Sitting of 17 November 2003

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

  LONDON LOCAL AUTHORITIES BILL [Lords]
  Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Question [13 November],
  That the promoters of the London Local Authorities Bill [Lords] shall have leave to suspend proceedings thereon in order to proceed with it, if they think fit, in the next session of Parliament, provided that notice of their intention to do so is lodged in the Private Bill Office not later than the day before the close of the present session and that all fees due up to that date have been paid;
  That, if the Bill is brought from the Lords in the next session, a declaration signed by the agent shall be deposited in the Private Bill Office, stating that the Bill is the same in every respect as the Bill brought from the Lords in the present session,
  That the Clerk in the Private Bill Office shall lay upon the Table of the House a certificate, that such a declaration has been deposited;
  That in the next session the Bill shall be deemed to have passed through every stage through which is has passed in the present session, and shall be recorded in the Journal of the House as having passed those stages;
  That no further fees shall be charged to such stages.—[The Chairman of Ways and Means.]
  Hon. Members: Object.
  Debate to be resumed on Tuesday 2 December.

Oral Answers to Questions
  WORK AND PENSIONS
  The Secretary of State was asked—
  WORK AND PENSIONS

    Disability Discrimination Act
    Mr. Anthony D. Wright: If he will make a statement on the effect of changes to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. [138633]
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Maria Eagle): By ending the small employer exemption and extending the employment provisions to more occupations in October 2004, we will bring 1 million more employers and 7 million more jobs within the scope of the Disability Discrimination Act. From the same date, the new duties requiring service providers to tackle physical barriers to access will increase accessibility to services for the 8.6 million disabled people in this country. I hope that the changes,
    466
    which are designed to facilitate greater participation by disabled people in all walks of life, will be welcomed by hon. Members on both sides of the House.
    Mr. Wright: I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Although it is recognised that the Government have done more to help disabled people than any previous Government, it is quite clear that such people still come up against barriers. A recent Scope survey found that 45 per cent. of employers reported that they were worried that they could not afford to employ a disabled person and that nearly 20 per cent. would be reluctant to employ such a person because they had not worked with one before. Will she tell us how the changes to the Disability Discrimination Act will resolve those difficulties?
    Maria Eagle: Legislation sets a framework, and the issues that were highlighted by the Scope survey were more about raising awareness. Many small firms, and even larger firms, are not used to employing disabled people because such people have been excluded from the labour market. The firms make all kinds of assumptions about how difficult that would be, which are not borne out by the facts. May I suggest that small firms in my hon. Friend's constituency contact the Disability Rights Commission in the first instance, which can be done by accessing www.drc-gb.org? The website contains a wealth of advice on how firms can employ disabled people, so they will come to realise that it is not that difficult and that there often is no cost involved in employing them above that which is incurred when employing anyone.
    Sir Archy Kirkwood: Does the Minister agree that any changes to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 that might be a feature of the upcoming parliamentary Session would best be done using pre-legislative scrutiny? The Government have made it clear that they are willing to contemplate that, but is the Department yet able to say what form of pre-legislative scrutiny might take place on any disability discrimination Bill that might be introduced in the next Session?
    Maria Eagle: The hon. Gentleman is trying his best to get me to pre-empt the Queen's Speech, which of course I am far too junior to do. He is right to say that the Government set great store by pre-legislative scrutiny, and the consideration of such changes is especially suitable for such scrutiny. We shall consider that, but I cannot give him more information at present.
    Mr. Tim Boswell: After our previous exchanges, will the Minister accept that it is still important that if further advances are to be made, legislation must become a reality? It is not just a matter of consultation, desirable as that may be, because the Government must get on and grasp the nettle on some of the details. If the Minister is holding out for pre-legislative scrutiny, will she at least bear in mind the importance of bringing to bear some of the recent reports of the Disability Rights Commission on its

    467
    experience of the current legislation in action, to ensure that if we wait a long time for legislation, it will be worth having when we get it?
    Maria Eagle: May I tell the hon. Gentleman, who I faced across the Dispatch Box when he was a Front-Bench spokesman on the matter, that I welcome his support? I hope that the fact that he now sits on the Back Benches when discussing the issue does not imply that there have been any policy changes by his party. I hope that the Conservative Front-Bench spokesmen will support the changes that are being suggested, which are generally well known, especially those that will take place next October. I hope that we will hear an expression of support for the changes from them when they speak. The hon. Member for Daventry (Mr. Boswell) knows of my impatience to get on with this. Consultation is tremendously important when changes are visited on many organisations and small businesses but, at the end of the day, it is implementation that matters.
    Mr. Tom Clarke: Is my hon. Friend aware that the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 was a perfectly reasonable piece of legislation for its time, enhanced by this Government's actions, including the introduction of the Disability Rights Commission? Given the worries, which I think we both share, that some small businesses and others are being provoked into thinking that the implementation of the changes will be a huge challenge, will she join me in advising such people to contact the DRC, the Employers Forum on Disability and the national register of access so that they get not only good advice, but advice that does not cost them money unreasonably and does not worry them unnecessarily?
    Maria Eagle: My right hon. Friend is right to highlight the fact that much excellent free advice is available to all companies, whether they are employers or service providers, on what they need to do to meet their obligations under the changes. Many organisations will offer to charge them for advice, but they should primarily go for the free advice first. Much of the advice is common sense and it is not necessary to pay an enormous amount to get advice that is freely available from the DRC and organisations such as the Employers Forum on Disability, all of which are doing excellent work in that regard. I certainly echo my right hon. Friend's sentiments.
    Mr. Jonathan Djanogly: Many charities and small voluntary organisations will suffer from the legislation. They work from old buildings and need Government help, which they feel they are not receiving. The Minister just passed the buck. What will the Government do to help those organisations?
    Maria Eagle: I would not agree with the hon. Gentleman's choice of phrase when he says that those who need to meet their obligations to disabled people are suffering as a result. He should not forget that there are 8.5 million disabled people in this country, all of whom would like access to goods, services, facilities and
    468
    employment opportunities like anyone else. It is about time they had that right and it is not a matter of people suffering to provide it.
    The hon. Gentleman should also realise that the law requires reasonable adjustment. There is no question of small organisations or those with few resources being put out of business or put to ridiculous expense. The requirement is reasonableness. That is a matter of common sense and proportionality. Ensuring that people get access to services should be proportionate to the resources available to those who are providing them. If approached positively, the requirements will make a massive difference to the ability of disabled people, for too long excluded from opportunities in society, to participate in society. That must be good for the country as a whole.

    Identity Cards
    Mr. James Plaskitt: If he will make a statement on his assessment of the possible role of identity cards in combating benefit fraud. [138634]
    The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Andrew Smith): As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has made clear, the main case for ID cards is to counter terrorism, organised crime and illegal immigration, but it is common sense that they would also be a big help in combating benefit fraud involving false identity.
    Mr. Plaskitt: I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. We have made useful progress in combating benefit fraud, especially in respect of income support and the jobseeker's allowance, but with millions more national insurance numbers in circulation than there are citizens in the United Kingdom, is it not the case that the more technologically sophisticated proof of identity would help us to make even more progress?
    Mr. Smith: Indeed it would. We inherited an enormous problem with the number of national insurance numbers—some 71.5 million, well in excess of the adult population. If we subtract the actual adult population of 47 million, the deceased records of 15.5 million and the 7.2 million who have gone abroad, 1.8 million are left. As the House would rightly expect, we are working intensively, sampling the national insurance records to check their authenticity. That work should be completed by the end of the year. I expect to report further progress to the House early next year.
    Mr. Steve Webb: The 1997 Labour manifesto estimated the cost of housing benefit fraud alone at £2 billion, suggesting that the total cost of benefit fraud runs into many billions of pounds, yet the Department's evidence is that identity fraud accounts for a tiny fraction of that grand total. Indeed, the Home Secretary said last week in the House that social security fraud was not really what he was talking about when he said that he was cutting down on fraud. Will the Secretary of State confirm that when he says that the

