that way—I remind the Committee of the extreme cruelty of foxes towards some new-born lambs—I warn the Committee that there will be no foxes in Montgomeryshire at all. Many foxes will be killed using shotguns. I hope that my neighbours will not be offended by what I am about to say, but not all of them are Olympic marksmen. A fox is a moving target. As was mentioned in the Burns report, many cruelly wounded foxes will be left in the countryside until they have been exterminated.
Furthermore, what about the consequences for all the other important and economically strong aspects of the controlled fox hunting which we have in rural mid-Wales? I have a number of friends—not many because I do not have many rich, land-owning friends—who have hunters. I do not know what a hunter costs. I have not ridden a horse for years—ever since I fell off the last one I rode and could not tighten the saddle. Hunters cost many thousands of pounds. Who will keep those horses in this country if hunting is banned?
Even more importantly—I introduce a Welsh dimension here—some of the Welsh packs of hounds, although not all, contain Welsh foxhounds. These can be traced back historically hundreds of years to the time of Owain Glyndwr. They are an endangered species. They are rare looking, fine beasts which are expensive to keep. Who will keep those foxhounds if the ban is enforced in law?
The Earl of Onslow: They have been very profitably introduced into English foxhounds to teach the English foxhounds how to speak and sing properly. It is essential they survive.
5.15 p.m.
Lord Carlile of Berriew: I am grateful to the noble Earl. I simply say to him, "chwarae teg".
I turn to the two alternatives. The ISAH proposal—that is, the supervision of fox hunting—involves self-regulation. It has a distinguished board chairman in Sir Ronald Waterhouse. Sir Ronald has shown his quality not only in his work over the years as a judge of the Family Division and then of the Queen's Bench Division, but also in his magnificent report produced in the most stressful of circumstances on issues relating to the protection of children in care in Wales. To suggest that Sir Ronald and any members of his commission would not be both careful and independent would be to insult them.
The proposal for supervision is up and running; it has that advantage. It is workable; it has that advantage. It carries few bureaucratic burdens; it has that advantage too. Farmers and country people bear enough bureaucratic burdens as it is. However, it is recognised by many—I am one—that voluntary self-regulation is not always highly respected. I spent
44
10 years as a lay member of the General Medical Council which is a body of great quality. I know that one or two other Members of the Committee have also served on that body. However, like other bodies it is not always respected for the self-regulation which it operates. Self-regulation has something of a bad name. In those circumstances the political and empirical needs of the Government and the requirements of the public may be better met if the Middle Way Group's proposals were to come to fruition.
As someone who has opposed any form of control of hunting beyond that of the good sense of country people, I am reluctant to have any form of regulation. However, if we are to have regulation, surely it must be regulation that will stick. We do not want to come back to this issue year after year after year as we have in the past. We certainly do not want governments to devote valuable parliamentary time to the issue in the future.
On balance, and with some reluctance, I come down in favour of the Middle Way Group's proposals for the following reasons. First, the measure is statutory. It is not perfect in the form in which it stands, but there is plenty of room to amend it. As it is statutory, it has the imprimatur of Parliament upon it. Further, because it is statutory, in my view it is more likely to allay public concern. It has the support of those who are in the front line of dealing with matters when something goes wrong in connection with hunting; that is, the police. I understand that the Association of Chief Police Officers has given its backing in principle to the middle way. Furthermore, it seems to me that if supporters of hunting vote for the middle way licensing system, it will show that hunting people have nothing to hide and are prepared to face up to the same scrutiny as anyone else.
On balance, therefore, I shall vote for the Middle Way Group's proposals. In my view—certainly, this is my hope—if the Middle Way Group's proposals are accepted and hunting continues but subject to regulation, we shall not have to revisit the issue year after year after year. If that proves to be the case, I thank Heaven for that.
Earl Ferrers: Perhaps I may make a short intervention. First, I declare an interest. I have always lived in the countryside. As I explained at Second Reading, I am not one who goes out hunting because my equine capabilities never extended beyond hanging on to the saddle with one hand.
I agree with my noble friend Lord Cope. He described this as a most unsuitable moment—I believe that it is a grotesque moment—at which to discuss the removal of hunting. When one sees the countryside in the absolute turmoil that it is, with sheep and cattle being slaughtered all over the place, when tourism has been cut down, when the countryside is in disaster and people's livelihoods have gone, when they may even—heaven preserve them from it happening—take their own lives because of the situation, for Parliament now to discuss the hunting ban is terrible. When the Prime Minister is so concerned about the situation in the countryside, when the Government are even talking

45
about postponing elections, I should have thought that it would have been at least in the spirit of that concern for the Government to say that they will put this Bill on the back burner for the moment.
I do not believe that people in the countryside will begin to understand what Parliament is thinking about. There is all this trouble in the countryside; yet all we do is to say, "And now we will have a ban on hunting; and we shall see a whole lot more jobs go down the drain". It is said that about 8,000 people will lose their jobs. We shall see hounds destroyed. That is all for the sake of this Bill.
I agree with my noble friend Lord Cope. The Minister cannot get away with the platitude that it is entirely up to Members of the Committee to decide what to do; that the Government are neutral. The Government are not neutral. The Government produced the Bill. As my noble friend said, the name of the noble Lord, Lord Bassam, is on the Bill. It is a government Bill. The Government could put the Bill on the back burner.
Lord Elton: My noble friend will recall that he and I were both in the Government when there was a general election in 1983. Does he recall that only Members of this House remained at their posts to serve the Government? Every other Member of the Government went off to fight an election. It seems to me that people have not realised the effect of calling an election during a crisis. The noble Baroness who speaks in this House for the Ministry of Agriculture would be left to run the department virtually alone and most of the Government would be run by the Civil Service. Does my noble friend want that during a crisis?
Earl Ferrers: I am sure that my noble friend is absolutely right. However, his was not a particularly helpful intervention; nor was it in line with what I was saying. I make an appeal to the noble Lord, Lord Bassam, that in the interests of the Government's own public relations they should not proceed with the Bill.
However, I turn to a procedural point, although I know that noble Lords are bored by them. The noble Lord, Lord Bassam, says that the position is quite clear. We shall have three Divisions: one on Amendment No. 1 which bans hunting; then on Amendment No. 2; and then on Amendment No. 3. If we vote on Amendment No. 1 and the amendment is lost, banning remains in the Bill. I do not understand how one can then come to Amendment No. 2, the first words of which remove Clause 1, because we shall already have decided not to remove Clause 1. How can noble Lords revisit that on Amendment No. 2? The Committee will be told, "It has all been decided". Perhaps it has all been decided, but I think that it is procedurally incorrect.
If there is to be a vote on the three amendments, however we come to that procedurally, I shall vote against the ban. I think that it is wrong, inept and improper. It is wrong to curtail the livelihoods of minorities. Amendment No. 3 provides for licensing. It would be terrible to add more bureaucracy to the
46
countryside and to set up a hunting authority with all the red tape that goes with that. Everyone says that that is the middle way. But all that it will mean is more bureaucracy. It does not follow that with bureaucrats an issue becomes legal and simple. Bureaucracy will merely add unnecessary chaos to the situation.
Lord Mishcon: During the 20-odd years that I have had the privilege of being a Member of this Chamber, I have got to know and admire some of the principles that guide us when we make decisions. First. as a rule we are not influenced by technical arguments when there are broad policy considerations of importance. We say that if there is a technical fault, we shall rectify it at a correct stage of the Bill; we are interested in principle.
Secondly, the majority of noble Lords—I say it most respectfully—are not influenced by political points which do not answer the main principles involved. I do not believe that questions from this side about whether or not the Conservatives would have postponed elections will influence Members of the Committee. The fact of the matter is that the issue of hunting was dealt with in a manifesto a long time ago. It was discussed a long time ago. The fact that it is only before Parliament now is indeed coincidental and not on purpose. Therefore I have no doubt that the Prime Minister—noble Lords will be surprised to hear me say that I am not in his confidence—will decide the matter in the national interest.
I hope, too, that cheap points will not be made with regard to this matter. They will not decide the issue. In my humble view, what will decide noble Lords are the following. Is hunting a more cruel way than another of exterminating what is undoubtedly a pest? There has been a committee. An important and illustrious person has gone into the matter at the wish of the Government, and the objective decision was that other methods are in some cases more cruel, in some cases as cruel, and that hunting is not by any manner of means the most cruel. So I suppose that we shall consider that aspect.
Then, if I may say so, we shall ask, "Shall we harm a number of people if we ban hunting?" Perhaps I may say this to the noble Earl, Lord Ferrers. Whether or not farmers are hurt is an issue which affects my side of the Chamber as much as his. The Labour Party is no less keen on protecting the countryside and those employed in the countryside than any other party. I believe that the Conservative and Liberal parties care about the countryside and are pretty miserable at this moment in regard to what has befallen it. So we shall ask: "Will people be hurt?" And the answer is, yes. There are human beings who do not share our employment but who have a specialist employment. If they are robbed of that employment there is no easy place for them to go except in a queue. It is not a queue for the employed, but a queue for the unemployed. That will weigh with us whatever side we sit on. No cheap points ought to be made on that score either. It will affect us.

47
I imagine that we are all animal lovers. I have a horrible suspicion of anybody whom I meet who does not love animals. One thing that worries animal lovers, whether they have made speeches here or in another place in favour of hunting or against it, is a question that nobody has answered: why is it a sport to kill among civilised human beings? It is not a necessity. We are not talking about people going out to kill foxes, hares or whatever it may be because they are harming the countryside. People dress up and go out for sport. Many of us cannot understand how to kill can be a sport for civilised human beings. That is not a good lesson for the next generation. There is a sport in England—and Scotland, Wales and Ireland—to kill.
So, there is a dilemma. I can only speak for my own decision. I cannot tolerate making people unemployed unless I am convinced that it is necessary. Therefore, I am against a ban. I believe that there should be some regulation and I go for the middle way, but if that regulation is not successful and examples are brought to us of it failing, we may have to think again. I hope that I have interpreted some of the views and reactions of noble Lords. I have tried.
5.30 p.m.
Viscount Bledisloe: It is appropriate that we are discussing the Bill today. It creates a criminal offence. As a lawyer who has never hunted, albeit I fish and shoot, I have examined the Bill—without a fee—to consider whether its provisions are suitable to be included in our criminal law. It is my considered opinion, which I commend to the Committee, that the Bill offends against two cardinal principles on which our criminal law must be based.
First, it is the function of the criminal law only to represent the views of the whole of reasonable society as to what should be forbidden. It is not the function of the criminal law to impose the taste, judgments or morality of the majority on a sane and responsible minority. Imposing morality on the minority was the policy of Cromwell's republic, and look where it got them. If imposing the morality of the majority was still the function of the criminal law, homosexuality and abortion would still be banned and we would probably be moving to ban Halal forms of butchery and many other things.
That point was made by a large number of speakers on Second Reading and I shall not repeat it. However, I shall briefly quote the remarks of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Scott of Foscote, who said:
"To impose the ban would be a misuse of law. It would bring the law into disrespect and a vast section of the community would think it unfair. Moreover, it would be profoundly undemocratic. … Democracy requires respect for the rights, beliefs and traditions of the minority. That would be offended if the Bill became law".—[Official Report, 12/3/01; col. 629.]
The second principle against which the Bill offends is that criminal statutes must be clear and unambiguous so that our citizens can know what they may and may not do. As the noble Lords, Lord Cope
48
and Lord Carlile, have already made clear, the Bill dismally fails that test. I shall draw attention to one or two particular points on which it fails.
Under the Bill, a person commits an offence if he hunts a wild mammal with a dog. As has been said, there is no guidance in the Bill as to what constitutes hunting. Obviously the Bill bans the activities of a full-scale organised hunt—what we might call a Hunt with a capital H—but what else does it ban? The Oxford English Dictionary gives various meanings for the transitive verb "to hunt". It can mean to pursue an animal for the purposes of catching and killing it. Presumably, catching and killing are required if we apply that definition, although it is not clear whether it is also necessary that there should be a reasonable expectation that the dogs can catch or kill the quarry in question.
However, alternative definitions are given, including to chase, to pursue and to drive away. None of those involves any concept of catching or killing, but merely some form of pursuit. If one interprets hunting in that manner, it will be an offence to use a dog to drive a fox away from a hen run with no intention of killing it, or to let an elderly pekinese—or the spaniel of the noble Baroness, Lady Castle—run after a muntjak.
What level of participation is necessary from the person in charge of the dog? Does he have to go forth with the deliberate purpose of setting his dogs on the hare or fox, or does he commit an offence if he takes his elderly labrador for a walk knowing that if it sees a hare it will probably chase it, albeit with only a very small chance of catching it? It is wholly unclear what the ordinary dog owner can do without committing the basic criminal offence.
That relates to the primary ban, but then there are exceptions, which appear to say that one cannot hunt a fox or a hare, but one can hunt a rat or a rabbit. That demonstrates beyond doubt that the Bill is not about cruelty. I am subject to correction by the noble Lord, Lord Burns, but I do not believe that there is anything in his report to suggest that rats or rabbits have a different threshold of welfare compromise from foxes or hares. If we had an educated rabbit among us today with a voice in the debate, might it not imitate Shylock in saying, "If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you hunt us, is not our welfare seriously compromised?"? If that is true of a hare, why is it not true of a rabbit?
That argument assumes not only that the Bill intends to ban the hunting of hares and allow the hunting of rabbits, but that it achieves that end. However, it does not achieve that end. Paragraph 10 of the schedule provides that:
"It is a defence … to prove that the conduct to which the charge relates consisted of hunting a rodent".
If the draftsmen of the Bill had bothered to look in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, they would have discovered that hares are rodents. The Bill says that it is illegal to hunt hares, but enables a defendant to say that he was hunting a rodent—namely a hare. Should we enact that?

49
On the question of rodents, one can also point out that the red squirrel is a rodent. Mr Blair may be confident of winning the next election but, once it is known that his Government are encouraging dogs to hunt Squirrel Nutkin, he will lose the whole Beatrix Potter vote and be doomed.
Many other points arise, such as, for example, the total unreality of the requirement that anyone who flushes a hare to shoot it must ensure—not merely try to ensure—that the dog does not obstruct the shooting of it. Anyone who has ever tried to shoot a rabbit or anything else with a dog in attendance knows that inevitably from time to time the dog will get in the way and prevent one shooting. However, if the dog does get in the way—not through its own fault but because the hare turns back—one will have committed a criminal offence.
Is that really the type of rubbish which Members of the Committee should be invited to enact? Whether or not one agrees with the principle, no noble Lord should dream of allowing into the criminal law provisions which are a muddle of this kind. I venture to suggest that a ban is unacceptable. Therefore, I come to the question of which alternative is to be preferred.
With some reluctance because I share with the noble Earl, Lord Ferrers, an intense dislike of bureaucracy, none the less I have no doubt that the best solution is regulation—the middle way—rather than voluntary supervision. Voluntary supervision suffers from one irredeemable difficulty: if a hunt is told by the ISAH, "Your conduct is unacceptable", frankly it can ignore that and continue to hunt. The ISAH will be unable to do anything about it, other than to throw the hunt out of the association if, indeed, it is a member. Therefore, in my respectful but disappointed opinion, voluntary self-regulation is just not on.
Lord Peyton of Yeovil: Perhaps I may—
Viscount Bledisloe: If a licensing system is voted for, it may well be that much will need to be done in amending the detail; for example, in order to give the ISAH a substantial role as the advisory body to the licensing authority. However, that can be done only once licensing is put on to the face of the Bill. It cannot be done, as the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, appeared to suggest—
Lord Mancroft: I am most grateful to the noble Viscount for giving way. I hope that I did not hear him correctly. Under the Countryside Alliance option, the Independent Supervisory Authority for Hunting can indeed overrule the individual governing bodies of the sport. If the governing bodies issued a sanction to one particular hunt—or, in the case of one or two of them, a group of individuals—in respect of something that it had done wrong, the Independent Supervisory Authority for Hunting could indeed overrule the governing body and increase the sanctions.
A substantial sanction could be issued against a hunt. For example—it sounds rather absurd in these circumstances—the removal of a hunt's or a mounted
50
pack's right to hold a point-to-point would remove, at the stroke of a pen, in the region of 30 to 50 per cent of its income. Further sanctions exist, but the important point is that the ISAH can, if necessary, overrule the governing bodies.
Viscount Bledisloe: I fully accept that. My point was that, if the hunt chooses to ignore what the ISAH and the association of which it is a member decree, it can be thrown out of the association but there is no way in which its activities can be banned.
My second reason for suggesting that one must adopt the middle way was put well by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Portsmouth. He said:
"What concerns me is that there is an increasing polarisation between these twin aspects of our society"—
namely, the town and the country—
"in a way which is proving damaging to the nation as a whole. For that reason I support the so-called 'middle way' which I believe will in some degree promote a sense of understanding and level-headedness in [the] … matter".—[Official Report, 12/3/01; col. 665.]
If your Lordships do not vote for licensing, inevitably there will he a risk that the antis will continue to press the matter. To put the right reverend Prelate's argument more succinctly, there is a chance of a compromise in the middle way; there is no chance of a compromise with self-regulation.
5.45 p.m.
Lord Peyton of Yeovil: I am so sorry to have interrupted what I thought to be the terminal remarks of the noble Viscount. I had cherished some hope that he was approaching his end, but he was not.
Listening this afternoon to the speeches made by my noble friend Lord Cope and by the noble Lord, Lord Carlile, I found myself in agreement with every word that they said. I do not always find myself in such warm agreement with the Front Bench; however, on this occasion, I am very glad to say that I am. During those two speeches a dreadful nightmare began to form in my mind as to what we would be faced with later. I realised that we might have to listen to the noble Lord, Lord Bassam of Brighton, floundering in an attempt to answer the unanswerable. If he achieves it, it will be a miracle which I would not expect from the noble Lord.
Let me make it clear that I do not hunt. However, I have on occasion attended meets. I have always been very surprised by the motley collection of people who have attended, sitting on a variety of mounts which beggared anticipation, and dressed in a variety of clothes which I could not possibly have expected.
I face the question which no Members of the Committee can answer easily this afternoon. How can it come about that we in this country, faced as we are with a huge variety of complex issues, are considering the banning of fox hunting—not only that, we are considering doing so in a messy, squalid little Bill which does not deserve a moment's serious attention? I am immensely surprised.

51
I believe that one thing that people forget about hunting is the paradox that those who go out oddly dressed on a variety of strange mounts with the intent to kill an animal nevertheless know more and care more about wildlife than the majority. It is a paradox which is, I fear, supposedly intentionally ignored by the partisans and the enthusiasts who support this measure.
Another surprising matter to which such people might at least have adverted is the point that has already been made: one consequence of this measure, were it passed, would be that there would be fewer foxes and fewer red deer. Can anyone contemplate that and say that they are willing to risk it?
I turn briefly to the issue of cruelty. Cruelty has many faces. It occurs frequently throughout the whole of nature; yet we are being invited to be rather selective and to consider only one of its aspects. If one accepts that foxes are pests and must be culled, I certainly would not dream of suggesting to the Committee that hunting is not the least cruel of all the available methods. No fox in its senses would wish to be shot at by people such as myself. If I were to hit it, it would undoubtedly not receive a fatal wound.
The closure of many small abattoirs throughout the country was accepted by the Government without question and sponsored through the not-very-respectable organisation that is known as the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: I am most grateful to the noble Lord for giving way and I am most interested in his argument. Does he agree that it was the previous government, whom he supported, who were responsible for the abolition of about 850 small abattoirs? He probably voted in support of that government on this particular issue.
Lord Lucas: Before my noble friend replies, does he agree that he gave me a great deal of grief about this matter at the time?
Lord Peyton of Yeovil: I did not hear what my noble friend said but I shall deal briefly with the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart. It does not seem to matter who made that mistake; the point is that the continued closure of small slaughterhouses involved a great deal of cruelty to thousands of animals which, as a result, have been transported over long distances and often in far from ideal conditions.
I turn to the question of other sports, including shooting, fishing and racing. Will such sports be targets? It is unlikely and unrealistic to think that those who detect cruelty in fox hunting will be keen to lay down their arms and abandon a crusade that they have really rather enjoyed.
If we go down the road of banning everything that we find offensive, something of a nuisance or rather discreditable, we will alter the face of this country, not just that of the countryside. I do not believe that people will be content simply to ban fox hunting; they will
52
proceed to interfere with and challenge those other activities. To expect them to do otherwise is about as realistic as expecting members of the IRA to abandon the bomb, the bullet and its bullying methods and to sit down around the table like polite little parliamentarians.
Reforming is rather fun. Reforming other people—their pleasures, habits and institutions—is an activity in which the other place revels. The pity is that the host of people who went exultingly through the Lobbies to give the Bill a Second Reading in another place seldom look at themselves or their institution in the mirror. If they did, it would tell them a story that might occasionally make them stop in their tracks.
I do not believe that the advocates of the Bill have thought seriously of the Bill's effects on wildlife, farming, horses, racing or the countryside; they have certainly neglected the hounds. They ignore traditions that are not theirs. To them, the ways of the countryside are not important; they are even anathema. I hope that they will have second thoughts and that they will not deceive themselves with the thought that the issue will simply blow over. Their proposal will cause enormous problems of enforcement. The only benefit of which I can think is that we might see the odd policeman in the countryside, which would make a change.
The main point is that the issue will not go away. It will leave behind it a legacy of bitterness among people who feel that their ways have been threatened by those who neither understand nor care.
6 p.m.
Lord Judd: The noble Lord, Lord Cope, referred to the virtue of tolerance. In view of what I am going to say this evening, I suspect that many Members of the Committee will need to show me a good measure of tolerance.
Responsibilities at the Council of Europe meant that I was sadly unable to be present at our Second Reading debate. However, I have read that debate carefully and with fascination from beginning to end. Passion and emotion spring from almost every column. But that debate left me with two overriding impressions: that if ever a subject needed a cool, considered and rational approach, this is obviously one; and that with all the pressures and traumas being experienced in the countryside at the moment, it is precisely the wrong time to have such a debate because such an approach will inevitably be all the more difficult to ensure.
Many in this House whom I deeply respect, some of whom I would like to claim as personal friends, have convictions on this issue that are totally at odds with my own. In ill-fated Cumbria, where my wife and I have in recent years begun to make our home, there are, among our best new friends and neighbours there—people who have gone out of their way to welcome us and to show us generous kindness—those who hold convictions on hunting which I do not share. I do not mind saying that there is a great temptation to lie low and to keep my views to myself, but that would fall short of what true friendship demands.

53
Like other noble Lords, I have received numerous letters on this issue. Many stress the key social significance of the hunt in rural life. As newcomers—"offcomers", as we are called in Cumbria—we have found that much of the social life there thrives in groups, associations and organisations that have absolutely nothing to do with hunting. To ban or not ban hunting with dogs will have no impact on such activity. Indeed, we have been repeatedly impressed by the vibrant variety of social life in the county. I say to my noble—and genuinely admired—friend Lady Mallalieu that for most people in the county, comradeship is found elsewhere than in the hunt.
Civil liberties have been stressed. Hunting with dogs is certainly not a private or a non-intrusive event. Its noisy and dramatic enjoyment for those involved—not to mention those who follow it and who crowd our narrow lanes with their cars, play radios and carry binoculars—is very public and obtrusive. It is not just a matter of sometimes straying into the gardens and properties of those who are not involved or of disturbing or even occasionally harming their domestic animals, livestock and poultry, which from time to time inevitably occurs; it is much more significantly a matter of the anxiety and distress caused to those who are in the vicinity of the hunt but who do not favour it. Their liberties also matter, as do the liberties of those in society more generally who are offended.
Of course the size and activities of the fox population have to be controlled. It would be foolish to argue otherwise. But in recognising that, it is essential to be measured and objective about just how many sheep, for example, are in fact killed by foxes as distinct from those that die from other causes—and here I do not refer to the current massacres resulting from foot and mouth with the questions that that raises about ultimate responsibility.
In the uplands, more frequent killers include poor mothering, starvation, adverse weather and inadequate shepherding. Foxes are opportunistic and will take dying or sickly lambs, especially twins. There are, I know, predacious activities by individual rogue foxes. Special, professionally competent, targeted arrangements are therefore needed for dealing with that. If clarification in the Bill is necessary, so be it. My noble friend Lord Mishcon was right to underline that. But the number of such occurrences is frequently exaggerated and does not justify a generalised response which is clearly not efficient if the rogue fox is genuinely the target. We would also do well to bear in mind the positive contribution made by foxes to the control of other vermin.
But what most leaves me still unconvinced is why sport and recreational enjoyment have in any way to be confused with the need to cull and control. The necessary management functions should surely be organised dispassionately and professionally, and hunting with dogs as at present undertaken in a sporting context is neither efficient nor cost-effective. Sport and recreation are surely about regeneration; about enabling us to be physically and mentally a qualitatively healthier and better species. I find those
54
objectives impossible to reconcile with the chase; with the unavoidable and well evidenced stress and cruelty that too easily ensues; and with the blood and gore, quite apart from the terrier sent below and the digging out.
We are repeatedly deeply concerned in this House by violence and unsociable behaviour. We talk of zero tolerance. There is an urgent need to re-emphasise sensitivity, concern, compassion and care in our society. I fear that, to say the least, hunting with dogs as it is presently undertaken plays a part in blunting the cutting edge of such social commitment.
The challenge to which I argue that we should be addressing ourselves is how we can keep as much of the excitement and the exhilaration of the hunt, which has been so powerfully described in this debate on behalf of the significant and highly articulate minority who enjoy it, completely separate from any cruelty or danger of cruelty. Indeed, the challenge is to set an example of how fun and joy can be found without hounding or bullying—drag hunting, as advocated by my noble friend Lord Longford, is one obvious approach—and how we can at the same time adopt a professional, economic, effective and altogether more soberly humane method of controlling the fox population by, for example, highly professional, targeted rifle shooting. My noble friend Lady Gibson of Market Rasen made this point, I thought, particularly well in the Second Reading debate. She argued that, when hunting with dogs is banned, minds will then concentrate on the alternatives.
Those then are some of the reasons why I shall vote for the ban and against the first amendment. The so-called "middle way", in my view, makes matters worse. In effect it gives the approval of the state to a sport in which cruelty will remain an inescapable element, albeit regulated cruelty, and will thereby perpetuate the dependence of enjoyment on activity which entails such cruelty. It will also raise issues of supervision for the police about which, despite what the Minister and others have said in this debate today, it appears many policemen themselves are far from happy.
Above all, I believe that it is no message to be sending out to the young in an increasingly brutalising age of egocentricity when the civilised qualities of sensitivity, care, compassion and responsibility are in jeopardy as never before in the past half century.
Lord Lawson of Blaby: I shall be brief, partly by not making any Committee stage points and partly because the true Committee stage will be the recommittal stage that we have been promised.
I have never hunted and am far too old now to start. Such knowledge as I have of fox hunting derives from the fact that parts of the Leicestershire constituency I used to represent in another place were hunted over by the Atherston and the Fernie and, when we moved to Northamptonshire, my youngest daughter occasionally used to hunt with the Pytchley. I learnt a little that way and I have to say to the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, who talked about animal lovers, that of all my children, she happens to be the most devoted animal lover.