    469
    measure will be "a big help", the marginal effect of ID cards on social security fraud will be acknowledged as peripheral to the debate on the cards?
    Mr. Smith: Yes, the main fraud that we encounter is not people making false claims of identity, but people making false claims regarding their circumstances. However, that does not mean that cracking down on such fraud will not result in substantial savings. Savings derived from checking multiple claims, verifying national insurance numbers, better recording of immigration and emigration, preventing people who are living together committing fraud, and checking documents add up to about £100 million. It speaks volumes of the way in which Liberal Democrats do their costings that £100 million is neither here nor there to them. That is money that could and should be going to schools and hospitals, not to fraud.
    Mr. Frank Field: As the Secretary of State has, rightly, welcomed ID cards as a potential means of providing a safe entrance into the social security system, may we take it that, when the proposal was discussed in Cabinet, he gave the Home Secretary 100 per cent. support for its introduction?
    Mr. Smith: As the House knows, we are united in our dedication to combat terrorism, crime and fraud of all kinds. I have strongly supported the good sense in an incremental approach, which demonstrates how an identity document with biometric data would work, initially with driving licences and passports. Once we have established that the technology works and is viable, the House will be able to make a decision on the question of compulsion in future. To my mind, that is a common-sense way to achieve a desirable goal.
    Mr. David Ruffley: On 13 February, the National Audit Office stated that the rate of reduction of fraud and error in jobseeker's allowance and income support had "slowed" this year. Can the Secretary of State explain that latest departmental failure?
    Mr. Smith: We remain on track to hit our targets to reduce fraud in income support and JSA. The Conservatives ought to note that when they were in government, they did not even have a target to tackle fraud, whereas since 1998, we have cut fraud in IS and JSA alone by more than a quarter. Of course there is more to do, but we will take no lectures from the Opposition on how to do it.
    Lawrie Quinn: Given the developing partnership with local government in the fight against benefit fraud, and the increasing mobility of the British population, what discussions has my right hon. Friend had with the Local Government Association and other local government bodies on how the anti-fraud initiative might help them in the front line of dealing with the problem?
    Mr. Smith: My hon. Friend makes an important point. We are working closely with local authorities. The total number of cases in which action is taken— including prosecution, and the imposition of
    470
    administrative sanctions and other penalties deployed in combating fraud —is more than double the number in 1997–98. A significant proportion of the increase is accounted for by extra cases and prosecutions brought by local authorities. As well as giving them extra resources, we are keeping in close touch with them on their progress, because the effort has to be a united one involving central Government, local government and all agencies working together to combat an illegal menace that deprives the budget areas that should have priority claim to resources that wrongly go to fraudsters. We have been cracking down jointly with local authorities, and we shall certainly continue to do so.

    Pension Credit
    Hywel Williams: What steps he has taken to promote the take-up of pension credit in Wales.[138635]
    Mr. Huw Edwards: If he will estimate the number of pensioners in Wales likely to qualify for the pension credit.[138639]
    The Minister for Pensions (Malcolm Wicks): I am pleased to be able to report that 111,000 pensioner households in Wales are already getting pension credit, of which 75,000 now get more than they would have under the minimum income guarantee. We estimate that about 250,000 pensioner households in Wales are eligible for the new credit.
    Hywel Williams: Given the level of pensioner poverty in Wales, many Welsh Members are promoting pension credit irrespective of our reservations. Our efforts would be far better directed if we had information on take-up by constituency. Is that information likely to become available?
    Malcolm Wicks: It is difficult to give accurate estimates by constituency. I think that on average, across the whole of Great Britain, we are talking about 5,000 or so people in each constituency, but obviously that is subject to quite significant variation. We will have more details by constituency as the take-up of pension credit proceeds. I welcome the hon. Gentleman's support for pension credit. Whatever our differences of opinion, there are people in our constituencies who need the extra money and we should all endeavour to make sure that they receive it.
    Mr. Edwards: May I inform my hon. Friend that about 250,000 pensioner households in Wales will greatly welcome the fact that the Government have recognised that they have modest savings, modest occupational pensions or modest earnings, and that they deserve extra help? The Government are giving them that help. Will my hon. Friend say how those with caring responsibilities will also gain from the extra help?
    Malcolm Wicks: This is good news for carers because of the pension credit package. One of the ways in which we can help people is through our local pension service, which often works closely with local Members. In Wales, during October alone, we visited more than 2,500 older people, and more than 3,000 have attended

    471
    outreach events run by the Pension Service. To bring the statistics down to earth, people gaining include a gentleman in Monmouth, my hon. Friend's constituency, who is aged over 80. He called into one of our local surgeries and requested a visit. He is entitled to about £45 a week on pension credit. That is an example of a policy that in practice is benefiting local people.
    Huw Irranca-Davies: The Minister will know that because the policy particularly affects the poorest pensioners in my constituency and in every constituency in the land, it is especially to be welcomed. Tribute has already been paid to the Pension Service. However, what measures are we using to reach those who are out of the network of information—for example, those who are contactable through social services within county council services? It is vital that those who do not currently use senior citizens' groups benefit equally from the important measure that the Government have introduced.
    Malcolm Wicks: Our first line of communication will be to write to every pensioner in Wales and throughout Great Britain about pension credit. They will all receive the application form, and where appropriate a form will be sent in the Welsh language. That is the service that we offer. In addition, through local advice surgeries, home visits and by working closely with social services, Age Concern and other services, we shall endeavour to inform everyone about their pension credit entitlement.

    Employment Trends
    Mr. John MacDougall: If he will make a statement on long-term trends in employment. 1138638]
    The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Andrew Smith): The labour market statistics continue to show employment growing and unemployment on a downward trend. As a result of our policies for economic stability and welfare to work the United Kingdom now has the highest employment and the lowest unemployment of the G7.
    Mr. MacDougall: I thank my right hon. Friend for his response and I congratulate the Government on their great success in reducing unemployment levels to their present levels. I hope that we can continue to improve our performance.
    May I bring to my right hon. Friend's attention areas of special need, such as Central Fife, where we had a strong influence in traditional industries and manufacturing industries, which have suffered badly. What special efforts are the Government making to tackle such areas? Can he give a reassurance to the House that we will not return to the days when, under the now Leader of the Opposition, we had the longest continuing increase in unemployment of any — [Interruption.]
    Mr. SpeakerOrder.
    Mr. Smith: I thank my hon. Friend for his remarks. I take this opportunity to congratulate him on the sterling work that I know he has done over a number of years in
    472
    regeneration and tackling unemployment in his constituency. He makes the important point that good though progress is, we need to do still more. It is especially important that we focus on pockets of particular disadvantage and remaining unemployment within each of our constituencies. I can assure my hon. Friend that through the incentive structure within Jobcentre Plus; the partnership work that we are encouraging with local business; and the work that we are doing, for example, through child care partnership managers to ensure that appropriate child care is available to help those who need it to move into jobs, and other area-based initiatives, we shall continue to drive forward. Our ambition is not just to have a better employment system, which is what we have, but to have full employment in every region and every community.
    Mr. Nigel Evans: Is the Minister not worried about all the manufacturing jobs that are being exported to eastern Europe and Asia? When Black & Decker announced that it was going to the Czech Republic, when Dyson announced that it was going to Malaysia and, more recently, when Wedgwood announced that jobs were going from Stoke-on-Trent to China, were alarm bells not ringing in his Department? What advice is he giving the hard-pressed people who are scouring department stores in this country for gifts that are made in Britain?
    Mr. Smith: It never ceases to stagger me that Opposition Members should run down British manufacturing industry and its enormous achievements. This Government have acted, for example, by introducing the research and development tax credit—there was no such encouragement under the Conservatives—and developing a skills strategy. It is only by being competitive in the high value-added areas of manufacturing industry that we will build on the considerable manufacturing success in this country. There have been successes in the aeronautical industry, for example, and success in my own constituency, where BMW is producing new Minis—a sales leader across the world—and taking on more workers. We should hear more from Opposition Members about the success of manufacturing industry instead of hearing them talk Britain down.
    Mr. David Clelland: Is my right hon. Friend aware that Lloyds TSB is proposing to close its call centre in Newcastle to exploit low-paid workers in India, with the potential loss of almost 1,000 jobs in my constituency, despite promises made when the centre opened two years ago that those would be long-term, sustainable jobs? What can he do to try to dissuade Lloyds TSB from that course of action, and what does he propose to do in light of the potential loss of tens of thousands of jobs in this country?
    Mr. Evans: It is the same question the other way round.
    Mr. Smith: I understand the concerns expressed by my hon. Friend on behalf of his constituents, and I can well imagine local anxieties. However, my answer is the same as the answer that I gave earlier. It is by investing in skills and competitiveness that we can best ensure jobs

    473
    for the future. I urge employers in my hon. Friend's constituency and elsewhere to keep the promises that they made to local workers and urge Members on both sides of the House to back a strategy of investing in skills so that more people can fill the 10,000 vacancies that are reported to Jobcentre Plus each and every day.
    Economic stability and success are generating jobs in all parts of this country, and unemployment has fallen most in the areas where it was highest. If people face job insecurity, that is worrying, and we must do everything that we can to support them, but it is by equipping people with skills for competitiveness and supporting our competitive industries that we will best ensure employment for the future.
    Mr. John Wilkinson: Is it not important to secure not just full employment, but productive employment? Over the past three years, the decline in manufacturing employment has been offset by a massive increase in public sector employment. East Germany, Poland and so on always had full employment in the days of the Warsaw pact and COMECON—the Council for Mutual Economic Co-operation—but they were never productive or satisfying places to live.
    Mr. Smith: It is an outrageous slur on our nurses, doctors, teachers and police officers—we are proud of the extra numbers employed in those front-line services—to suggest that they are not productive. They are productive, and not only has there been a welcome increase in public sector employment, but there are more jobs in the private sector.