55
The pleasure in hunting is not a pleasure in the kill; it is the pleasure in the chase. But then, to adapt Macauley, those who wish to ban fox hunting do so not because they wish to spare the foxes pain, but because they dislike the pleasure it gives to the participants.
Strong emotions are involved on both sides of this debate, and we have heard some of them today. But they are rather different. On one side, it is overwhelmingly the love of hunting and the way of life that has grown up around it; on the other side, it is predominantly, although not entirely, a hatred of those who hunt and what they are perhaps mistakenly believed to represent. I have no difficulty in deciding between the two which is the most congenial.
But emotion is not a good basis for legislation. Legislation must be based on principle and on reason. The principle at stake here is one of the most fundamental we could possibly find; that is, the principle of liberty. I know that against that there is, ostensibly at least, a case made in terms of animal welfare. But if concern for animal welfare was the overriding consideration, why pick on fox hunting? Fishing and shooting "compromise welfare"—to use the term of my noble friend and former Treasury colleague Lord Burns—just as much as fox hunting, as does the process by which we are able to enjoy the pleasures of meat eating. So, if there is any distinction to be made, it should tell in favour of fox hunting. At least if there were not fishing or shooting, the fish and the pheasant would be spared the predation of man. Similarly, if there were to be legally enforced vegetarianism, the cow and the sheep could sleep peacefully and be protected. But foxes will be culled anyway, and as we know from the Burns report, whatever theoretical abstractions may be put forward, in practice that would cause at least as much and probably more cruelty than fox hunting. So, why pick on fox hunting? The only person who has addressed this on behalf of the Government—it was the Government's choice—was the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, replying on behalf of the Government at Second Reading. When asked about this matter, he stated:
"There is huge public interest in it. There is no such public interest or support in relation to any sort of ban on fishing or shooting".—[Official Report, 12/3/01; col. 674.]
What sort of principle is that? It is simply an unprincipled surrender to presumed popular prejudice. I suspect that the noble and learned Lord is secretly deeply ashamed of that.
We have before us in the first vote this evening the issue of whether we shall uphold the principle of individual freedom and whether we shall assert the value of reason in legislation over and above popular prejudice. That is what this place is for. I hope that we shall do our duty by a very large margin.
Lord Bramall: So much has been said already that it seems inappropriate to say anything else. Indeed, I have been urged by a previous commander merely to move that we stop talking and start voting.
Noble Lords: Hear hear!
Lord Bramall: I feel a great deal of sympathy for that. However, I did not speak earlier and want to make a modest contribution in as brief—and I shall be brief—and as dispassionate a way as possible. I am not a hunting man, nor have I ever had a great urge to be one. However, bearing in mind the eye needed for country; the exhilaration of going fast across country and the not inconsiderable but dashingly accepted risks involved, I have long recognised that hunting provides an excellent challenge to courage and nerve, as well as to horsemanship. It is therefore a pastime seen to have some relevance to those intent on preparing themselves for even greater challenges and risks ahead, particularly in the profession of arms.
I respect that view, and those who hold it, as did Friedrich Engels, which some may find surprising. I am less impressed by the arguments sometimes bandied about that we cannot ban hunting because many of those who now indulge in it would defy the law and go on doing it. Certainly, a total ban would cause large-scale problems in the country. Jobs would be lost. There would undoubtedly be widespread alienation among country folk, and stalwart and honest citizens could well be criminalised. The question of priorities and overstretched police forces would also arise.
If a Bill to ban hunting became law, it would have to be enforced at some time and in some way, however difficult that would be. The argument that after it is on the statute book members of the hunt would still have a birthright or human right to do what they please would have no more validity than the arguments of animal rights protestors and similar groups who feel that they can seriously, and often violently, break the law because they are doing so in the interests of what they believe to be a righteous cause.
Nor can the human rights argument and the "freedom to do what the individual thinks is reasonable" be entirely justified on historical grounds. The noble Lord, Lord Graham of Edmonton, raised that issue in an earlier debate. If that were so, those who might want to pursue other forms of behaviour which have, over the years, been banned on the grounds that they constitute unacceptable conduct in an otherwise civilised society could argue the same way.
I am in agreement with the noble Earl, Lord Ferrers, on the issue of timing. However, apart from that, with the minimum of emotion and sentiment, the case for or against hunting should rest on whether, with the world as it is, the act of hunting with dogs in a properly supervised way is or is not so contrary to standards of human behaviour in a civilised society and so important in upholding those standards that this popular pastime which requires skill and courage, gives work and livelihood to many and plays a significant role in rural life and nature conservation, should be singled out for special legislation.
From all that I have read and heard—that is a very great deal—listening to the arguments on both sides and, on rare occasions observing, I can only conclude

57
that hunting neither demands nor deserves such special treatment. I strongly suspect that the Bill would not have got as far as it has had it not in some cases been for reasons and attitudes not exclusively associated with the welfare of the fox.
We must consider the predatory and vicious cut and thrust of the animal kingdom in its natural habitat, to which animals must be conditioned; the pain and grief of other forms of necessary fox control and the fact that in a well-organised hunt there is not, as some critics would say, intentional, gratuitous cruelty of inflicting pain of a voyeuristic nature, which is more than can be said of some activities which go on in public. All that must be put into the context and perspective of many activities impinging on the welfare and health of human beings—some may find such activities excessive and perhaps even, at times, degrading, yet they continue to happen—together with even more urgent examples of man's inhumanity to man and that which has to be done to the benefit of man, which cry out to be solved.
Properly controlled hunting cannot possibly fall within the category of being so unacceptable and urgent in terms of standards of human behaviour that it justifies Government interference and cannot be left where it rightly belongs; as a matter of personal conscience and choice whether to hunt or not to hunt; whether to hunt the stag, the fox or the hare—some may see a distinction between those three—or whether to hunt without involving animals but with a drag, which my mother always claims one of her ancestors invented. Although that is not the same in terms of hounds working, it undoubtedly provides as much if not more challenge and risk.
It is a matter of choice, not legislation. It is on that basis alone that I feel that a total ban on hunting with dogs would be not only unnecessary but utterly unreasonable. If I can work it all out, I shall vote to omit the present Schedule 1; I shall vote against any total ban and for the continuation of hunting, to be supervised as other sports such as racing, steeplechasing, boxing, football, cricket and many others so controlled, by those who understand the sport, and with the minimum, if any, Government intervention.
6.15 p.m.
Lord Phillips of Sudbury: I hope that those in favour of abolition will not think me presumptuous if I say that nothing short of a cataclysm in the views of this House, judged by the debate 10 days ago, can lead to anything but a vote tonight against abolition. It seems to me, therefore, that we, in this House, should concentrate on the choice between self-supervision and independent regulation. That is what I propose to do.
I believe that we should look at this issue not from within the walls of this fine Chamber but from how our debates and the outcome will look to those beyond. I refer in particular to the very many people in this country—whether we think them right or wrong, well-informed or ill-informed—who feel passionately that
58
hunting is in need if not of abolition of some sort of regulation and control. Perhaps I might give three reminders to the Committee. First, an election is in the offing; secondly, the manifesto has yet to be written or completed, and thirdly, after the election this issue will not have gone away. The question will then arise, which the Government will have to decide, as to whether or not to use the Parliament Act in relation to the issue that we are debating tonight.
If one contemplates those three matters, one may reach the conclusion, as have I, that self-supervision in the future will not satisfy that part of the British public which is there to be influenced. I put it that way because it would be a serious stupidity on our part to concentrate on the zealots—the antis—who will never be convinced of anything bar the need to abolish not only this sport but, I suspect, others too. We can forget them.
Furthermore, we must not caricature those who do not agree with the hunting fraternity as either having class hatred, as the noble Lord, Lord Lawson, stated, or being prejudiced. Millions of our countrymen are neither suffused with class hatred nor intentionally prejudiced but they are unhappy with the status quo. Unless we face that fact, we shall lose the argument, if not tonight in the future.
I strongly believe that independent regulation has advantages over self-supervision to which we should not close our eyes. The noble Viscount, Lord Bledisloe, remarked on compulsory licensing as having a real sanction against those hunts which breach the code. However, I draw the attention of the Committee to the lack of independence of the ISAH alternative. The Explanatory Notes indicate that the membership of ISAH comprises the chairman of the Countryside Alliance's Hunting Committee; the chairmen of the hunting associations; the Masters of Foxhounds Association, the Central Committee of Fell Packs, the Federation of Welsh Packs, the Association of Masters of Harriers and Beagles, the Masters of Basset Hounds Association, the National Coursing Club; the Association of Lurcher Clubs; the Masters of Deerhounds Association; and the Masters of Mink Hounds Association and the National Working Terrier Federation. Do not Members of the Committee think that that is a list of highly independent members?
I put it to the Committee that it will not be credible for us to say that we must not allow the abolition of hunting on libertarian, communal and traditional grounds but that it is sufficient to leave it to ISAH, which has as its members those groups I have mentioned, and the commission of which is made up of seven people, and which is presided over by the chairman drawn from the members and the chairman of the Countryside Alliance. It is absolutely paramount—
Baroness Mallalieu: Perhaps I may correct the noble Lord. The chairman of the commissioners is Sir Ronald Waterhouse. Only one of the seven members of the commission which conducts the affairs of ISAH is a nominee from the Hunting Committee of the

59
Countryside Alliance. The other six members have no connection with any hunting body whatever, either pro or anti, and they are the people who take the decisions. The members provide the money, but the commission is independent.
Lord Phillips of Sudbury: I am obliged for that intervention and I apologise to the Committee for forgetting that the chairman is Sir Ronald Waterhouse. However, I believe that I am right in saying that the other members are drawn from bodies such as the NFU—
Noble Lords: No!
Lord Phillips of Sudbury: I believe that I am right in saying that the other members of the commission are drawn from the NFU and the vets—
Baroness Mallalieu: Perhaps I may help the noble Lord. An appointments committee was set up consisting of Sir Ronald Waterhouse and a representative of the National Farmers' Union, the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and the Country Landowners' Association. They in turn nominated the commissioners who comprise a number of distinguished professors, a distinguished Queen's Counsel and a prominent farmer. Indeed, I believe that all Members of the Committee have received a note from the current chairman setting them out.
Therefore, the commission was nominated by those bodies, but the commissioners are wholly independent of any connection with hunting, save for the one single representative.
Lord Phillips of Sudbury: I am grateful to the noble Baroness. I accept what she says but I still put it to the Committee that all the members are from the hunting fraternity—
Noble Lords: No!
Lord Phillips of Sudbury: No; members of ISAH are all from the hunting fraternity and that is a fact.
We have been told that the seven commissioners are nominated by three bodies; that is, bodies representing farming, the veterinary profession and country landowners. Even though they may have appointed professors and others of independent minds, I do not believe that that framework will satisfy a sceptical public when compared with an independent hunting authority appointed by the Home Secretary, the majority of the members of which must be entirely independent.
I understand those who would prefer the self-supervision option having concern about whether the Home Secretary will be impartial and fair in the appointment of members of the hunting authority. However, I believe that the right place to deal with that issue—I believe that it can be dealt with—is when the detail of the chosen option is entered into. I can see amendments being made to the schedule put forward
60
in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Bassam of Brighton, which could go a long way to satisfying any unease on the part of the hunting fraternity about the independence of the hunting authority.
However, any such unease is but as nothing compared with the level of suspicion and uncertainty on the part of millions of our fellow countrymen as regards a self-supervision alternative. For that reason above all others, I believe that those who want to see hunting survive should tonight make it emphatically clear that they are willing to accept that which they may not want in their heart of hearts; that is, an independent statutory hunting authority. I believe that that would satisfy all but the closed-minded among the public.
Lord Davies of Coity: Like my noble friend Lord Mishcon, I shall not address the technical elements of the Bill but the principles of the matter before us. When I spoke at the Second Reading, I addressed, as others did, the questions of culture, control and cruelty. Many other speakers dealt with the question of job losses as well as what would happen to hounds and horses if hunting was banned. Indeed, I believe that no aspect relating to hunting was left unexplored by the 60 speakers who felt that the banning of hunting was unnecessary and unjustified.
As indicated on 12th March, I have no personal interest whatever in hunting, fishing or shooting. However, throughout I have been concerned that those who have been campaigning for hunting to be banned have not, in my view, been able to present logical and coherent arguments in support of their position. Of course, I hasten to add that a great deal of emotion has certainly been generated, particularly on behalf of foxes, but in my view the emotive statements expressed do not conform to reality.
During the Second Reading, fewer than 10 speakers spoke in favour of a ban on hunting. But despite being challenged none of them seriously addressed the fact that the fox population needs to be controlled; neither did they address the cruelty of the alternative methods which would need to be employed to a greater extent if hunting was banned.
Like many other Members of the Committee, I recently received a communication from those who want to ban hunting. It stated:
"The debate is not about the countryside, it is about cruelty".
Of course there is a measure of cruelty in hunting, as there is in many things, such as the slaughter of animals for food and the experimentation on animals in order to produce life-saving medicines for human beings—men, women and children. Furthermore, I am well aware of the argument about cruelty arising from a sporting activity, and cruelty arising from the activities to which I have just referred. But the letter that I received which supports a ban, like the speakers in the Second Reading debate, completely ignores the cruelty which arises from alternative methods used to control the fox population.

61
However, if those who support a ban on hunting are concerned solely with cruelty that arises from a sporting activity, there is a clear inconsistency in their arguments. When it is put to them that cruelty to creatures arises from other sporting activities, there is complete silence. Why should that be? When a fish is on the end of a line, often for a very long time, with a hook in its mouth or throat and fights to get free and is landed completely exhausted, the hook is removed and it is returned to the water to suffer the same fate time and time again. Is that not every bit as cruel as hunting? Why are those who call for a ban on hunting so silent about fishing?
Birds are bred for shooting. Beaters drive them into the air and they are shot, and often they are only wounded. Dogs are sent to recover them and carry them back between their jaws. Is that not cruelty arising from a sporting activity? But those who call for a ban on hunting are once again silent. Why? It seems to me that there can be only two explanations. One is that the killing of creatures by way of a hunt is regarded by those who wish to ban the sport as giving rise to a unique level of cruelty. But that stance cannot be justified. The second explanation is that cruelty to creatures arising from hunting is not regarded as giving rise to a unique level of cruelty, but the belief is that all cruelty arising from sporting activities should be banned. If that is the case, the silence is unworthy and the justification for a ban on hunting even more unacceptable. It would appear that a stepping-stone strategy is being employed, with hunting banned today, fishing banned tomorrow and shooting the day after. Forall these reasons, I believe that those who call for a ban on hunting have not made out their case, even though many of them claim to have held the same view all their lives. Therefore, I believe that the House should reject the call for a ban on hunting.
Finally, I wish to address the way that I believe this House should vote on the options before it. As already indicated, I shall vote against a ban on hunting and self-regulation. I shall vote in favour of statutory regulation and the continuation of hunting under licence, because I believe that in the circumstances, given the strength of opinion in the other place, that is the only way to prevent hunting from being banned. Should this House vote overwhelmingly for self-regulation, the polarisation of views will work to the advantage of those in the other place who have voted by a very large majority to ban hunting. They will claim, quite correctly, that this unelected House is displaying an intransigence beyond its authority. It will turn into a battle of strength on the constitutional position as much as on hunting itself. On the other hand, if this House demonstrates its magnanimity, acknowledges the authority of the other place and is prepared to compromise, our opponents will be disarmed and our supporters in the other place, the foremost of whom is my right honourable friend Jack Straw, will be reinforced in their support for the prime objective, of which we must not lose sight; namely, to retain hunting. Failure to follow the course that I propose may very well result in the coming to pass of the very thing that we fear most: a ban on hunting.
6.30 p.m.
Lord Willoughby de Broke: I should like to begin by declaring my interest as chairman of St. Martin's Magazines which publishes Hunting and Country Illustrated and also my membership of, and great support for, the Countryside Alliance. I pay great tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, for her presidency of the Countryside Alliance and to its chairman, John Jackson. They do a wonderful job in defending not only field sports but also the interests of rural people and the rural economy. That makes it all the more difficult for me to say that I do not believe I can support the option of self-supervision put forward by the Countryside Alliance. All things being equal, I would much prefer to have hunting self-supervised, but at the moment all things are not equal.
In the other place an enormous majority voted against hunting. Sadly, the Government have given time to discuss a ban on fox hunting at a time when the countryside is in flames. Piles of animals are rotting in fields and are being incinerated, the rural economy is falling apart and yet we are talking about the welfare of foxes. It does not make sense. But we must recognise that that is what is happening.
The majority in the other place is a hard fact that we must recognise. If evening's debate the Bill which is sent back to the other place puts in place independent supervision, how will that play in the other place? I believe that we already have the answer to that. A Bill providing for self-supervision will be treated with the same disdain and ignorance as before and dismissed. How will it play with the public and the press? I suggest that we also know the answer to that. Until the middle way was introduced, every opinion poll, however fallible it might be, indicated that the country was against hunting.
I should like to thank the all-party group of MPs, none of whom hunts—I believe that Llin Golding fishes—for the enormous amount of time and trouble that it has taken to defend hunting. It deserves the thanks of all of us who support hunting for bringing forward those ideas. The fact is that until its ideas were put forward hunting appeared to be extremely unpopular. If we send out a message from this House this evening that we shall not listen to the proposals for a middle way and the voices of reason, if that is what we believe they are, but simply press ahead with self-supervision, it could be very dangerous. As the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Coity, said, how will it play with the Ministers and MPs who have supported hunting and come out in favour of the middle way? Will they switch their opinions to support self-supervision? I do not know the answer to that, but I know where I would put my money. I do not believe that they would do that.
To echo the words of the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, the crucial question that we must ask ourselves is not whether self-supervision would be fair. It would be fair. I am convinced of that because of the people in charge of it—for example, Sir Ronald Waterhouse—and all the trouble that has been taken to put in place the ISAH, which is up and running. I hope that the fact