    Employment Service (Selby Taskforce)
    Mr. John Grogan: If he will make a statement about the contribution of the Employment Service to the Selby taskforce. [138640]
    The Minister for Work (Mr. Desmond Browne): Jobcentre Plus is a key member of the Selby taskforce, making a positive contribution to its work to help the local community. Working closely with local organisations, Jobcentre Plus has provided advice, guidance, and training to help those made redundant to make the move back into work. I know that my hon. Friend has been working hard to support the efforts of the taskforce, and I am sure that his work, in conjunction with that of the taskforce, is appreciated by those people who have moved into work.
    Mr. Grogan: Will my hon. Friend congratulate Mrs. Alison Seabrooke who, incidentally, is married to a Selby man and who, perhaps more than anyone else, has helped co-ordinate the various agencies involved in the Selby taskforce, and helped to ensure that the current mine closure is handled differently from the mine closures that occurred in Yorkshire in the 1980s and 1990s? Does my hon. Friend share my hope that UK Coal and the National Union of Mineworkers will work hard to reach agreement on terms that will allow 260 Selby miners to transfer to nearby Kellingley colliery?
    Mr. Browne: I am more than happy to join my hon. Friend in congratulating Mrs. Seabrooke on her
    474
    contribution to the efforts of the taskforce. I will pass on to those working closely with Jobcentre Plus my hon. Friend's advice about the opportunities available to Selby miners, to ensure that the best is made of those opportunities.

    Pension Credit
    Rob Marris: What plans he has to maximise take-up of the pension credit. [138641]
    The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Andrew Smith): Pension credit is already making a real difference in the lives of pensioners. As I reported to the House last week, at the end of October there were 1.97 million pensioner households—around 2.3 million individuals—receiving pension credit, and 1.2 million households—around 1.4 million individuals—are now receiving more money than they did before, with an average award of –47.10 per week. Our advertising campaign is continuing and we are working with partner organisations, such as Help the Aged, Age Concern and the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux, to fulfil our aspiration that as many pensioners as possible should take up their entitlement.
    Rob Marris: I suggest to my right hon. Friend that take-up of pension credit is likely to be higher if there is confidence in the assessment and delivery process, and conversely, that if confidence fell, take-up would fall. The computer history of large organisations in the private sector and in the public sector, including the Department, is not always good. Can my right hon. Friend assure me that the telephony and the computer systems are robust enough for pension credit?
    Mr. Smith: Yes, indeed. We learned the lessons of previous experience in that area, and ensured that the project was not dependent on new IT, that the staff were thoroughly trained, and that the take-up was phased. On telephony, I can report that the average to date is 95 per cent. of calls being answered within 30 seconds, not by a metallic recording machine, but by a human being. Last week the pension credit application line answered 100 per cent. of calls within 30 seconds.
    Mr. David Willetts: Does the Secretary of State recall his Minister of State, the Minister for Pensions, saying:
    "No one of sound mind could advocate wholesale means-testing"?
    Does the Secretary of State believe that the pension credit, requiring 60 different pieces of information on one's financial circumstances, is not a means test, or does he think that means-testing more than half of the entire population of British pensioners is not wholesale means-testing, or are we driven reluctantly to conclude that the Minister of State thinks the Secretary of State is not of sound mind?
    Mr. Smith: As emerged from the pensions debate that the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues initiated a few weeks ago, the income assessment for pension credit is a million miles away from the old intrusive, demeaning means-testing that disfigured this country in the past. I

    475
    note that last week the hon. Gentleman was forecasting that it would take six to seven years to reach the 3 million figure. I will make a deal with him. If we are wrong and it takes that long to hit 3 million, I will apologise to the House. If and when we hit our target, as I am confident we will, he should be back in the House explaining why we are right and admitting that the Opposition were wrong.
    Mr. Willetts: Let me tell the Secretary of State that we do not do deals. The Government must do the deals. As a matter of arithmetic, at the current rate at which the pension credit is being taken up by new claimants, if he extrapolates that trend, when will he reach his target for the take-up of the pension credit?
    Mr. Smith: The hon. Gentleman knows that we must hit 3 million by 2006. I am confident that we are on course and look forward to his coming to the House and apologising when we hit our target.
    Mr. David Watts: Will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating St. Helens council on recently holding an advice street stall in the town centre at which hundreds of pensioners were helped with the pension credit? Will he encourage more councils to do the same?
    Mr. Smith: I join my hon. Friend in congratulating his local authority, working in partnership with the Pension Service. Such activities are taking place across the country, because partnership is at the heart of our drive to maximise take-up of the pension credit. It is a pity that the Conservative party does not join in that partnership to encourage the take-up of pension credit. Anyone listening to the hon. Member for Havant (Mr. Willetts) a few minutes ago would have thought that the Conservative party would abandon the pension credit.
    Sir Sydney Chapman: Further to the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Havant, when the Labour Government came to power, the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that one of the Government's central objectives was to get rid of means-testing for the elderly. Was the Chancellor of the Exchequer right or wrong, or have the Government done a massive U-turn?
    Mr. Smith: I have already pointed out that the pension credit is a million miles away from the old, degrading, intrusive weekly means test. We receive hundreds of messages through the local Pension Service to the effect that pensioners who have successfully applied for pension credit appreciate not only being better off, but the value of the sensitivity and the helpfulness with which the Pension Service has handled their applications. That is amplified not only by those working on the telephone lines, but by the important work of the local Pension Service, which visits people in their homes and helps them to claim their entitlement. Conservative Members should admit that that is not the old-style means test.

    New Deal (Young People)
    Siobhain McDonagh: If he will make a statement on the impact of the new deal for young people. [138642]
    The Minister for Work (Mr. Desmond Browne): The new deal has already helped nearly 450,000 young people into work, including 720 in my hon. Friend's constituency.
    Along with our other welfare-to-work policies, the new deal has helped reduce youth unemployment to around its lowest level since the mid 1970s and has virtually eradicated long-term youth unemployment. The new deal for young people has been a great success. To put that achievement in perspective, I remind hon. Members that between 1990 and 1992, when the current Leader of the Opposition was Secretary of State for Employment, youth unemployment rose by 60 per cent.; since 1997, it has been reduced by 40 per cent.
    Siobhain McDonagh: I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Given the scheme's great success in my constituency and others, will he tell the House what work has been done on what the impact might be if it were withdrawn?
    Mr. Browne: I know that my hon. Friend strongly supports the work done by Jobcentre Plus in her constituency. She will know from her experience how many individuals the new deal for young people has helped—it has helped 720 people in her constituency in six years. If she can contemplate 720 people becoming unemployed for 18 months or more in her constituency, it would be a decent measure of what abandoning the new deal for young people would do over the next six years.
    Mr. George Osborne: The new deal for young people cost taxpayers a third of a billion pounds last year, so we are entitled to ask whether it helps young people. The Employment Service survey found that three out of four new deal options reduce the chance of a young person moving away from the new deal itself or jobseeker's allowance. Is the Minister happy with that?
    Mr. Browne: May I first congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his promotion to the Front Bench? I look forward to working with him on the part of the brief for which he is responsible. When he has an opportunity to acquaint himself with more information about the new deal for young people, he will come across independent research by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, which found both that long-term youth unemployment would have been twice as high without the new deal and that a large number of young people left unemployment quicker than they would have done without it. That same institution has produced research showing that the economy as a whole is richer by £500 million a year as a result of the new deal for young people. It is more than justified by those factors alone.
    Mr. Ian Davidson: While I accept that many young people have indeed been helped by the scheme, many others seem to have disappeared from the

    477
    system: they neither appear on the records nor are they in work. Is the Minister, like me, worried that they are being deserted by the system?
    Mr. Browne: I hear what my hon. Friend has to say. I know from the interest that he takes in his constituents that he speaks with some degree of knowledge of the labour market in Glasgow. I can reassure him by saying that research shows that approximately the same number of young people go into work from that group as from other groups. Our Department consistently carries out research on the destinations of young people, both on leaving school and from the new deal. The evidence suggests that people leaving to unknown destinations are just as likely to enter jobs as those leaving to known destinations—about 57 per cent. do SO.