63
that it exists will be used later when we come to amend the Bill. The crucial question is not whether it is fair but whether it will be seen to be fair. Will a vote for self-supervision be acceptable or will it be seen as the last stand of the last ditchers? There is a danger that that will happen.
If in reality self-supervision is a political non-starter—I believe that that is the case—we should give serious consideration to supporting the middle way. That option is by no means perfect. Even those who propose it accept that. But we have been promised recommittal and, therefore, will have the opportunity to amend the middle way to make it workable. I believe that it has serious flaws: it is far too bureaucratic and prescriptive. And I believe that the enforcement provisions, which are also far too harsh, have been lifted straight out of the option to ban hunting. I do not believe that it will be remotely acceptable. We shall have the chance to alter it.
The middle way proposals are not unreasonable. They are not that frightening. No reputable hunt should be too frightened of licensing if it is satisfied that its activities are not cruel. As the noble and learned Lord, Lord Scott, and the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, said at Second Reading, those of us who hunt do not believe that we are doing something cruel. If hunts are properly run, and most of them are, they will have nothing to fear from licensing.
Licensing is not state controlled as has often been depicted. Pubs, drivers, banks and casinos are licensed. Does anyone suggest that those are all state controlled? Of course they do not. Licensing will give hunting the right to continue under responsible hands. All Members of the Committee who want hunting to continue must give that matter very serious consideration.
The composition of the hunting authority appears to be fairly reasonable. There is to be a representative from an animal welfare group and one each from a hunting group, from farmers, from landowners and from veterinary interests. I qualify that statement by saying that it is out of the question that the RSPCA should be the representative of the animal welfare group. It should hang its head in shame at the waste of its members' money in sponsoring anti-hunting advertisements and propaganda.
A vote against the middle way would send quite the wrong message to the Government and to the country at large. The message would be that supporters of the ISAH are reactionary dinosaurs. That is not the case, but that is how it would be seen and how it would be spun by those who are against hunting. The extremists in the other place must be absolutely praying that we vote down the middle way tonight.
The middle way is supported by the NFU. I remind Members of the Committee that without farmers there would not be any hunting at all. It is supported by the Home Secretary, the Association of Chief Police Officers and a number of MPs. If we send a clear message today, more Members of the other place might come out and support the middle way. That is why I really believe that it is the only option left to us.
64
It would also be a kick in the teeth to those people who over the years have been brave enough to come out in support of hunting and have been threatened with violence. It would be a terrible way to treat them, to say, "No, thank you very much. We are not interested in what you are saying. We don't need your support. We'll go on our own merry way". As I asked previously: will they stick with the hunting supporters after that? I do not know; I rather doubt it.
Regulation of hunting by a public authority with a balance of interested parties answerable to Parliament could prove acceptable to everyone except the most rabid of extremists. I hope that Members of the Committee will vote for the middle way tonight.
6.43 p.m.
Baroness Mallalieu: Perhaps I may deal as briefly as I can with the three options before the Committee.
So far as concerns the first option—the ban—my objections, which I previously expressed at Second Reading, are both in principle and practical. Those who support a ban do so, as I have understood the debate both today and on the earlier occasion, essentially for two reasons: first, they say that hunting is cruel. Simply saying so, however strongly the speaker holds the belief and however eloquent and passionate the speech—we have heard a number tonight and on earlier occasions—does not make it so.
The inquiry, of the noble Lord, Lord Burns, set up by the Home Secretary to inform this debate, found that the evidence of cruelty is not there. Both he and the noble Lord, Lord Soulsby, told us that the inquiry did not find cruelty; nor do the four veterinary surgeons who go out hunting regularly with my local pack; and nor did that inquiry find that alternative methods of killing caused less suffering.
Secondly, opponents of hunting say that it is morally wrong to use a form of killing as a sport. It does not matter tuppence to the animal which is killed whether its killer enjoyed what it did, or whether it wore absurd clothes; what matters surely is that it is skilful and efficient. But, they say, it is for the good of our society and to send a message to the next generation.
However, the morality behind option one, the ban, is both selective and profoundly hypocritical. It is apparently morally wrong to kill foxes, deer and hares unless it is done without enjoyment, for pest control or meat. Yet, it remains perfectly acceptable to kill rabbits and rats with as many dogs as one can muster and to shoot foxes, deer and hares, not to mention birds and killing fish, and to take as much pleasure as one wishes in so doing.
Once Parliament goes down the path of outlawing activities because of what some imagine is going on in the minds and thoughts of others, we set off down a slippery path towards a society in which I and others who care for freedom would have no wish to live.
Those are my objections in principle to option one. There are also practical objections which others have spelt out. There is no comprehensive workable definition of the offence of hunting contained

65
anywhere in the proposed Bill. It would be a nightmare for the police, the prosecuting authorities and the courts. The powers that it gives beggar belief—arrest without warrant; stop and search, and, whatever has been said, as the Bill is presently drafted the onus to prove that one comes within one of the exceptions rests on the accused; forfeiture and destruction of animals and a life ban on keeping a dog. It is ironic that the RSPCA, which is currently unable to find homes for tens of thousands of unwanted, neglected and cruelly treated animals, which it destroys each year, should be promoting legislation to remove much loved, well-cared-for animals from responsible owners and to kill them.
The provisions of option one do nothing for animal welfare. They are an undisguised attack on people. It is all the more ironic that those who would be primarily affected are those in the farming community. Whatever views Members of the Committee hold on the merits and demerits of hunting, a vote for option one is to deliver a kick in the teeth to part of our nation which needs our support now as never before. Furthermore, it will be seen by them as just that.
Several Members of the Committee have addressed the merits of options two or three. In particular, my noble friend Lord Davies of Coity and the noble Lords, Lord Willoughby de Broke and Lord Phillips of Sudbury, have urged Members of the Committee to think how such a vote would play, spin or look, and whether a vote for independent supervision would be acceptable. I may be accused, probably rightly, of being politically naive, but I always mistrust suggestions that one votes according to the way one thinks the vote will be received. The right course for each one of us is to look at the options in the Bill and to vote for the one which we honestly believe offers the right course.
Whatever noble Lords' views on the merits or demerits of options two and three, it would not be right for Members of the Committee to reject both those options. There is a widespread desire to find a resolution to the issue which allows all those who truly care about the countryside to devote their energies to the massive task of securing some future and regeneration for it and to avoid further damaging and divisive fights such as this. Such a resolution must in part involve, as other Members of the Committee have said, reassuring public opinion that hunting is conducted according to proper codes and rules; that complaints and breaches are properly, independently and publicly scrutinised and dealt with; and ensuring that the concerns highlighted by the noble Lord, Lord Burns, in his report, are properly addressed.
I support option two. I could barely do otherwise, having played a small part in setting up the independent supervisory authority. It is not the status quo. Indeed, it involves a significant change to current animal welfare legislation. The change centres around the recently formed independent supervisory authority, of which others have spoken. That authority not only has the power to review and revise the codes of practice of all those member hunting organisations but also oversees and controls the
66
disciplinary procedures of those organisations and makes recommendations for improvements and changes where necessary.
A major change to the law proposed in option two is that those who do not operate under the control of ISAH will lose their exemption from prosecution under the Protection of Animals Act and the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act. Therefore, anyone who is not supervised by ISAH and does not subscribe to its codes and who goes hunting or coursing would not in a subsequent prosecution be able to claim any exemption under the law. It has other benefits. It is self-financing. It will not cost the Exchequer one penny. Unlike the middle way—option three—it is fully operational now and, unlike the middle way, it has a disciplinary procedure that is already in place. It is not overly bureaucratic and examination will show—I know that the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, will examine it when he has a chance to look at the documents that were sent out—that its independence is unchallengeable.
I shall support option two and I commend it to the Committee. But I should like to make the following point about the middle way option. I, too, pay tribute to those in another place who have stuck out their necks to raise this issue and widen the debate. In particular, I should like to pay tribute to Ms Kate Hoey and Mrs Llin Golding on my side of the House who at considerable personal risk have stood up to threats, intimidation and abuse for their views. My concerns about the middle way are as follows. As they themselves accept, it has as yet been only in a draft form in the sense that it has had no scrutiny in another place. I am concerned that it creates yet another government quango, with still more bureaucracy, complexity and expense. I am concerned also that in the present draft Bill licensing is treated in a way that does not foresee many of the potential difficulties. It is perfectly possible to devise an excellent licensing system for the existing organised hunts. But they are in a sense the tip of the iceberg because there are tens of thousands of people who use their dogs either for pest control or sport but who are not part of any of the recognised groups that would be registered. At some stage, that problem may have to be grappled with.
Whichever of the two options the Committee chooses—assuming that it votes against option one—I have no doubt that there will be a considerable degree of good will from all sides of the Committee and from all those who wish to see a resolution of this issue. There may be those who think that a licensing system is necessary. I believe that they would be better advised to vote for option two and then seek to put the teeth that they require into that option at later stages in Committee, if we have them. If the Committee supports independent supervision—option two—I shall not vote against option three, the middle way; I shall abstain. However, if the Committee rejects option two—independent supervision—it is essential that it should not rule out all forms of regulation and I, together with others, will do my best to ensure that

67
option three is put into a workable form for return to the other place. But it is surely the first vote in the Committee that is by far the most important.
It is not often that this House is called upon to defend the freedom of our people against prejudice. I hope that that is what we are about to do today.
Baroness Fookes: Perhaps I may first declare an interest, although it is entirely non-financial, as a member of the RSPCA for many years, a former chairman of its council and currently a vice president. The Committee will not therefore be surprised to find that I am a member of an endangered species—a Conservative Peer who supports the total ban. However, I do not intend to hang my head in shame at any of the activities of the society, which I support. Hell will freeze over first.
I do feel very strongly about this issue, but I hope that I can be absolved from either total ignorance or perpetuating class hatred. As a child and youngster, I rode a great deal. It was a natural extension in those days, as I believe it still is today, to follow the hunt; and I did. But I changed my mind and I have held my present views for a good many years. So I hope at least that the sincerity of my motives will not be questioned, however much Members of the Committee disapprove of the view that I take.
For me, the main issue is the welfare of the animals that are hunted and whether or not they suffer. I prefer not to use the word "cruelty" because it has particular connotations. What I am concerned about is whether the animals suffer and whether, if they have to be killed for reasons of pest control, hunting is the best way to do it or whether there are other better ways. In that respect, I disagree fundamentally with the views expressed so eloquently by the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu.
In my view, the suffering comes in two phases. At the end, it is by no means certain that the animal concerned is killed instantaneously. Indeed, post-mortems on foxes and other creatures show that death is not instantaneous. Therefore, there is suffering at that point. What is even more important for me is the actual rigour of the chase. Let us remember that we are not simply talking about foxes, as many Members of the Committee have tended to do. We are looking also at stags, hares and even mink. I believe that real suffering is involved. Some very respectable scientific research suggests that there is a real element of suffering in the chase, a chase that may last for 20 minutes or several hours. That, to me, is totally unacceptable.
Much has been made of the fact that the Burns report did not refer to cruelty. But it is enough for me to hear the phrase, reported a number of times, that the welfare of the fox, the stag and so forth is "seriously compromised". That is an attempt to make it as impartial as possible, but for me that must mean suffering and I do not accept that it should continue. I understand the views of those in the countryside who are suffering so greatly at the moment, but I am not
68
responsible for that or for the timing of the Bill. We can deal only with what is before us today. I shall vote for the ban.
Perhaps I may deal briefly with another point, as I know that Members of the Committee are anxious to proceed to votes. I am concerned that the very worst of the other methods of control are being put before us. That is a clever device, but there are means of controlling animals that are pests. Perhaps I may refer to lamping, which was indeed mentioned in the Burns report, whereby the fox is found at night under a powerful beam of light and is then shot with a rifle. That may not be appropriate in all cases, but in the hands of those who are competent, it is a way of dealing with foxes satisfactorily and with the minimum of suffering.
Lord Mancroft: I am most grateful to my noble friend for giving way. Over the weekend she will have seen reports on the television and in the press stating that the chief vet of the RSPCA, of which my noble friend is a vice-president, has drawn attention to the very real welfare concerns as regards the culling of livestock by soldiers using rifles.
It is clear that it is difficult to kill sheep with a rifle at close range, even for a trained soldier. If it is difficult for a soldier to kill a sheep at close range with a rifle, does not my noble friend understand how much more difficult it could be for a marksman to kill a rather smaller animal at longer range and under more difficult conditions. Although I understand the points made in his report by the noble Lord, Lord Burns, as regards the use of alternative means of control, the matter is not quite that simple. Considerable difficulties will be encountered if lamping is to become the sole means of culling foxes.
7 p.m.
Baroness Fookes: I am not suggesting that lamping should become the sole means, but those who wish to see a total ban on hunting have been challenged to suggest other methods. I still believe that, in skilled hands, lamping should be perfectly possible. I assume that soldiers are not used to killing sheep.
I remain firmly of the opinion that other methods can and should be sought. In any case, if the culling of foxes and other animals is so important, it seems to me that hunting is an extraordinarily inefficient way of achieving that aim. I do not believe that anyone is suggesting that, currently, hunting accounts for the majority of those animals killed for culling purposes. That is a very important point to make.
I am aware that I am highly unlikely to change anyone's views, but I felt that I had to put on to the record the feelings which I have held, and still hold, very strongly indeed. Finally, I am not happy with the proposed alternatives because they do not deal with what for me is the essential point about hunting: that is, the chase. It may be prolonged, and it is a fact that

69
hounds—I believe that I should call them dogs now—cannot be controlled to the extent that one can be sure that death will be instantaneous. I rest my case.
Viscount Astor: It may be convenient to noble Lords—
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: I should remind the noble Viscount that we are in Committee, not at Second Reading or on Report. I hope that the noble Viscount who is trying to speak from the Dispatch Box does not believe that he can close down debate on this Bill simply because he has risen to speak. That is not going to happen. Other people, including myself, wish to speak. I am going to speak. The noble Viscount should make up his mind. If he wishes to speak now, he can do so. Indeed, if he wishes to speak before the right reverend Prelate, he can do so. However, I intend to speak in this debate.
Viscount Astor: I am delighted to give way to the noble Lord. Lord Stoddart. Furthermore, if the right reverend Prelate wishes to speak, I am sure that the Committee would like to hear what he has to say. However, it may be convenient to noble Lords if, after those contributions, I say a few brief words in order to give the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, a chance to respond.
The Lord Bishop of Guildford: I should like to make two points in this debate, both of them of a moral character. They follow on from the speech of the noble Baroness.
First, when we are dealing with legislation, perhaps it takes a Bishop to make the point that not every immoral act should be turned into a criminal act. It is important that we distinguish that point. Parliament needs to consider extremely carefully the effect on society of criminalising behaviour. As a Christian and as a Bishop, there are many things that I believe to be wrong and immoral, but I do not think that the law should ban them. Indeed, if the law did engage in banning many of the things I believe to be immoral, we might have a rather thinner House tonight.
I am opposed to gambling, for example. Many people choose to gamble. We have chosen to regulate that behaviour. Regulating behaviour does not mean to say that the state either approves or disapproves of it; it makes provisions for the benefit of the whole community. We need to consider that carefully when we are legislating.
With my second point, I should like to build on the two excellent speeches made at Second Reading by my colleagues the right reverend Prelates the Bishops of Bath and Wells and of Portsmouth. The other night, I went to see the film "Billy Elliot". I am very sorry that it did not win an Oscar. It took me back to the days of the miners' strike and reminded me of a year of very great social difficulty in our country. It brought back to mind my feelings of uncertainty and opposition to the behaviour of the unions in calling and prosecuting the strike, but also my anxieties as regards the way in which the authorities were dealing with mining
70
communities on strike. To this day, those communities bear the scars of that dispute. They felt themselves to be engaged in a battle with their own government, with the police and with the authorities.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of the case, a minority of people in this society felt themselves to be very much on the fringe of our community. People who went down into the mines to dig out coal, at great cost both to themselves and to their families, and people in generations past whose communities had gone to war by serving in our Armed Forces in defence of our country, were now on the receiving end, as they saw it, of policing and of government behaviour that they found extremely difficult.
At Second Reading, the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Portsmouth made a very important point about social cohesion. I do not believe that democracy is concerned with how the majority can impose its will on everyone else. I believe that Parliament has a duty to listen to the voices of minorities. Thus, in an atmosphere where a serious moral debate is taking place—a proper, moral debate to which the noble Baroness has just contributed so excellently—it is the duty of legislators to provide the climate for that moral debate to continue in decency. It cannot continue if legislators impose their will on people who simply do not understand what they are doing.
Only when we achieve a sense of consent within the communities most directly affected by what we seek to do will we be in a position to legislate. The danger of legislating in the face of communities which find that intention extremely difficult to accept is that we may then undermine and fracture our social cohesion. That is a very important moral and spiritual point which needs to be made in this debate. Parliament, and this House in particular—because of its nature and character—have a responsibility to hear the voices that might otherwise be shut out of this debate. We need to consider these matters as we move towards the vote tonight.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: I am sure that the whole Committee will have listened to the speech of the noble Baroness, Lady Fookes, with great respect. Noble Lords will respect her views, even though they may not be universally popular. However, I would say to the Committee and to the noble Baroness that I reached my decision by another route. Many years ago, I was in favour of a ban; I have now become a "non-banner". The reason for that change is because, as the right reverend Prelate has just told the Committee, if we are not careful, no one will be able to do anything because one person's pleasure will become another person's ban. As we heard from my noble friend Lord Davies of Coity, next on the list will be shooting and, after that, will be fishing. In terms of cruelty, they are all cruel in one way or another. So we have to be careful what we are doing.
I listened, as I always do, to the great speech of my noble friend Lady Mallalieu. I agree with her. We have not only the stench of burning carcasses in the fields around the country but also the stench of hypocrisy around this issue. Many people who wish to ban

71
hunting—and, indeed, many other things—are quite prepared to put up with things which are just as bad or even worse.
I sometimes think that I am a member of a mad house rather than a Parliament. As has been mentioned, we are here discussing the culling of vermin while we are contemplating the destruction of perhaps up to 30 million well animals. That is the advice that we are getting from our scientists. To kill 30 million foxes—which are vermin—at the present rate of culling would take 750 years. If we killed only 1 million well animals—which do not do any damage to anyone; they make the landscape look much better and provide us with food—it would still take 25 years for the hunt to kill as many foxes, which are vermin.
When people talk about cruelty, barbarism and so on, all kinds of actions are barbaric. In fact, I think that the slaughter policy is complete madness—there are alternatives—but the people who have sent this Bill to us appear to be contemplating this mass slaughter, this animal holocaust, with complete equanimity. That is why I say there is the stench of hypocrisy around the place.
I shall risk this comment. We have heard that cats kill 200 million small mammals and birds; that is 5.5 million a day. I hope that we shall not hear from people who own cats that we are barbarians and cruel.
As to the two alternatives, I believe that the self-regulatory body has been working. It is not a myth; it is not something in the distance; it has been working. Huntsmen and others have been happy to subscribe to it and to obey the rules which have been thought out and imposed. I believe that that should continue to go forward. It is the real way forward and I am inclined to support it.
What worries me about the middle way—I have thought about it deeply—is that it will be bureaucratic. The penalties are, quite frankly, far too heavy. The penalties contemplated will even include banning people from owning a dog for life, make no mistake about that. They are very arduous indeed.
We all know that bureaucracies, once set up, like to creep forward and forward and forward. The noble Lord, Lord Willoughby de Broke, knows that very well because he is a member of the European Union Select Committee. He has very often told us how we have this creeping bureaucracy in Europe. I should tell him that all bureaucracies creep.
Lord Willoughby de Broke: I am grateful to the noble Lord for giving way. He is quite right, of course, about bureaucracy in the European Union. Unfortunately, try as we might, we are unable to amend it. I hope that if we can persuade the Committee to vote for the middle way we can amend the current proposals and make sure that it is not under any circumstances a back-door way of banning hunting.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: I am afraid the noble Lord is completely and utterly wrong. We can amend European bureaucracy by repealing the European
72
Communities Act 1972. Indeed, on 31st January 1997, this House gave a Second Reading to a Bill which would have amended that Act.
Nevertheless, we have to give the Commons something to cling on to. If we go for the self-regulation, as I believe we should, it would be open to Members of the Commons—the Bill has to go back there—if they are open minded, to say, "Well, chaps, along in the Lords there, even though we do not quite agree with them about self-regulation, there is another proposal for the so-called middle way. We will agree to that and send it back to them for their further consideration".
Under those circumstances—bearing in mind that the Bill has a long way to go; it will not finish in two or three hours or two or three days—I believe that we should opt for self-regulation and then see what happens.
7.15 p.m.
Viscount Astor: We have heard all sides of the argument, even if we have not heard from all Members of the Committee who wish to speak. I shall speak to Amendments Nos. 1 and 4, the first grouping, and to the other amendments later, as I am sure will other Members of the Committee.
The noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, said that this was not a political issue. In one sense it is not a political issue—it is a free vote and there are different views on all sides of the House; the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, on one side and my noble friend Lady Fookes on the other—but, of course, this was in the Labour Party manifesto. We have to ask why have the Government waited for four years to bring the Bill forward, knowing that an election was imminent. The noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, judged his party too kindly, giving it credit for behaving properly, as perhaps he would have done had he been a member of the Government.
I have a number of questions briefly to put to the Minister about the part of the Bill that we are currently debating. As my noble friend Lord Cope said, there are provisions in the Bill which reverse the burden of proof. That has been put to us by legal opinion, and I should like the noble and learned Lord to explain to the Committee why that is not the case.
As it stands, the Bill has a number of rather strange parts. If one looks at page 2, it refers to hunting with "a dog". That is an extraordinary term. It should be hunting with "dogs". I do not know how you can hunt with one dog. The term seems designed to catch innocent walkers who occasionally let their badly behaved dogs off the lead.
As drafted, the Bill would certainly catch drag hunting. Some members of the Committee who are against fox hunting have said that people will be able to continue to go drag hunting. But, under the Bill as it stands, no drag hunts could possibly take place because of the risk involved. Should hounds cross the line of a fox or a hare and decide that it was more entertaining than the drag they were following, the hunt would then be breaking the law, and no hunt can

73
afford to do that. As regards drag hunting, as the Bill stands, no one could take the risk of taking part in it for fear of prosecution.
Under the Bill as it stands, if a landowner gives permission for someone to walk his dog and the dog, unbeknownst to him, misbehaves, it seems to me that the landowner would also be liable for prosecution. I should be grateful for the noble and learned Lord's comments on that.
Under paragraph 19 of the schedule, on page 6 there are powers of entry without a warrant. But most extraordinary is the provision in paragraph 18:
"the constable may stop and search a vehicle, animal or other thing".
I do not know what the Government were thinking when they included the phrase "other thing"; I am not sure what an "other thing" is when you find it out hunting. Perhaps the noble and learned Lord will be able to explain. These are draconian powers. Paragraph 22 of the schedule includes a power to ban someone for life from owning a dog. This is an extraordinarily severe power.
As we see from a quick reading of the Bill, if your dog chases a rabbit and then changes its mind, finds a hare and starts chasing that, if you chase the dog you are hunting: if you leave it alone and say that it is out of your control, you are not. Obviously, if the dog does that, you would want to stop the dog doing it and get it back. You would then be committing an offence. Finally, there is the example given by the noble Lord, Lord Carlile, about a dog who goes down a hole. The provision for a ban does not work. It would catch innocents taking their dogs for a walk; it is morally wrong; and it would not work in practice.
Turning to the moral debate, I have only one point to make. I commend to any Members of the Committee who were not present at Second Reading the very fine speeches made by the three right reverend Prelates. I was delighted to give way earlier to the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Guildford, who made an extremely good point and an interesting speech; and I am always delighted to give way to the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart.
I said that I should be brief, and I shall. This is a bad Bill at the wrong time. Although we are being offered a free vote, the Bill is being taken in government time and it is promoted by government Ministers. They cannot hide behind a free vote. They cannot deny responsibility for deciding when to bring the Bill forward both in another place and in this Chamber. A vote to ban hunting would be an insult to all those who live in rural areas at this time of national emergency.
The Minister of State, Cabinet Office (Lord Falconer of Thoroton): The role of the Government is as follows. The Labour Party stated in its manifesto that a free vote would be held on this issue. A Private Member's Bill was proposed in another place. There
74
was a free vote in relation to that. Subsequent to that Private Member's Bill, the noble Lord, Lord Burns, was commissioned by the Home Secretary to write a report which I believe all Members of the Committee who have taken part in this debate have found useful in informing the debate. Once the noble Lord finished his report, the Government made time, using the method that was used in relation to the Sunday Trading Bill which had been used by the previous government as a means of giving the legislature a chance to decide what it wished to do about hunting. They did so because there are very strong feelings about hunting—feelings that are not shared in relation to shooting and fishing. That is why the Government have made time in relation to it; that is why it has been done in this way. It gives the legislature the opportunity to express its view on this important issue, which needs to be resolved. That is why we have done it in this way.
I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Cope, that the Government should answer any legitimate questions that have been raised in relation to the legislation, and that is what I shall do. What I shall not do is engage in the debate as to whether it is right to ban hunting, whether it is right to have regulation or whether it is right to have licensing. That is a matter for the legislature to decide. That is the way in which we have addressed the issue. The Government have made it clear, as Members speaking on behalf of the main Opposition party have said, that this is to be a matter for a free vote.
We have had a good debate. Perhaps I may single out two particular speeches: that of the noble Baroness, Lady Mallalieu, and the brave, clear speech of the noble Baroness, Lady Fookes. Perhaps I may deal with the particular issues raised. The first was the appropriateness of debating this matter today, when the countryside is going through the trauma of foot and mouth disease. If we could have done anything today in debating the matter to assist in relation to foot and mouth, we should have done it; but there was not anything we could do. The Government must fight the disease with every skill that they have. But, equally, things must go on in other areas, just as they have in relation to other pieces of legislation. Having embarked on this legislation, I am sure that the right course is to continue with it. That is what we are doing.
Earl Ferrers: Perhaps I may interrupt the Minister. What he says is of great importance and great interest. However, does he agree that the Government could have withdrawn the Bill for the time being to allow the problem of the countryside to be overcome before adding yet more difficulties and yet more anxieties for the countryside?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: It was a matter for the usual channels as to what were the issues for debate today. So far as concerns the result, it is a matter for this House to decide what it wishes to do about the three options. I am sure that the right course is to continue to allow the Committee to express its view on the options.