    Pension Service
    Tim Loughton: If he will make a statement on the effectiveness of the Pension Service. [138643]
    The Minister for Pensions (Malcolm Wicks): The Pension Service is the first ever service dedicated to the needs of elderly people. It operates through a network of 26 pension centres across the country, supported by a local service provided in accessible locations and delivered in partnership with local statutory and voluntary organisations. It has only been operating since April 2002, but we already know from customer and partner feedback that it is making a real difference.
    Tim Loughton: The Secretary of State just talked about pensioners who have made successful applications for pension credit as if that should qualify them for a special achievement award. Despite the local field workers in the Pension Service, most pensioners have to rely for advice on the hotline to the call centres, where it is recommended that they should allow at least 20 minutes for their call to be processed. Can the Minister name one other advice line that recommends a minimum of 20 minutes to deal with what should be a straightforward benefit to members of the public, elderly or otherwise?
    Malcolm Wicks: The hon. Gentleman's cynicism about this social policy is a cause for concern. I hope that he does not go around spreading that cynicism in his constituency, because much good work is going on there. People can now choose how to apply for pension credit—by filling in the application form, by ringing the
    freephone number, by visiting the advice surgery or by having a home visit. That is a great advance. In October alone, in the hon. Gentleman's constituency—I am sure he knows this—91 home visits were made, 173 people dropped into local surgeries, and there were 16 surgery appointments. [Interruption.] The hon. Gentleman, from a sedentary position, seems to say that he is not participating. If he wants to know about the good work on the pension credit in his own constituency, he should get out more.
    Mr. Nigel Waterson: When I visited the Pension Service in my constituency last Friday, I found
    478
    its dedicated staff working flat out to try to explain the pension credit to pensioners. Given the Minister's assumption that 1.4 million of the poorest pensioners will not get round to claiming it owing to its complexity and means-testing, why not simply boost the basic pension, which has 100 per cent. take-up, and restore the link with earnings?
    Malcolm Wicks: We know that since 1980, members of the Tory party have become born-again earnings linkers—a bit late, methinks. Let me tell the hon. Gentleman about the figure of 1.4 million: that is the number of individuals who have already gained from pension credit and are better off. The number will grow and grow. I welcome the hon. Gentleman's support for our local Pension Service, which comprises a dedicated group of people. However, they will be helped by enthusiasm from local Members of Parliament, not by Conservative Members stirring up apathy about a major social advance.
    If the extra money for pension credit were simply put into increasing the basic pension, some people in all our constituencies would be £30 a week worse off. We make no apologies for helping the poorest among the elderly population.

    Child Support Agency
    Tony Lloyd: If he will make a statement on the new scheme for dealing with Child Support Agency cases. [138645]
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Chris Pond): The new scheme was introduced for new cases and those connected to a new scheme case in March this year.
    Steady progress is being made, and I am pleased to be able to report that nearly 6,000 of the poorest families are already benefiting from the new child maintenance premium.
    My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will shortly place in the Library a second report on progress in implementing the new child support scheme.
    Tony Lloyd: I am sure that the 6,000 beneficiaries will be grateful for the new scheme and that my hon. Friend will confirm that the Government clearly perceive it to be a fairer system. Can my hon. Friend therefore understand the frustration of the many people on the old scheme who feel that they are locked into it, and sometimes pay not only more than they believe to be right but more than their former partners believe to be right? Can he provide a ray of hope to many people that the management system in the CSA will get to grips with the problem and that the new scheme will be rolled out for all those who need it?
    Mr. Pond: We understand why people are impatient to move to the new scheme, which is fairer, simpler and helps to ensure that hildren get the support that they need and deserve as effectively as possible. We are making good progress, with the CSA clearing thousands of cases each week, but we have always said that we will transfer existing cases to the new scheme when we are satisfied that it is working well. We shall not make the

    479
    mistakes of 1993, when the existing scheme was introduced too hurriedly and at considerable cost and heartache both to parents with care, and non-resident parents and to their children.
    Mr. Paul Goodman: The Under-Secretary will naturally want to be candid with hon. Members about the reasons for the delay in transferring the old cases to the new scheme. Will he confirm or deny the report in this week's Computer Weekly, which claims that up to 40 per cent. of the old records could contain defects, omissions and anomalies; that up to 14 million individual items may need validating, correcting or checking; and that the CSA has
    "no clear solution to its difficulties, no real idea when it will transfer the million cases … and has not told the whole truth to Parliament about its affairs"?
    What did the Under-Secretary know about that and when did he find out?
    Mr. Pond: Well, Mr. Speaker! May I welcome Conservative Members' new-found enthusiasm for this matter? A little more than two weeks ago, we had an opportunity to discuss it in practical terms in Committee. Only one Conservative Member, who stayed for one minute of the proceedings, turned up. Conservative Members were concerned with three letters—not "CSA" but "IDS".
    We are doing what we can to ensure that the new scheme operates effectively. It is working effectively—we are dealing with thousands of cases every week. We know that it is far fairer and simpler than the previous scheme, which the Conservative party was responsible for introducing. We shall ensure that we tackle the problems that we are experiencing with the IT system. The hon. Gentleman knows that those problems have been disappointing for the Government and all other hon. Members. However, we shall ensure that we deal with them. We are working with our partners, Electronic Data Systems—EDS—on that, and we are determined that children get the support that they deserve and need as quickly and effectively as possible.
    Dr. Ashok Kumar: I support the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Central (Tony Lloyd). I emphasise that many of my constituents have told me that the CSA has told those on the old system that it will take many years to get on to the new system. Will my hon. Friend consider that seriously and do what he can to speed up the process?
    Mr. Pond: I assure my hon. Friend and his constituents that we will transfer the existing cases as quickly as we can, because we understand the frustration and impatience both of non-resident parents and of parents with care about the need to move quickly—but we shall do so only when we are sure that the system is working effectively. We would be doing no favours to the House, and certainly not to the parents or children involved, if we tried to move forward before we were ready.

    Benefits Entitlement (Savings Income)
    Dr. Vincent Cable: If he will reduce the imputed return on savings in the calculation of benefits entitlement. [138646]
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Chris Pond): We have already done so in respect of pension credit, for which the tariff income on savings is half that for the minimum income guarantee, which it replaced. We have no plans to change the tariff income on other benefits, but we keep all income and capital rules under review.
    Dr. Cable: I accept the Minister's reply, in that the Government have indeed reduced the assumed rate of annual return from the ludicrous level of 20 per cent. However, does the Minister accept the criticisms of the pensions experts who came before the Treasury Committee last week, who said that the current assumed rate of 10 per cent. on savings over £6,000 was totally unrealistic, because no bank offers anything remotely like that, and was a significant disincentive to saving?
    Mr. Pond: Less than 5 per cent. of customers are assessed as having any tariff income at all, and we must bear in mind that the first tranche of savings is disregarded altogether. The tariff income rules allow people to continue to receive income-based benefit even if they have some savings, rather than their being disqualified outright. I think that the hon. Gentleman would agree that it would be wrong to disqualify people totally simply because they had some savings. The tariff income rules are a way of phasing out the entitlement to benefit, without pushing people over a cliff edge, but we keep all the rules under review, and will continue to do
    so.