75
It was said that the Bill does not define hunting. It would be a matter for the court, if a case ever came before it, as to whether there was any difficulty with the provision,
"A person commits an offence if he hunts a wild mammal with a dog".
The noble Viscount, Lord Bledisloe, who raised the point, will know perfectly well that the fact that there are a number of definitions in dictionaries has never prevented the courts reaching a conclusion previously.
A question was raised about the dog which, unbeknownst to its owner, follows a scent and begins to hunt a wild mammal. The crime that is created in Part 1 is in relation to the individual, not to the animal. The individual must have the necessary criminal intent for a crime to be committed.
Reference was made to the point raised by the Delegated Powers and Deregulation Committee about the inappropriateness of delegated legislation being used to change defences. If the schedule survives in the Bill—that is plainly a matter of which the Government will take great note, particularly after any debate that follows on recommitment.
The question was raised as to where is the burden of proof in relation to the exceptions. The burden of proof would be on the defence, on the balance of probabilities. That is perfectly normal in relation to any Bill where a crime is created but a defence is also created which is an exception to the crime. So I do not think that that would be regarded as in any way abnormal.
The noble Lord, Lord Carlile, raised issues relating to the defence where a gun pack was involved and in particular where foxes were being flushed out. The noble Lord asked what would happen if the dog went underground without the consent of the owner. Again, the question would relate to the intent of the owner and it would be decided as a matter of fact in every case. I do not think that there would be any difficulty in relation to the magistrates' court dealing with that.
Viscount Bledisloe: Where does the noble and learned Lord find intent in the Bill?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: There would be no doubt that that is how the courts would construe the matter—
Viscount Bledisloe: Why?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Because they have dealt with statutes drafted in this way on many previous occasions.
The noble Viscount also said that Bill was not clear and unambiguous. Plainly, if the schedule survives, any amendments that would be required to make it clearer and more unambiguous would be entertained by this House. But I do not think that there would be any doubt as to the intention of the statute.
76
So far as concerns "rodents", the position is that rabbits and hares are not rodents, despite the researches of the noble Viscount, Lord Bledisloe, in the Encyclopaedia Britannica. Within the classification of "mammal", they do not fall within the order "Rodentia" but within the order "Lagomorpha". They differ from rodents in having an extra pair of incisors and in other skeletal features. I am sure that would be clear to the court.
Viscount Bledisloe: Where does the Minister find that definition other than in the Encyclopaedia Britannica?
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: That is the position so far as concerns the facts.
I believe that I have dealt with all the points raised. I do not think that the Committee wishes me to detain it with any more detail.
We shall now proceed to the first vote. I remind the Committee that the procedure we are following is one that this place agreed by a substantial majority to adopt. This first vote will be on the Question of whether we should remove the ban option from the Bill. Therefore, those noble Lords who support a ban on hunting with dogs should vote "Not-Content" on this first vote, while noble Lords who favour the continuation of hunting should vote "Content". I commend the amendment to the Committee.
7.30 p.m.
On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 1) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 317; Not-Contents, 68.

Division No. 1

CONTENTS

Aberdare, L.

Boardman, L.

Ackner, L.

Bowness, L.

Acton, L.

Brabazon of Tara, L.

Allenby of Megiddo, V.

Bradshaw, L.

Alton of Liverpool, L.

Bragg, L.

Ampthill, L.

Bramall, L.

Anelay of St Johns, B.

Brennan, L.

Armstrong of Ilminster, L.

Bridgeman. V.

Arran, E.

Bridges, L.

Astor, V.

Brightman, L.

Astor of Hever, L.

Bristol, Bp.

Attlee, E.

Brookeborough, V.

Bagri, L.

Brookman, L.

Baker of Dorking, L.

Burnham, L.

Baldwin of Bewdley, E.

Buscombe, B.

Barber of Tewkesbury, L.

Butler of Brockwell, L.

Barnett, L.

Butterworth, L.

Bath and Wells, Bp.

Buxton of Alsa, L.

Beaumont of Whitley, L.

Byford, B.

Bell, L.

Caithness, E.

Belstead, L.

Campbell of Alloway, L.

Bernstein of Craigweil, L.

Campbell of Croy, L.

Biffen, L.

Carlile of Berriew, L.

Blackwell, L.

Carlisle of Bucklow, L.

Blaker, L.

Carnarvon, E.

Blatch, B.

Carnegy of Lour, B.

Bledisloe, V.

Carr of Hadley, L.

77

Carrington, L.

Home, E.

Carver, L.

Hooson, L.

Cavendish of Furness, L.

Howe, E.

Chadlington, L.

Howe of Aberavon, L.

Clement-Jones, L.

Howell of Guildford, L.

Cobbold, L.

Howie of Troon, L.

Coe, L.

Hunt of Kings Heath, L.

Colville of Culross, V.

Hurd of Westwell, L.

Colwyn, L.

Hussey of North Bradley, L.

Cooke of Islandreagh, L.

Hutchinson of Lullington, L.

Cope of Berkeley, L.

Inge, L.

Courtown, E.

Inglewood, L.

Craig of Radley, L.

Jauncey of Tullichettle, L.

Cranborne, V.

Jeger, B.

Crathorne, L.

Jellicoe, E.

Crickhowell, L.

Jenkin of Roding, L.

Croham, L.

Jenkins of Hillhead, L.

Cumberlege, B.

Jopling, L.

Dacre of Glanton, L.

Keith of Castleacre, L.

Dahrendorf, L.

Kelvedon, L.

Darcy de Knayth, B.

Kimball, L. [Teller]

Davies of Coity, L.

Kingsdown, L.

Dean of Harptree, L.

Kingsland, L.

Denham, L.

Kirkham, L.

Desai, L.

Laing of Dunphail, L.

Dixon-Smith, L.L

Lamont of Lerwick, L.

Donaldson of Lymington, L.

Lane, L.

Dunn, B.

Lane of Horsell, L.

Eccles of Moulton, B.

Lang of Monkton, L.

Elis-Thomas, L.

Lawson of Blaby, L.

Elles, B.

Layard, L.

Elliott of Morpeth, L.

Lester of Herne Hill, L.

Elton, L.

Lewis of Newnham, L.

Enroll, E.

Lincoln, Bp.

Evans of Temple Guiting, L.

Linklater of Butterstone, B.

Ezra, L.

Lipsey, L.

Falkland, V.

Listowel, E.

Feldman, L.

Liverpool, E.

Fellowes, L.

Lucas, L.

Ferrers, E.

Luke, L.

Filkin, L.

Lyell, L.

Flather, B.

McColl of Dulwich, L.

Fraser of Carmyllie, L.

Macfarlane of Bearsden, L.

Freeman, L.

McIntosh of Hudnall, B.

Gardner of Parkes, B.

Mackenzie of Framwellgate, L.

Garel-Jones, L.

Mackie of Benshie, L.

Geddes, L.

Mallalieu, B. [Teller]

Geraint, L.

Mancroft, L.

Gibson, L.

Mar, C.

Gilmour of Craigmillar, L.

Mar and Kellie, E.

Glenarthur, L.

Marlesford, L.

Glentoran, L.

Marsh, L.

Goodhart, L.

Marshall of Knightsbridge, L.

Gordon of Strathblane, L.

Mason of Barnsley, L.

Goschen, V.

Mayhew of Twysden, L.

Grabiner, L.

Methuen, L.

Gray of Contin,L.

Miller of Chilthorne Domer, B.

Greenway, L.

Miller of Hendon, B.

Grenfell, L.

Milner of Leeds, L.

Griffiths of Fforestfach, L.

Molloy, L.

Guildford, Bp.

Molyneaux of Killead, L.

Habgood, L.

Monro of Langholm, L.

Hambro, L.

Monson, L.

Hanham, B.

Montagu of Beaulieu, L.

Hardy of Wath, L.

Montrose, D.

Harris of Greenwich, L.

Moore of Lower Marsh, L.

Harris of High Cross, L.

Moore of Wolvercote, L.

Harris of Peckham, L.

Moran, L.

Hayhoe, L.

Morris of Castle Morris, L.

Hayman, B.

Mowbray and Stourton, L.

Henley, L.

Moynihan, L.

Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, L.

Murton of Lindisfarne, L.

Hoffmann. L.

Naseby, L.

Hogg, B.

Newton of Braintree. L.

Holderness, L.

Nickson, L.

Holme of Cheltenham, L.

Noakes, B.

78

Nolan, L.

Selkirk of Douglas, L.

Northbourne, L.

Sharman, L.

Northbrook, L.

Sharples, B.

O'Cathain, B.

Shaw of Northstead, L.

Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay, L.

Sheppard of Didgemere, L.

Onslow, E.

Shore of Stepney, L.

Oxfuird, V.

Simon, V.

Palmer, L.

Simon of Glaisdale, L.

Park of Monmouth, B.

Skelmersdale, L.

Patten, L.

Slim, V.

Pearson of Rannoch, L.

Soulsby of SWaffham Prior, L.

Peel, E.

Stodart of Leaston, L.

Perry ofSouthwark, B.

Stoddart ofSwindon, L.

Perry of Walton, L.

Strabolgi, L.

Peyton of Yeovil, L.

Strange, B.

Phillips of Sudbury, L.

Strathclyde, L.

Pilkington of Oxenford, L.

Swinfen, L.

Plumb, L.

Taverne, L.

Plummer of St. Marylebone, L.

Taylor of Blackburn, L.

Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L.

Taylor of Warwick, L.

Powell of Bayswater, L.

Tebbit, L.

Prys-Davies, L.

Tenby, V.

Puttnam, L.

Thomas of Gresfotd, L.

Pym, L.

Thomas of Gwydir, L.

Quinton, L.

Thomas of Swynnerton, L.

Randall of St. Budeaux, L.T

Thomas of Walliswood, B.

Rawlings, B.

Thomson of Monifieth, L.

Rawlinson of Ewell, L.

Tombs, L.

Rea, L.

Trefgarne, L.

Reay, L.

Trumpington, B.

Redesdale, L.

Tugendhat, L.

Rees, L.

Turner of Camden, B.

Rees-Mogg, L.

Vinson, L.

Renton, L.

Vivian, L.

Renton of Mount Harry, L.

Waddington, L.

Renwick of Clifton, L.

Wakeham, L.

Richard, L.

Waldegrave of North Hill, L.

Richardson of Duntisbourne, L.

Wallace of Saltaire, L.

Roberts of Conwy, L.

Walpole, L.

Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L.

Walton of Detchant, L.

Rogan, L.

Warnock, B.

Roper, L.

Watson of Richmond, L.

Rotherwick, L.

Waverley, V.

Ryder of Wensum, L.

Weatherill, L.

Saatchi, L.

Weinstock, L.

Sainsbury of Preston Candover, L.

Wilcox, B.

Wilkins, B.

St. John of Bletso, L.

Williams of Elvel, L.

St John of Fawsley, L.

Williamson of Horton, L.

Saltoun of Abernethy, Ly.

Willoughby de Broke, L.

Sandberg, L.

Wilson of Tillyorn, L.

Sanderson of Bowden, L.

Winston, L.

Sandwich, E.

Wolfson of Sunningdale, L.

Scott of Foscote, L.

Woolmer of Leeds, L.

Seccombe, B.

Wright of Richmond, L.

Selborne, E.

Young, B.

NOT-CONTENTS

Andrews, B.

Evans of Parkside, L.

Archer of Sandwell, L.

Evans of Watford, L.

Avebury, L.

Farrington of Ribbleton, B.

Bach, L.

Faulkner of Worcester, L.

Barker, B.

Fookes, B.

Bassam of Brighton, L.

Gale, B.

Billingham, B.

Gibson of Market Rasen, B.

Blease, L.

Gilbert, L.

Boothroyd,B.

Goudie,B.

Castle of Blackburn, B.

Gould of Potternewton, B.

Clarke of Hampstead, L.

Graham of Edmonton, L. [Teller]

Crawley, B.

Davies of Oldham, L.

Hamwee, B.

Dholakia, L.

Harris of Haringey, L.

Dixon, L.

Harris of Richmond, B.

Dormand of Easington, L.

Harrison, L.

Elder, L.

Haskel, L.

79

Hattersley, L.

Morris of Manchester, L.

Howells of St. Davids, B.

Murray of Epping Forest, L.

Hoyle, L.

Nicol, B.

Hughes of Woodside, L.

Northover, B.

Islwyn, L.

Orme, L.

Jenkins of Putney, L.

Patel of Blackburn, L.

Judd, L.

Ramsay of Cartvale, B.

Kirkhill,L.

Richardson of Calow,B.

Laird, L.

Roll of Ipsden, L.

Lloyd-Webber, L.

Shepherd, L.

Lockwood, B.

Shutt of Greetland, L.

Lofthouse of Pontefract, L.

Tomlinson, L.

McCarthy, L.

Tope, L.

McIntosh of Haringey, L.

Walker of Doncaster, L.

McNally, L. [Teller]

Whitaker, B.

Massey of Darwen, B.

Whitty, L.

Morgan, L.

Wolfson, L.

Young of Old Scone, B.

Resolved in the affirmative, and amendment agreed to accordingly.
7.46 p.m.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton Lord Falconer of Thoroton moved Amendment No. 2:
Leave out Clause 1 and insert the following new clause—
"HUNTING WITH DOGS: SUPERVISION
Schedule (Hunting with Dogs: Supervision) (which restricts certain statutory exceptions from offences to supervised hunting) shall have effect."
The noble and learned Lord said: I beg to move this amendment standing in the name of my noble friend Lord Bassam of Brighton. This is the amendment which would insert the self-regulation option put forward by the Countryside Alliance. My noble friend has described what it involves. We intend to say nothing more about it.
Viscount Astor: It may be helpful at this stage if I say something about independent supervision. No matter what Members of the Committee on my right say, there are a few questions which we have to consider and there are a few points which I would like to make.
The first point is that the organisation exists and works. Surprisingly, it has received no complaints since it has been in place. I do not believe that there are many other sports that could claim that credit. I make the point that it is an independent commission. I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Phillips of Sudbury, is now clear about its independence. Although its members are involved in hunting, it is independent and only one member represents hunting.
There is a code of conduct which is clear about how hunts should behave. I remind the Committee that should independent supervision be selected by the Committee, that does not mean that licensing does not exist. Currently, there are at least three types of licences in existence of which I am aware. Hunts have licences with the Ministry of Defence, the National Trust and the Forestry Commission.
There is one question which we have to address; namely; does the commission have teeth? I believe that it does. Perhaps it could be improved. Speaking personally, there is a case for the Secretary of State having the power to appoint either two or three of the
80
commissioners. That would give it enormously greater authority while maintaining its independence. It must be a preferential route to licensing. No other sports would be licensed in this way. Angling, falconry, and rambling are not licensed. It does not seem to make any sense. This provision would work and I believe that it has the support of your Lordships' House.
The Earl of Carnarvon: At Second Reading, very late at night, I said that when the Bill reached Committee stage I would move an amendment to option two. When the Bill is re-committed I would like your Lordships to know that I shall move an amendment to add to ISAH commissioners two commissioners appointed by the Home Office and one by the Welsh Assembly.
The Earl of Erroll: As regards ISAH having teeth, I know from experience sitting on another body, that insurance is the issue. I am fairly certain that if hunts had their permission withdrawn by ISAH they would no longer be insured in which case they would be unable to continue hunting. If one wants the dead weight of bureaucracy to kill hunting, I suspect that the middle way is the option to go for. One has only to look at the 21 pages of Amendment No. 6 to understand what that will involve. Alternatively, you can pass that on to ISAH.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: This has been an interesting debate. The arguments have been set out extremely thoroughly. The suggestion that has been made as regards the amendment is important and we shall obviously consider that. Those Members of the Committee who favour self-regulation should vote "Content" in this Division while those who oppose the self-regulation option should vote "Not-Content".
7.50 p.m.
*On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 2) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 249; Not-Contents, 108.

Division No. 2

CONTENTS

Ackner, L.

Boardman, L.

Allenby of Megiddo, V.

Bowness, L.

Alton of Liverpool, L.

Brabazon of Tara, L.

Ampthill, L.

Bradshaw, L.

Anelay of St Johns, B.

Bragg, L.

Armstrong of Ilminster, L.

Bramall, L.

Arran, E.

Bridgeman, V.

Astor, V.

Bristol, Bp.

Astor of Hever, L.

Brookeborough, V.

Attlee, E.

Burnham, L.

Bagri, L.

Buscombe, B.

Barber of Tewkesbury, L.

Butler of Brockwell, L.

Bath and Wells, Bp.

Butterworth, L.

Bell, L.

Buxton of Alsa, L.

Belstead, L.

Byford, B.

Blackwell, L.

Caithness, E.

Blaker, L.

Campbell of Alloway, L.

Blatch, B.

Campbell of Croy, L.

81

Carlile of Berriew, L.

Inge, L.

Carlisle of Bucklow, L.

Inglewood, L.

Carnarvon, E

Jauncey of Tullichettle, L.

Carnegy of Lour, B.

Jeger, B.

Carr of Hadley, L.

Jellicoe, E.

Carrington, L.

Jenkin of Roding, L.

Carver, L.

Jopling, L.

Cavendish of Furncss, L.

Keith of Castleacre, L.

Chadlington, L.

Kelvedon, L.

Cobbold, L.

Kimball, L. [Teller]

Colwyn, L.

Kingsdown, L.

Cooke of Islandreagh, L.

Kingsland, L.

Cope of Berkeley, L.

Kirkham, L.

Courtown, E.

Laing of Dunphail, L.

Craig of Radley, L.

Lamont of Lerwick, L.

Cranborne, V.

Lane, L.

Crathorne, L.

Lane of Horsell, L.

Crickhowell, L.

Lang of Monkton, L.

Croham, L.

Lawson of Blaby, L.

Cumberlege, B.

Lester of Herne Hill, L.

Dacre of Glanton, L.

Lewis of Newnham, L.

Dahrendorf, L.

Lincoln, Bp.

Darcy dc Knayth, B.

Linklater of Butterstone, B.

Dean of Harptree, L.

Liverpool, E.

Denham, L.

Luke, L.

Desai, L.

Lyell, L.

Dixon-Smith, L.

McColl of Dulwich, L.

Donaldson of Lymington, L.

Macfarlane of Bearsden, L.

Dunn, B.

McIntosh of Hudnall, B.

Eccles of Moulton, B.

Mallalieu, B. [Teller]

Elis-Thomas, L.

Mancroft, L.

Elles, B.

Mar, C.

Elliott of Morpeth, L.

Marlesford, L.

Elton, L.

Marsh, L.

Erroll, E.

Marshall of Knightsbridge, L.

Falkland, V.

Mayhew of Twysden, L.

Fellowes, L.

Miller of Hendon, B.

Ferrers, E.

Molloy, L.

Filkin, L.

Molyneaux of Killead, L.

Flather, B.

Monro of Langholm, L.

Fraser of Carmyllie, L.

Monson, L.

Freeman, L.

Montagu of Beaulieu, L.

Gardner of Parkes, B.

Montrose, D.

Garel-Jones, L.

Moore of Lower Marsh, L.

Geddes, L.

Moore of Wolvercote, L.

Geraint, L.

Moran, L.

Gibson, L.

Mowbray and Stourton, L.

Gilmour of Craigmillar, L.

Moynihan, L.

Glenarthur, L.

Murton of Lindisfarne, L.

Glentoran, L.

Naseby, L.

Goodhart, L.

Newton of Braintree, L.

Gordon of Strathblane, L.

Nickson, L.

Goschen, V.

Noakes, B.

Grabiner, L.

Nolan, L.

Gray of Contin, L.

Northbourne, L.

Greenway, L.

Northbrook, L.

Griffiths of Fforestfach, L.

O'Cathain, B.

Habgood, L.

Onslow, E.

Hambro, L.

Oxfuird, V.

Hanham, B.

Palmer, L.

Harris of Greenwich, L.

Park of Monmouth, B.

Harris of High Cross, L.

Patten, L.

Hayhoe, L.

Pearson of Rannoch, L.

Henley, L.

Peel, E.

Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, L.

Perry of Southwark, B.

Hogg, B.

Perry of Walton, L.

Holderness, L.

Peyton of Yeovil, L.

Hooper, B.

Pilkington of Oxenford, L.

Hooson, L.

Plumb, L.

Howe, E.

Plummer of St. Marylebone, L.

Howe of Aberavon, L.

Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L.

Howell of Guildford, L.

Powell of Bayswater, L.

Howie of Troon, L.

Pym, L.

Hurd of Westwell, L.

Quinton, L.

Hussey of North Bradley, L.

Randall of St. Budeaux, L.

Hutchinson of Lullington, L.

Rawlings, B.

82

Rawlinson of Ewell, L.

Stoddart of Swindon, L.

Reay, L.

Strange, B.

Rees, L.

Strathclyde, L.

Rees-Mogg, L.

Swinfen, L.

Renton, L.

Tanlaw, L.

Renton of Mount Harry, L.

Taverne, L.

Richardson of Duntisbourne, L.

Taylor of Blackburn, L.

Roberts of Conwy, L.

Taylor of Warwick, L.

Rogan, L.

Tebbit, L.

Rotherwick, L.

Thomas of Gwydir, L

Ryder of Wensum, L.

Thomas of Swynnerton, L.

St John of Fawsley, L.

Thomson of Monifieth, L.

Saltoun of Abernethy, Ly.

Tombs, L.

Sandberg,L.

Trefgarne, L.

Sanderson of Bowden, L.

Trumpington, B.

Sandwich, E.

Tugendhat, L.

Scott of Foscote,L.

Vivian, L.

Seccombe, B.

Waddington, L.

Selborne, E.

Waldegrave of North Hill, L.

Selkirk of douglas, L.

Walton of Detchant, L.

Sharman, L.

Warnock, B.

Sharples, B.

Watson of Richmond, L.

Shaw of Northstead, L.

Waverley, V.

Sheppard of Didgemere, L.

Weinstock, L.

Simon, V.

Wilcox, B.

Simon of Glaisdale, L.

Wilkins, B.

Skelmersdale, L.

Willoughby de Broke, L.

Slim, V.

Wilson of Tillyorn, L.

Soulsby of Swaffham Prior, L.

Winston, L.

Stodart of Leaston, L.

Wright of Richmond, L.

Young, B.

NOT-CONTENTS

Acton, L.

Grenfell, L.

Andrews, B.

Hamwee, B.

Archer of Sandwell, L.

Harris of Haringey, L.

Avebury, L.

Harris of Richmond, B.

Bach, L.

Harrison, L.

Barker, B.

Haskel, L.

Barnett, L.

Hayman, B.

Bassam of Brighton, L.

Holme of Cheltenham, L.

Beaumont of Whitley, L.

Howells of St. Davids, B.

Billingham, B.

Hoyle, L.

Blease,L.

Hughes of Woodside, L.

Boothroyd, B.

Hunt of Kings Heath, L.

Brennan, L.

Islwyn, L.

Brooke of Alverthorpe, L.

Jay of Paddington, B. (Lord Privy Seal)

Brookman, L.

Burlison, L.

Jenkins of Putney, L.

Carter, L.

Judd, L.

Castle of Blackburn, B.

Kirkhill, L.

Chandos, V.

Laird, L.

Clarke of Hampstead, L.

Layard, L.

Clement-Jones, L.

Lipsey, L.

Colville of Culross, V.

Lockwood,B.

Craigavon, V.

Lofthouse of Pontefract, L.

Crawley, B.

McCarthy, L.

Davies of Coity, L.

McIntosh of Haringey, L.

Davies of Oldham, L.

MacKenzie of Culkein, L.

Dholakia, L.

Mackie of Benshie, L.

Dixon,L.

McNally, L.[Teller]

Elder, L.

Mar and Kellie,E.

Evans of Watford, L.

Massey of Darwen, B.

Falconer of Thoroton, L.

Methuen, L.

Farrington of Ribbleton, B.

Miller of Chilthorne Domer, B.

Faulkner of Worcester, L.

Milner of Leeds, L.

Fookes, B.

Mitchell, L.

Gale, B.

Morgan, L.

Gibson of Market Rasen, B.

Morris of Manchester, L.

Gilbert, L.

Murray of Epping Forest, L.

Goudie, B.

Nicol, B.

Gould of Potternewton, B.

Northover, B.

Graham of Edmonton, L. [Teller]

Orme, L.

Patel of Blackburn, L.

Greengross, B.

Phillips of Sudbury, L.

83

Puttnam, L.

Symons of Vernham Dean, B.

Ramsay of Cartvale, B.

Tomlinson, L.

Redesdale, L.

Tope, L.

Richard, L.

Tordoff, L.

Richardson of Calow, B.

Turnberg, L.

Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L.

Turner of Camden, B.

Roper, L.

Uddin, B.

Scotland of Asthal, B.

Wallace of Saltaire, L.

Scott of Needham Market, B.

Walpole,L.

Shepherd, L.

Whitaker, B

Shutt of Greetland, L.

Whitty, L.

Stern, B.

Woobner of Leeds, L.

Young of Old Scone, B.

*The Tellers for the Not-Contents recorded 108 votes. The Clerks recorded 107 names.
Resolved in the affirmative, and amendment agreed to accordingly.
8.3 p.m.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton Lord Falconer of Thoroton moved Amendment No. 3:
Leave out Clause 1 and insert the following new clause—
"HUNTING WITH DOGS: REGULATION
Schedule (Hunting with Dogs: Regulation) (which provides for the regulation of hunting with dogs in certain circumstances) shall have effect."
The noble and learned Lord said: I beg to move Amendment No. 3, which stands in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Bassam of Brighton. The amendment would insert into the Bill the Middle Way Group scheme for statutory regulation. Again, the noble Lord described it in his opening speech. I do not intend to add anything.
Viscount Astor: The Committee has voted by an overwhelming majority against the ban on hunting and by a large majority for supervision. I respectfully suggest that noble Lords vote Not-Content to statutory licensing.
Lord Vinson: Perhaps I may be the "odd Lord out". With my background and my practice, I have believed all my life in self regulation. In the past, whether as regards Lloyd's or elsewhere, I have believed that it has been better for people who understand the matter to regulate themselves. However, we have to be realistic. The general public are not so sold on hunting as are Members of this Chamber. Many members of the public will look for a middle way, a compromise. This House should send them a compromise—the middle way. We should accept that we would rather have regulated hunting than no hunting. That is my view. That is why I shall vote for the amendment. I may be the only person in the Whole House to do so, but I believe that that would send the right signal to the House of Commons. We may propose but they will dispose. We should recognise that and help the goodwill generated there and with the wider public by voting for the middle way.
Lord Carlile of Berriew: I am concerned at the advice given from the Conservative Front Bench. I belong to a party in which many Members are hotly opposed to hunting in any form. I believe that members of my
84
party in the country, who believe in individual liberties and freedom, will see the middle way option as a compromise which keeps the public involved in the issue of hunting but is more satisfactory because it has the imprint of Parliament upon it. I respectfully urge noble Lords to vote for that middle way option.
The Earl of Onslow: As a fanatical fox hunter, my bones have been broken; I have lain in the mud; I have jumped ditches. I understand why some people do not like hunting. What the noble Earl, Lord Carnarvon, said earlier was right. We should take the noble Earl's suggestion on statutory regulation: that we split the compromise between those who want ISAH and those who want 20 pages of statutory regulation. If we make ISAH statutory under regulation we have the right balance. I shall vote for Amendment No. 3.
Lord Graham of Edmonton: I state again a position I have declared previously. One is either for fox hunting and chasing wild mammals or one is against it. It has been stated more than once in the debate today that there is a middle way, a compromise. I call it a cop-out. There is no compromise about what I abhor in fox hunting. A number of references have been made to the people out there—the public. I know the people in my area. I celebrate my birthday today
Noble Lords: Hear, hear!
Lord Graham of Edmonton: Sixty years ago I joined the Labour Party. When I reflect on where I should look for guidance or comfort I look to the Labour Party and the Labour movement. I look in particular to my friends on this side of the Chamber. It is a free vote. I respect whatever they do. However, I remind them that in another place our comrades voted 383 for a ban, with 13 voting for the middle way. Although it is said that we are entitled to our view, we must remember this. Of those Members who voted, 75 represent rural constituencies. Whenever the election will be, they will have not have taken part in an academic exercise: they stand up to be counted. They had the courage to do that.
Some of my friends believe that there is a genuine compromise or middle way. I do not believe that there is. The manner in which dogs hunt to the death remains. One can license a man; one can license an organisation. But when those dogs are let loose to hunt, one cannot control the instincts of the dog. That is why I believe that the middle way is not a compromise; it is a cop-out. Whether or not my friends vote for a ban, I urge them not to be fooled. If they lend their strength to this issue, it will be a sad and sorry day not only for themselves but for elements of the Labour Movement. We have all had letters. I have posted 52 replies today, many of them to individuals who had urged me to oppose the ban. I treated them with respect. I also had letters from Labour and trade union organisations. If my friends want some guidance beside their conscience on what the Labour movement wants, I can tell them that it does not want anything to do with the second or third options.

85
The decision is on whether to lend our support to an option that would allow the continuation of hunting. I urge my noble friends to vote against it.
Lord Hooson: I have one thing in common with the noble Lord, Lord Graham—we both celebrate our birthday today. However, I totally disagree with what he has said. Those who want to increase the divide between the countryside and the urban population should follow his advice.
Lord Mackie of Benshie: I shall put a simple political point to those who do not want this countryside sport banned. The Government have offered a compromise. If we reject the third option in favour of self-regulation, they can move as they wish. Those who want to preserve the opportunity for people to hunt without cruelty should vote for the amendment in large numbers to correct the harm that was done by the previous vote.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: I suggest that we move to the vote without further delay. I remind noble Lords that the vote is on whether to insert the Middle Way Group's statutory regulation option into the Bill and to remove the self-regulation option. Those who favour a statutory licensing regime for hunting—the middle way option—should vote Content, while those who arc opposed to the licensing option should vote Not-Content.
8.12 p.m.
On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 3) shall be agreed to?
*Their Lordships divided: Contents, 122; Not-Contents, 202.

Division No. 3

CONTENTS

Acton, L.

Chandos, V.

Allenby of Megiddo, V. [Teller]

Clement-Jones, L.