    Unemployment (Nottingham, North)
    Mr. Graham Allen: When he next plans to visit Nottingham, North to meet jobcentre staff to discuss the number of local unemployed people. [138647]
    The Minister for Work (Mr. Desmond Browne): Unemployment in my hon. Friend's constituency has fallen by 31 per cent. since 1997. From March next year, Jobcentre Plus will be working with Nottingham city council to co-ordinate a number of local employment projects within the neighbourhood renewal employment strategy, to help even more people into jobs in the future. My hon. Friend will remember that last month my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State told him that he would be happy to visit his constituency, and he knows that he has only to invite him.
    Mr. Allen: My hon. Friend will realise that in 1997, unemployment was the No. 1 issue in my constituency, as in many others. Now it often barely rates a mention—and that is the greatest tribute to my right hon. and hon. Friends on the Front Bench, and the rest of the Government, for what they have done since 1997. However, some of the hardest cases still remain. Will my hon. Friend take some time to consider the possibility of the Employment Service and others connected with

    481
    employment doing more outreach work? In my constituency, individuals in places such as the Westwood and Broxstowe estates are doing incredibly good work on a one-to-one basis. Will my hon. Friend re-examine this matter and see whether the Employment Service and Jobcentre Plus can be pushed out to where the unemployed are, so that we can crack some of the harder remaining cases?
    Mr. Browne: I thank my hon. Friend for his recognition of the Government's achievements on employment. They have not been achieved alone, and a significant number of partners, including local Members of Parliament, have contributed to them. I am aware that last year my hon. Friend corresponded with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State about the other matter that he raised. Jobcentre Plus and the Pension Service are developing local partnerships across the country, exactly as my hon. Friend describes in his constituency, and I know that he will be pleased to hear that as part of the jobcentre roll-out, we will offer some of our services in local community surgeries, and from sites shared with local authorities. We are also planning worklessness pilots in some of the most disadvantaged areas throughout the United Kingdom.

    Pension Credit
    Annabelle Ewing: What recent assessment he has made of the take-up rate of pension credit in Scotland. [138648]
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Maria Eagle): Pension credit has got off to a good start in Scotland. Already, 155,000 pensioners in Scotland are better off than they were under the old system and, for the first time, people who have saved for their retirement are being rewarded. At the end of October, there were already 202,000 pensioner households in Scotland receiving pension credit.
    Annabelle Ewing: I thank the Minister for that answer. Obviously, however, much still needs to be done to ensure that all pensioners in Scotland receive their entitlement as soon as possible. In that regard, is the Minister concerned by reports that one of the partner organisations in the take-up campaign, Help the Aged, has proposed swingeing and disproportionate cuts to its services in Scotland, including the closure of the Edinburgh office of its free telephone advice service, SeniorLine? Surely that is likely to have a negative impact on take-up in Scotland.
    Maria Eagle: I am always concerned to hear about organisations that do good work, such as Age Concern, having that kind of difficulty. I hope, though, that the hon. Lady will be able to step into the breach and start to encourage pensioners in Perth to claim their entitlement. if she did so, far more people would claim. I hope that she will be able to do that, even though her party opposed the pension credit.
    John Robertson: I congratulate my hon. Friend and her Department on the work that they are doing. Will she assure me and the elderly people of Anniesland that, even when we reach
    482
    the June deadline for contacting people, we will not stop there, and that we will not be satisfied until every pensioner is getting what they are due?
    Maria Eagle: My hon. Friend is well known for the work that he does in this area, particularly on encouraging pensioners to take up their entitlement. I am sure that he will not stop doing so come next June. It is certainly our intention that everybody who is entitled to pension credit should take up that entitlement, and the Pension Service—particularly the local service—will continue its effort to ensure that as many people as possible, and preferably all those who are entitled, take up their entitlement.

    Hospital Patients (Benefit Payments)
    David Taylor: How many people in receipt of benefit have been in NHS hospitals for more than a year. [138649]
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mr. Chris Pond): The latest information is that there are, at any one time, between 20,000 and 25,000 people on benefit who have been in hospital for more than 52 weeks. In May this year, we extended the period before benefits are reduced as a result of a stay in hospital from six to 52 weeks.
    David Taylor: Almost 9,000 people with mental ill health in England and Wales have been in hospital for more than a year. Given that benefit cuts at that point can be demonstrated to be anti-therapeutic, and can therefore lengthen the stay in hospital, is it not right, in medical, moral and monetary terms, to push that 52 week limit even further, perhaps to something approaching two years? The cost would not be great, the Chancellor is listening, and this is the time of year to do it.
    Mr. Pond: I pay tribute to my hon. Friend, and also to Mind and the other mental health charities that have argued this case. My hon. Friend will recognise, however, that 97 per cent. of hospital in-patients leave hospital within six weeks, and so would not even have been affected by the pre-May 2003 rules. Our recent change means that even more people will see no reduction in their benefit while they are in hospital, but I think that my hon. Friend would agree that we have to draw the line somewhere, and that it is right in principle that social security benefits should not be paid in full indefinitely when someone is in an NHS hospital and therefore getting their day-to-day living expenses met. However, this is an issue that we shall keep under review.
    Miss Anne McIntosh: The hon. Gentleman referred to those who have been in hospital and are over a certain age, many of whom will be elderly and mentally infirm patients. What provisions has his Department made to ensure that checks on those eligible for pension credit have been made? Also, could his hon. Friend the Minister for Pensions possibly find the time

    483
    to respond to the question that I put to him a month ago? He said that he would reply if I wrote to him; I have written, but I am still waiting for a reply.
    Mr. Pond: I will ensure that the hon. Lady gets a reply, and I apologise if there has been a delay. We estimate that, at any one time, about 20,000 pensioners and 3,000 income support recipients aged under 60 are benefiting from the May 2003 change to which I referred. We want to ensure that those who are in hospital long term receive the benefits to which they are entitled. I will certainly give the hon. Lady my assurance that we will continue to do that.

    New Deal (Young People)
    Mr. Edward Leigh: Pursuant to the Government's response to the 62nd report of the Public Accounts Committee, Session 2001–02, on the new deal for young people, how the Government will track the progress of those who have left the new deal for young people and moved into employment. [138650]
    The Minister for Work (Mr. Desmond Browne): Consistent with the Department's response to the Public Accounts Committee report, we are working with the Inland Revenue to link our records with theirs where possible. That work will improve our understanding of what happens in the long term to people who leave our programmes, such as the new deal for young people. We
    484
    are also conducting separate work to identify immediate destinations of people on leaving the new deal for young people.
    Those are just part of our extensive programme of research evaluating our welfare-to-work programmes. That research both measures the success of our programmes and identifies areas for further improvement.
    Mr. Leigh: As the Minister has explained, the Employment Act 2002 gives his Department the chance to access all the Inland Revenue records of all those who have been on new deal so that we can check exactly what is happening to their employment. Is the Department doing that and trying to track all those who have been on the new deal, and what has it learned from that analysis about the sustainability of their employment and about their earnings? If it is not doing so, that will add credence to the charge made by the Minister's colleague the hon. Member for Glasgow, Pollok (Mr. Davidson), that many people are simply vanishing from the system.
    Mr. Browne: The hon. Gentleman makes an important point, and we are of course undertaking such checks. I repeat that we are working with the Inland Revenue to link our records with theirs where possible. We will report to the House once that work is concluded, or when we are in a position to draw conclusions from it.

Potato Ring Rot (Wales)
3.30 pm
Mr. Bill Wiggin: To ask the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales if he will make a statement on the outbreak of potato ring rot at Bwlch and what discussions he has had with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the National Assembly for Wales to prevent its spread to the rest of the United Kingdom.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. Don Touhig): First, I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his new post. He has served on the Welsh Affairs Committee and on the Welsh Grand Committee. He does not represent a Welsh seat, but his constituency is a part of the country that has been contested by our two nations for some time.
Ministers and officials at the Wales Office, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the National Assembly have been in discussions since we first became aware of the ring rot outbreak at Bwlch last Wednesday, 12 November. The infected potatoes were discovered during a routine annual inspection conducted by the plant health and seeds inspectorate on behalf of the National Assembly. We believe that the potatoes were grown from seed imported from the Netherlands in 2002 and planted in Wales earlier this year. The Assembly and DEFRA acted swiftly. The first priority was to contain the disease at Middlewood farm and assess the risk that it might spread.
Assembly officials visited the farm immediately they were notified of the outbreak to assess the situation. Equipment and machinery on the site were disinfected and sterilised, and the farmer, Mr. John Morgan, who is a seed potato farmer of international reputation, fully co-operated with the public health authorities. To our knowledge, this is the first outbreak of potato ring rot in the UK, and it is a credit to the systems that we have in place that the disease was identified during a routine check.
We are following very strict guidelines agreed in the European Union, and further tests are being conducted on the potatoes at Bwlch. Those tests will take some time to complete.
Mr. Wiggin: Can the Minister explain how this bacterial infection, which is one of the world's most damaging potato diseases, was able to get into Wales? How was the disease able to get past the checks in the Netherlands and in the UK just two years after the devastating foot and mouth crisis? Despite the Government's assurances following foot and mouth, they have failed to provide adequate checks and safeguards to protect the UK farming industry. Why is it that not every batch of imported stock is tested? Should not the Government already have put in place extra surveillance of meat and agricultural imports to prevent our domestic agriculture from being affected by foreign diseases? Will they tighten security for imports on a disease basis?
What about Mr. Morgan? He has complied with the Government, as the Minister said, and done everything he can to ensure that the outbreak remains in his potato
486
sheds. He has been let down by the security system. Can he expect some compensation for the loss of his business? He will be unable to grow potatoes again for at least four years. Like me, he is deeply concerned about the impact on tourism and the cost to the community. Can the Minister assure the House that Mr. Morgan is the victim, not the villain?
What extra resources are the Government putting in place towards plant security, or does the Minister think that enough is already being done? Is he aware that ring rot bacteria can survive for two years in dry conditions? However, is it right that, unbelievably, Mr. Morgan is allowed to sell his potatoes for consumption? It is only his resolve to protect the national industry, and the fact that he has to live with himself, that prevents him from using that route to recoup some of his losses. I hope that the Minister will consider that before ruling out helping this farmer.
What actions have been taken to prevent the disease from spreading? Is there an action plan? Does it take local knowledge into account? How much co-operation is required from potato farmers? How many potato farmers are there in Wales, and has the Minister estimated the size of losses to people throughout the United Kingdom if he fails to control the disease? Has he not learned the lesson of foot and mouth, for example? I hope he has sufficient stocks of everything he needs.
It is known that the infected farm may have supplied seed potatoes to other farms. What steps are being taken to ensure that the seeds are not sown, and that the bacteria are dealt with properly? What assessment have the Government made of the economic consequences of the outbreak for the potato sector? Have the Dutch authorities been contacted to establish where else in the UK seeds of the same origin have gone? Finally, will the Government confirm that they will do more to prevent the disease from reaching Britain?
Mr. Touhig: As far as we are aware, Mr. Morgan has acted perfectly properly throughout the whole business. As I have said, he is a farmer of international repute, and I have nothing but praise for his response to the problem that he discovered.
Our own response should be measured and determined. We were right to act immediately to isolate the bacterium, but—I am not suggesting that the hon. Gentleman did this—we must not imply that this problem is on the same scale as problems that have hit our farming industry before. Farming has gone through a pretty tough time. It is in all our interests to act responsibly, in order to protect the long-term interests of our farmers and rural communities.
No compensation schemes currently exist, although there may well be discussions between the farming unions and various Departments on whether compensation is possible. My colleague the Assembly Health Minister is due to make a statement tomorrow. We have been in touch with the Dutch authorities: indeed, my colleague at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Exeter (Mr. Bradshaw), raised the matter with a Dutch Minister at a meeting in Brussels this morning.
There have been some movements of potatoes from the farm in question, but they have been traced, and action has been taken to ensure that they are not taken

487
anywhere else. They are being examined and tested. As for the economic consequences of the outbreak, I am afraid that it is not possible to make a proper assessment at this stage; but there will clearly have to be one, especially in view of Mr. Morgan's specific difficulties. As for the implications for potato farmers throughout Wales, there are six seed potato growers in Wales, and many other farmers are involved in producing potatoes. All those factors will have to be taken into account when the Government decide on a longer-term response.
The hon. Gentleman asked about protecting our country from any import of the seeds. No imports from non-EU countries are allowed, and there is an arrangement for proper checks and inspections of those from EU countries. There is a problem with ring rot in a number of European countries: it has recently been discovered in Austria, Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany and France, as well as parts of north America. As far as we know, this is the first outbreak in this country, although the bacterium was discovered in the late 1800s. I think that our response has been appropriate, but it will take six to eight weeks for us to assess the damage caused to the crop.
Paul Flynn: I join others in welcoming the hon. Member for Leominster (Mr. Wiggin) to his position as Opposition spokesman on Wales. His appointment is in the Tory tradition of appointing alien governors-general for Wales. However, I regret his comparison with foot and mouth disease, which has also been made in the press. It is ludicrous to compare this disease, which can and probably will be contained, with a virulently infectious disease such as foot and mouth. The comparison is not only untrue and inaccurate but extremely damaging. Many people have suggested that there is already a reluctance to book holidays or arrange other tourism activities in the Brecon area, and there have even been some cancellations, because of exaggerated press reports. While we should of course take this matter seriously, should we not also ensure that our comments are restrained and measured?
Mr. Touhig: I agree with that final point. As I said in response to the hon. Member for Leominster, it is important that our response be proper, well thought out and careful. I fear that we are in danger of over-hyping this issue, although I do not think that anyone would want to diminish its importance and seriousness.
I saw press reports over the weekend suggesting that this is the arable form of foot and mouth. We do not accept that at all. My hon. Friend the Member for West Carmarthen and South Pembrokeshire (Mr. Ainger) spoke to me only today about discussions he had with the National Farmers Union in his area over the weekend. It too is concerned that, if our reaction to the disease gets out of hand, people will think it is a huge problem. That would have a huge detrimental effect on our farming industry and on the countryside. We do not want that to happen, so our response must be measured, proper and appropriate to the difficulty.
Sue Doughty: First, I apologise for the absence of my hon. Friend the Member for Montgomeryshire (Lembit Öpik), who normally deals with these issues.
488
The outbreak is a serious issue and it is important that we take it seriously, but I am concerned that we do not whip up the whole issue into a frenzy that will affect tourism in Wales and the farming industry not only in Wales but in other parts of Britain. I would like it confirmed that the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will not allow the media to whip up the issue into the same problem that we had over foot and mouth.
I seek an assurance that the consignment is fully traceable. What advice can the Minister give about the liability of the original supplier, and what assurance can he give that the burden will not fall on the importers or growers, who, as we have heard, have acted perfectly correctly? We have concerns about the suppliers. What responsibility does DEFRA have for the quality of the inspections by plant health inspectors? How is the number of tests arrived at? Tests led to the discovery of the outbreak. Would more tests have led to the discovery sooner?
Britain had the advantage of having disease-free status. What resources does DEFRA have, once we have contained and sorted out this problem, to regain that status, which is so important for our agricultural export industry? In many other European countries—France, Holland, Spain and Denmark—compensation arrangements are in place. What assessment will the Secretary of State make of parallel schemes that could be adopted for use in this situation? We now understand that at least three farms in west Cornwall and in the Isles of Scilly received consignments of potatoes from the original farm in Wales. Can the Minister tell us how many farms received those consignments?
Mr. Touhig: On the last point, my advice is that four consignments left the farm. The recipients have been contacted and movement restrictions have been put in place in respect of those seed potatoes. I can only refer the hon. Lady to the point that I made earlier on compensation. There is no scheme at present, but I have no doubt that the farming unions and Mr. Morgan in particular will want to make representations at some stage. Ministers will obviously have to take account of that.
It is important that we recognise that the system that we have in place is working and is appropriate—an annual routine inspection discovered the outbreak. It is important that we recognise that that annual inspection is operating throughout the European Union, and it has proved to be effective in this case. It is important, as the hon. Lady says, that we in no way harm our farming community more than it has been harmed in recent years, by giving the impression that this is of the scale of the problems that the industry has faced in most recent times.
It is important that we do a proper assessment, which will take some weeks, of the extent of the outbreak. It is right to state that it needs to be properly assessed. The bacteria can exist for perhaps four or five seasons, in sacking, in barns and so forth. That is why we need to disinfect and to sterilise the places where these particular potatoes were stored. We are taking appropriate