Alton of Liverpool, L.

Colville of Culross, V.

Baker of Dorking, L.

David, B.

Barber of Tewkesbury, L.

Davies of Coity, L.

Barker, B.

Dean of Thornton-le-Fylde, B.

Barnett, L.

Donoughue, L.

Bath and Wells, Bp.

Evans of Watford, L.

Beaumont of Whitley, L.

Ezra, L.

Bernstein of Craigweil, L.

Falconer of Thoroton, L.

Biffen, L.

Gordon of Strathblane, L.

Bledisloe, V. [ Teller]

Greengross, B.

Boothroyd, B.

Grenfell,L.

Bowness, L.

Griffiths of Fforestfach, L.

Bradshaw, L.

Guildford, Bp.

Bragg, L.

Habgood, L.

Brennan, L.

Hamwee, B.

Bridges, L.

Hardy of Wath, L.

Bristol, Bp.

Harris of Greenwich, L.

Brooke of Alverthorpe, L.

Hayman, B.

Brookman, L.

Hereford, Bp.

Burlison, L.

Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, L.

Buxton of Alsa, L.

Holme of Cheltenham, L.

Carlile of Berriew, L.

Hooson, L.

Carter, L.

Howie of Troon, L.

Carver, L.

Hunt of Kings Heath, L.

Castle of Blackburn, B.

Inglewood, L.

86

Jay of Paddington, B. (Lord Privy Seat)

Redesdale, L.

Rees,L.

Jellicoe, E.

Rees-Mogg, L.

Kingsdown, L.

Richard, L.

Layard, L.

Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L.

Lea of Crondall, L.

Roper, L.

Lester of Herne Hill, L.

Sandwich, E.

Linklater of Butterstone, B.

Scotland of Asthal, B.

Lipsey, L.

Scott of Needham Market, B.

Listowel, E.

Shepherd, L.

Lloyd-Webber, L.

Shutt of Greetland, L.

Lucas, L.

Stern, B.

MacKenzie of Culkein, L.

Symons of Vernham Dean, B.

Mackenzie of Framwellgate, L.

Taverne, L.

Mackie of Benshie, L.

Taylor of Blackburn, L.

Mar and Kellie, E.

Tenby, V.

Methuen, L.

Thomas of Gresford, L.

Miller of Chilthorne Domer, B.

Thomas ofWalliswood, B.

Milner of Leeds, L.

Tope, L.

Mitchell, L.

Tordoff, L.

Monson, L.

Turnberg, L.

Moore of Wolvercote, L.

Turner of Camden, B.

Morris of Castle Morris, L.

Varley, L.

Nickson, L.

Vinson, L.

Northover, B.

Waldegrave of North Hill, L.

Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay, L.

Wallace of Saltaire, L.

Onslow, E.

Walpole, L.

Orme, L.

Walton of Detchant, L.

Pearson of Rannoch, L.

Weatherill, L.

Phillips of Sudbury, L.

Weidenfeld, L.

Pilkington of Oxenford, L.

Williams of Crosby, B.

Prys-Davies, L.

Williamson of Horton.L.

Puttnam, L.

Willoughby de Broke, L.

Rea, L.

Wilson of Tillyorn, L.

Woolmer of Leeds, L.

NOT-CONTENTS

Ackner, L.

Craigavon, V.

Ampthill, L.

Cranborne, V.

Anelay of St Johns, B.

Crathorne, L.

Armstrong of Ilminster, L.

Crawley, B.

Arran, E.

Crickhowell, L.

Astor, V.

Croham, L.

Astor of Hever, L.

Cumberlege, B.

Attlee, E.

Davies of Oldham, L.

Avebury, L.

Dean of Harptree, L.

Bach, L.

Denham, L.

Bagri, L.

Dholakia, L.

Bassam of Brighton, L.

Dixon, L.

Bell, L.

Dixon-Smith, L.

Billingham, B.

Donaldson of Lymington, L.

Blackwell, L.

Dunn, B.

Blaker, L.

Eccles of Moulton, B.

Blatch,B.

Elder, L.

Blease, L.

Elis-Thomas, L.

Boardman, L.

Elliott of Morpeth, L.

Brabazon of Tara, L.

Elton, L.

Bridgeman, V.

Erroll, E.

Brookeborough, V.

Farrington of Ribbleton, B.

Burnham, L.

Faulkner of Worcester, L.

Buscombe, B.

Ferrers, E.

Butler of Brockwell, L.

Flather,B.

Byford, B.

Fookes, B.

Caithness, E.

Freeman, L.

Campbell of Croy, L.

Gale, B.

Carlisle of Bucklow.L.

Gardner of Parkes,B.

Carnarvon, E.

Garel-Jones, L.

Carnegy of Lour, B.

Gibson, L.

Carrington, L.

Gilbert, L.

Cavendish of Furness, L.

Gilmour of Craigmillar, L.

Clarke of Hampstead, L.

Glenarthur, L.

Cobbold, L.

Glentoran, L.

Colwyn, L.

Goschen, V.

Cope of Berkeley, L.

Goudie, B.

Courtown, E.

Gould of Potternewton, B.

87

Graham of Edmonton, L. [Teller]

Oxfuird, V.

Palmer, L.

Gray of Contin, L.

Park of Monmouth, B.

Greenway, L.

Patel of Blackburn, L.

Hambro, L.

Peel, E.

Hanham, B.

Perry of Southwark, B.

Harris of Haringey, L.

Perry of Walton, L.

Harrison, L.

Peyton of Yeovil, L.

Haskel, L.

Plumb, L.

Henley, L.

Plummer of St. Marylebone, L.

Hogg, B.

Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L.

Holderness, L.

Powell of Bayswater, L.

Hooper, B.

Pym, L.

Howe of Aberavon, L.

Quinton, L.

Howell of Guildford, L.

Ramsay of Cartvale, B.

Howells of St. Davids, B.

Randall of St. Budeaux, L.

Hoyle, L.

Rawlings, B.

Hughes of Woodside.L.

Rawlinson of Ewell, L.

Hussey of North Bradley, L.

Reay, L.

Islwyn, L.

Renton, L.

Jenkin of Roding, L.

Renton of Mount Harry, L.

Jenkins of Putney, L.

Richardson of Calow, B.

Jopling, L.

Richardson of Duntisbourne, L.

Judd, L.

Roberts of Conwy, L.

Keith of Castleacre, L.

Rogan, L.

Kelvedon, L.

Rotherwick, L.

Kimball, L.

Ryder of Wensum, L.

Kingsland, L.

St John of Fawsley, L.

Kirkham, L.

Saltoun of Abernethy, Ly.

Laing of Dunphail, L.

Sandberg, L.

Laird, L.

Sanderson of Bowden, L.

Lamont of Lerwick, L.

Scott of Foscote, L.

Lane, L.

Seccombe, B.

Lane of Horsell, L.

Selborne, E.

Lang of Monkton,L.

Selkirk of Douglas, L.

Lawson of Blaby, L.

Sharman, L.

Lewis of Newnham, L.

Shaw of Northstead, L.

Liverpool, E.

Sheppard of Didgemere, L.

Lofthouse of Pontefract, L.

Simon, V.

Luke, L.

Simon of Glaisdale, L.

McCarthy, L.

Slim, V.

McColl of Dulwich, L.

Stoddart of Swindon,L.

Macfarlane of Bearsden, L.

Strange, B.

McNally, L. [Teller]

Strathclyde, L.

Marlesford, L.

Swinfen, L.

Marsh, L.

Tanlaw, L.

Massey of Darwen, B.

Taylor of Warwick, L.

Mayhew of Twysden, L.

Tebbit, L.

Miller of Hendon, B.

Thomas of Gwydir, L.

Molyneaux of Killead, L.

Thomas of Swynnerton, L.

Monro of Langholm, L.

Tombs, L.

Montagu of Beaulieu, L.

Tomlinson, L.

Moore of Lower Marsh, L.

Trefgarne, L.

Moran, L.

Trumpington, B.

Morris of Manchester, L.

Vivian, L.

Mowbray and Stourton, L.

Waddington, L.

Moynihan, L.

Warnock, B.

Murray of Epping Forest, L.

Weinstock, L.

Murton of Lindisfarne, L.

Whitaker, B.

Naseby, L.

Whitty, L.

Newton of Braintree, L.

Wilcox, B.

Noakes, B.

Wright of Richmond, L.

Nolan, L.

Young, B.

Northbrook, L.

Young of Old Scone, B.

[*The Tellers for the Not-Contents reported 202 votes. The Clerks recorded 203 names.]
Resolved in the negative, and amendment disagreed to accordingly.
8.29 p.m.
Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.
Schedule [Hunting with Dogs: Prohibition]:
Lord Falconer of Thoroton Lord Falconer of Thoroton moved Amendment No. 4:
Leave out the Schedule.
The noble and learned Lord said: Amendment No. 4 removes the schedule that went with a ban on hunting. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton Lord Falconer of Thoroton moved Amendment No. 5:
Leave out the schedule and insert the following new schedule—
"SCHEDULE
HUNTING WITH DOGS: SUPERVISION
Supervised hunting and coursing
1 Hunting a wild mammal with a dog is "supervised" for the purposes of this Schedule if it is engaged in by—

(a) a hunt which is a member of or registered with a supervised body, or

(b) an individual who is a member of or registered with a supervised body.

2 (1) Hare coursing is "supervised" for the purposes of this Schedule if it is carried on as part of a hare coursing event arranged by—

(a) a supervised body, or,

(b) a body which is a member of or registered with a supervised body.

(2) This paragraph is without prejudice to the generality of paragraph 1.
3 (1) In paragraphs 1 and 2 "supervised body" means an organisation which is a member organisation of—

(a) ISAH Limited (a registered company incorporated on 30th December 1999 as a supervisory authority for hunting in the United Kingdom), or

(b) such other body as the Secretary of State may designate by order in place of ISAH Limited.

(2) An order under sub-paragraph (1 )(b) may be made only if—

(a) ISAH Limited ceases to exist, or

(b) the statement of objects in its memorandum is altered.

(3) An order under sub-paragraph (l)(b)—

(a)shall be made by statutory instrument,

(b) may make consequential amendments to this Schedule,

(c) may include transitional provision, and

(d) shall be subject to annulment pursuant to a resolution of either House of Parliament.

Restriction of statutory exceptions
4 (1) In so far as they relate to hunting a wild mammal with a dog or hare coursing the statutory exceptions listed in sub-paragraph (2) shall apply only in relation to—

(a) supervised hunting or coursing,

(b) hunting rodents,

(c) using a dog to retrieve a rabbit, hare, fox or mink which has been shot,

(d) using a dog to find a wild mammal which has escaped from captivity or confinement (and which was not permitted, for the purpose of being hunted, to escape),

(e) using a dog to find a wild mammal which has been released from captivity or confinement (and which was not released for the purpose of being hunted), and

(f) using a dog to find a wild mammal which has been injured.

(2) The statutory exceptions are—

(a) section l(3)(b) of the Protection of Animals Act 1911 (cruelty: exceptions: coursing or hunting), and

(b) section 2(b) of the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996 (unnecessary suffering: exceptions: mammal injured or taken in hunting or coursing).

ISAH Limited
5 The Secretary of State may make grants or loans to ISAH Limited out of money provided by Parliament.
6 If the Secretary of State receives a report from ISAH Limited about its activities he shall lay a copy before Parliament.
Interpretation
7 In this Schedule—

(a) a "hare coursing event" is a competition in which dogs are assessed as to speed or skill in hunting hares,

(b) "a hunt" means a body of persons (corporate or unincorporated) who combine wholly or partly for the purpose of hunting wild mammals with dogs,

(c) a reference to "hunting a wild mammal with a dog" includes, in particular, any case where—

(i) a person engages or participates in the pursuit of a wild mammal, and

(ii) one or more dogs are employed in that pursuit (whether or not by him and whether or not under his control or direction), and

(d) "wild mammal" includes, in particular—

(i) a wild mammal which has been bred or tamed for the purpose of being hunted or for any other purpose,

(ii) a wild mammal which is in captivity or confinement,

(iii) a wild mammal which has escaped or been released from captivity or confinement, and

(iv) any mammal which is living wild.".

The noble and learned Lord said: This amendment inserts the schedule that goes with self-regulation. We have debated that already. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Lord Geddes): I must advise the Committee that I cannot call Amendment No. 6 as Amendment No. 3 was disagreed to.
Remaining clauses agreed to.
House resumed.
The Deputy Speaker: My Lords, the Committee of the Whole House to whom the Hunting Bill was committed has gone through the same and has directed me to report it to your Lordships with amendment. In accordance with the decision of the House on 13th March, the Bill stands recommitted to a Committee of the Whole House.

Medway Council Bill [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons agreed to with amendments.
House adjourned at twenty-eight minutes before nine o'clock.

  Marriage and Relationship Advice and Support
  Marriage and Relationship Advice and Support
  Government Disputes: Alternative Dispute Resolution
  Government Disputes: Alternative Dispute Resolution
  Department for International Development: Annual Report
  Department for International Development: Annual Report
  Benefit Take-up and Fraud Reduction
  Benefit Take-up and Fraud Reduction
  Public Places Charter
  Public Places Charter
  Hepatitis C: Steering Group
  Hepatitis C: Steering Group
  Variant CJD
  Variant CJD
  Wythenshawe Hospital Heart Transplant Unit
  Wythenshawe Hospital Heart Transplant Unit
  Speech and Language Therapists and Teachers: Recruitment
  Speech and Language Therapists and Teachers: Recruitment
  Rheumatoid Arthritis: Anti-TNF Therapy
  Rheumatoid Arthritis: Anti-TNF Therapy
  Census Information: Confidentiality
  Census Information: Confidentiality
  Partnerships UK
  Partnerships UK
  Government Policies and Sustainability
  Government Policies and Sustainability
  Climate Change Convention, Kyoto Protocol: Ratification
  Climate Change Convention, Kyoto Protocol: Ratification
  Planning Application Inquiries: Appearance by Opposing Parties
  Planning Application Inquiries: Appearance by Opposing Parties
  Gypsies and Other Travellers: Accommodation in Central London
  Gypsies and Other Travellers: Accommodation in Central London
  Vehicle Identification Symbols
  Vehicle Identification Symbols
  RAF Little Rissington: Glider Movements
  RAF Little Rissington: Glider Movements
  Army Pay
  Army Pay
  Green Technology
  Green Technology
  Lamb, Pork and Bacon: Origin Labelling
  Lamb, Pork and Bacon: Origin Labelling
  Foot and Mouth Disease
  Foot and Mouth Disease
  Non-food Crop Uses
  Non-food Crop Uses