489
measures. Possibly my Cardiff colleague the Assembly Minister will have some further information when he makes his statement tomorrow.
Mr. Tam Dalyell: My hon. Friend will recognise that, without being selfish, those in the agricultural community in the Lothians, who send their considerable condolences to Welsh colleagues, are greatly concerned about the outbreak in Wales, because theirs is one of the major seed-producing areas of Europe. What does he think of the suggestion, of which I have given him notice, made by James Withers on behalf of the Scottish NFU that the Scots should use only Scottish seed for the moment, that high health regions should be introduced, and that imports of seed from Holland, Germany and Denmark should be at least considered and possibly forbidden? Does he agree with the Scottish NFU that the European Union ought to consider disease-free areas?
Mr. Touhig: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving me notice of that question earlier today. Of course, in Scotland, there already exists a voluntary ban on importing seeds from the Netherlands, although that is not because of any case of ring rot in Scotland. The EU has protected area status for some diseases, and it is up to individual member states to prove that they are disease-free. Such status does not exist for ring rot at this time. I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will be interested in my hon. Friend's remarks, and I will certainly ensure that his remarks are brought to her attention.
Mr. Robert Walter: I want to take issue with the Minister's last remarks, because restrictions in regard to ring rot are in place. If he looks at the DEFRA website, he will see that there are restrictions on potato imports from Germany. That site also says that ring rot is prevalent in Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Spain and the Netherlands, but we have had no restrictions on potatoes coming from the Netherlands since 1997. Given that Germany is next door to the Netherlands and we have restrictions on German imports, why have the Government not seen fit to place restrictions on imports from the Netherlands?
Mr. Touhig: I can only refer the hon. Gentleman to the points that I made earlier on how we have responded to this outbreak. I cannot, in fact, tell him that it would have been appropriate to place restrictions on imports from the Netherlands. It is for my colleagues at DEFRA to make a proper assessment. I have no doubt that they will take account of his remarks, and if appropriate action is needed, I am sure it will follow.
Kevin Brennan: May I tell my hon. Friend that, if any more compensation is to be handed out by the Government, there are greater priorities than this—for example, the Allied Steel and Wire workers? If more retrospective compensation is to be paid to the agricultural industry, which already receives massive public subsidy, does he agree that other priorities should be considered first?
Mr. Touhig: I am well aware that my hon. Friend and others campaign on behalf of the workers at Allied Steel and Wire, and I am sure that hon. Members of all parties have great sympathy with them, especially in light of the problems with their pensions. I can only tell my hon. Friend that no such compensation scheme exists at present. The Government are not suggesting that there should be such a scheme—I have simply indicated that I have no doubt that others will raise the issue in the coming weeks.
Mr. Elfyn Llwyd: The Minister said earlier that the annual inspection regime works. Well, self-evidently that is not the case, or there would not have been this outbreak. May I urge on him the need to look again at the imported material and to speak to members of the other Governments, because the problem is rife in Denmark, Finland, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands and Greece? Should there not be a general moratorium until such time as we are confident that inspection procedures are equally good on the other side of the English channel? I do not say that as an anti-European person—I am not a Eurosceptic—but it is high time we took on the problem and dealt with it urgently. With respect to what the Minister said about containing the problem in Bwlch, the Government have got that part right, and I congratulate them on that.
Mr. Touhig: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his final remarks. It is good to see that we are at one on this approach. I know of his keen interest in rural matters, given the constituency that he represents, and we do not want this to get out of hand in terms of the public being afraid to come into the countryside or its being suggested that this is a greater problem than it is. I can confirm that the disease is found in north America, Canada, parts of the former Soviet Union, Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Denmark, Greece, Spain and the Netherlands. To date, as far as I am aware, the Government have not considered banning the importation of seeds from those countries, but I have no doubt that, having read the Hansard report of today's urgent question, colleagues at DEFRA will consider the matter.
Mr. Douglas Hogg: The Minister has told us that the source of this problem is imported seed potato from the Netherlands. To his knowledge, what steps are the Dutch authorities taking to address the problem on that farm of origin? What steps are the British Government taking to ensure that no disease is lurking in UK farms that may also have received imports from the affected farm in the Netherlands?
Mr. Touhig: We have been in touch with the Dutch authorities on this matter to trace the supplier of this particular seed. My DEFRA colleague, my hon. Friend the Member for Exeter, raised the matter with his Dutch counterpart this morning, and ongoing discussions will take place on the matters that the right hon. and learned Gentleman raises, to determine whether other steps are needed and are appropriate. I cannot give the right hon. and learned Gentleman any more up-to-date information at present, but I am sure that this matter

491
will figure in DEFRA questions later this week, and that the Secretary of State and her Ministers will have more to say about it.
Mr. David Heath: I commend the Minister on the steps that have been taken to contain the present outbreak. Does he agree, however, that dealing effectively with potential epidemics of both animal and plant diseases require a robust and regularly reviewed contingency plan? Can he tell me when the contingency plan for potato diseases was last reviewed and whether he will place a copy in the Library?
Mr. Touhig: He's got me on that one, Mr. Speaker. I cannot tell the hon. Gentleman that, but I will certainly make inquiries, write to him and place a copy in the Library.
Mr. Nigel Evans: The potato crop is important not just for Wales but for the entire United Kingdom, with many millions of pounds' worth of potatoes being sold. We very much hope that the disease has been contained to this particular farm, but the Minister has mentioned a number of other countries in addition to Holland where this disease lurks. Indeed, I suspect that it is not only from Holland that we import potato seed. What extra action are the Government taking to ensure that any potato seeds coming from any other European Union countries, Russia, the Czech Republic, or other countries that he has mentioned, such as Canada, are not bringing the disease into the United Kingdom?
Mr. Touhig: I have no doubt that my colleagues at DEFRA have been reviewing the matter, and as I have said in answer to other questions, we will clearly be looking at imports of seeds from the countries where this disease is prevalent and where there have been recent outbreaks, in mainland Europe, north America and elsewhere. I have no doubt that at some stage that will lead to a review of whether we need to take action to prevent the importation of those seeds, and I am sure that the Government will then take the appropriate action.
Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: May I start by declaring my entry in the Register of Members' Interests as a potato grower? The DEFRA website on 29 April 2003 said:
492
"Potato ring rot is a highly contagious disease of potatoes, which is not present in the UK. If it were to be introduced, successful eradication would be very difficult, and losses would arise through lower yields, compliance with control measures, and reduced exports. Following interceptions of this disease on potatoes from Germany, the Potatoes Originating in Germany (Notification) (England) Order 2001 was introduced in October 2001, to enable the PHSI to monitor trade from this source and target inspections more effectively."
Can the Minister have urgent discussions with his colleagues at DEFRA to ensure that that order is now extended to Holland and to any other source countries where the disease is likely to be present? Can he also comment on the 2,500 inspections of potato seed each year? Are those adequate, and will he again have discussions with his colleagues on that? Finally, we should not overstate the danger of this disease: it poses no danger whatever to the public, they may continue to eat potatoes perfectly safely—and my potatoes grown in Norfolk are some of the best.
Mr. Touhig: I am glad that the hon. Gentleman declared an interest in the matter. I will ensure that the Hansard report of today's question is brought to the attention of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, because several issues have been raised to which it would be more appropriate for a Minister from her Department to respond.
The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. I shall ensure that the matter is brought to the attention of my colleagues, and we shall take whatever steps are appropriate in view of the difficulties that we face. It is important that we do not overstate the difficulty at the present time. Let us do the assessment and take the appropriate action because, as the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) said, it is important to note that the situation is isolated. We did the right thing at the beginning and we need to continue to do that.
Mr. Patrick McLoughlin: On a scale of one to 10, with 10 being very serious, how serious is the outbreak?
Mr. Touhig: To answer that question would perhaps lend weight to those who are trying to suggest that the problem is greater for our country than it is, and I would not wish to take that course. The matter is serious, and it is appropriate that we respond seriously. In view of the huge problems that this country's farming community has faced in recent years, I do not think that any hon. Member wants to do anything more to harm or cause grief to farmers and their families.

Point of Order
3.55 pm
Mr. Andrew Mackay: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am sure that it will not have escaped your attention that, as we speak, the Minister for Children is making a personal statement outside the House. You will recall from exchanges during business questions last week and on a previous point of order that many people in the House believe that the Minister should make a statement here, especially bearing it in mind that she traduced the whistleblower in the Islington child abuse case by suggesting that he was mentally unstable. Is there any way in which you can protect our interests and ensure that Ministers make statements inside the House from the Dispatch Box, and not outside to the media?
Mr. Speaker: I understand that the right hon. Lady is making a statement that has nothing to do with parliamentary proceedings. It is a matter outside the House about which she is making a statement.
Mr. Eric Forth: Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. If the Minister for Children is saying anything that has any bearing on her ministerial responsibilities, surely that would rightly be a matter for the House. Is that not something to which the House may wish to return tomorrow, when we might want an early opportunity to hold the Minister to account here for her ministerial responsibilities, however widely that might be construed?
Mr. Speaker: We have just been speaking about farming matters. The farmers in Scotland often say that the cares of tomorrow are for a day still to come. We will worry about tomorrow, tomorrow. [Interruption.] I was not giving the right hon. Gentleman any encouragement whatever—it was the opposite, actually.

Courts Bill [Lords] (Programme) (No.2)
Motion made,and Question put forthwity, pursuant to Orders [28 June 2001 and 29 October 2002],
That the following provisions shall apply to the Courts Bill [Lords] for the purpose of supplementing the Order of 9th June 2003—

Courts Bill [Lords] (Programme) (No.2)
  Consideration of Lords Message
  1. Proceedings on consideration of the Lords Message shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement at this day's sitting.

  Subsequent stages
  2.Any further Message from the Lords may be considered forthwith without any question put.
  3. Proceedings on any further Message from the Lords shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement.—[Margaret Moran.]
  The House divided: Ayes 303, Noes 123.

  Division No. 363]

  [3:57 pm

  AYES

  Abbott, Ms Diane

  Chapman, Ben (Wirral S)

  Ainsworth, Bob (Cov'try NE)

  Chaytor, David

  Alexander, Douglas

  Chidgey, David

  Allen, Graham

  Clapham, Michael

  Anderson, rh Donald (Swansea E)

  Clark, Mrs Helen (Peterborough)

  Anderson, Janet (Rossendale &

  Clark, Dr. Lynda (Edinburgh

  Darwen)

  Pentlands)

  Armstrong, rh Ms Hilary

  Clark, Paul (Gillingham)

  Atherton, Ms Candy

  Clarke, rh Tom (Coatbridge &

  Atkins, Charlotte

  Chryston)

  Austin, John

  Clarke, Tony (Northampton S)

  Bailey, Adrian

  Clwyd, Ann (Cynon V)

  Baird, Vera

  Coaker, Vernon

  Banks, Tony

  Coffey, Ms Ann

  Barnes, Harry

  Coleman, Iain

  Barron, rh Kevin

  Colman, Tony

  Bayley, Hugh

  Connarty, Michael

  Beard, Nigel

  Cook, Frank (Stockton N)

  Bell, Stuart

  Cook, rh Robin (Livingston)

  Bennett, Andrew

  Cooper, Yvette

  Benton, Joe (Bootle)

  Cousins, Jim

  Berry, Roger

  Crausby, David

  Betts, Clive

  Cruddas, Jon

  Blackman, Liz

  Cryer, John (Hornchurch)

  Blears, Ms Hazel

  Cummings, John

  Blizzard, Bob

  Cunningham, Jim (Coventry S)

  Borrow, David

  Cunningham, Tony (Workington)

  Bradley, rh Keith (Withington)

  Dalyell, Tam

  Bradley, Peter (The Wrekin)

  Davey, Edward (Kingston)

  Brake, Tom (Carshalton)

  Davey, Valerie (Bristol W)

  Breed, Colin

  David, Wayne

  Brennan, Kevin

  Davidson, Ian

  Brooke, Mrs Annette L.

  Davies, rh Denzil (Llanelli)

  Brown, Russell (Dumfries)

  Davies, Geraint (Croydon C)

  Browne, Desmond

  Davis, rh Terry (B'ham Hodge H)

  Bryant, Chris

  Dawson, Hilton

  Buck, Ms Karen

  Dean, Mrs Janet

  Burden, Richard

  Denham, rh John

  Burgon, Colin

  Dismore, Andrew

  Burstow, Paul

  Dobson, rh Frank

  Cable, Dr. Vincent

  Donohoe, Brian H.

  Cairns, David

  Doran, Frank

  Calton, Mrs Patsy

  Doughty, Sue

  Campbell, Alan (Tynemouth)

  Dowd, Jim (Lewisham W)

  Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge)

  Eagle, Angela (Wallasey)

  Campbell, rh Menzies (NE Fife)

  Eagle, Maria (L'pool Garston)

  Campbell, Ronnie (Blyth V)

  Edwards, Huw

  Caplin, Ivor

  Ennis, Jeff (Barnsley E)

  Casale, Roger

  Farrelly, Paul

  Cawsey, Ian (Brigg)

  Field, rh Frank (Birkenhead)

  Challen, Colin

  Fisher, Mark

  495

  Fitzpatrick, Jim

  Lewis, Ivan (Bury S)

  Fitzsimons, Mrs Lorna

  Liddell, rh Mrs Helen

  Flint, Caroline

  Lloyd, Tony (Manchester C)

  Flynn, Paul (Newport W)

  Love, Andrew

  Francis, Dr. Hywel

  McAvoy, Thomas

  Gapes, Mike (llfordS)

  McCabe, Stephen

  Gardiner, Barry

  McDonagh, Siobhain

  Gerrard, Neil

  MacDougall, John

  Gilroy, Linda

  McFall, John

  Griffiths, Jane (Reading E)

  McGuire, Mrs Anne

  Grogan, John

  McIsaac, Shona

  Hall, Mike (Weaver Vale)

  McKechin, Ann

  Hall, Patrick (Bedford)

  Mackinlay, Andrew

  Hamilton, David (Midlothian)

  McNulty, Tony

  Hanson, David

  Mactaggart, Fiona

  Havard, Dai (Merthyr Tydfil &

  McWilliam, John

  Rhymney)

  Mahmood, Khalid

  Healey, John

  Mahon, Mrs Alice

  Heath, David

  Mallaber, Judy

  Henderson, Doug (Newcastle N)

  Marris, Rob (Wolverh'ton SW)

  Henderson, Ivan (Harwich)

  Marsden, Gordon (Blackpool S)

  Hendrick, Mark

  Marshall, David (Glasgow

  Hepburn, Stephen

  Shettleston)

  Heppell, John

  Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)

  Hesford, Stephen

  Marshall-Andrews, Robert

  Hewitt, rh Ms Patricia

  Merron, Gillian

  Heyes, David

  Miliband, David

  Hill, Keith (Streatham)

  Miller, Andrew

  Hoey, Kate (Vauxhall)

  Mitchell, Austin (Gt Grimsby)

  Holmes, Paul

  Moffatt, Laura

  Hope, Phil (Corby)

  Mole, Chris

  Hopkins, Kelvin

  Moore, Michael

  Howarth, rh Alan (Newport E)

  Mountford, Kali

  Howarth, George (Knowsley N &

  Mudie, George

  Sefton E)

  Murphy, Denis (Wansbeck)

  Howells, Dr. Kim

  Murphy, Jim (Eastwood)

  Hughes, Beverley (Stretford &

  Murphy, rh Paul (Torfaen)

  Urmston)

  Naysmith, Dr. Doug

  Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N)

  Oaten, Mark (Winchester)

  Humble, Mrs Joan

  O'Brien, Mike (N Warks)

  Hurst, Alan (Braintree)

  Olner, Bill

  Hutton, rh John

  O'Neill, Martin

  Ingram, rh Adam

  Palmer, Dr. Nick

  Irranca-Davies, Huw

  Perham, Linda

  Jackson, Glenda (Hampstead &

  Picking, Anne

  Highgate)

  Pickthall, Colin

  Jackson, Helen (Hillsborough)

  Pike, Peter (Burnley)

  Jamieson, David

  Plaskitt, James

  Jenkins, Brian

  Pollard, Kerry

  Johnson, Alan (Hull W)

  Pond, Chris (Gravesham)

  Johnson, Miss Melanie (Welwyn

  Pound, Stephen

  Hatfield)

  Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lewisham

  Jones, Helen (Warrington N)

  E)

  Joyce, Eric (Falkirk W)

  Prentice, Gordon (Pendle)

  Kaufman, rh Gerald

  Prescott, rh John

  Keeble, Ms Sally

  Primarolo, rh Dawn

  Keen, Alan (Feltham)

  Prosser, Gwyn

  Kelly, Ruth (Bolton W)

  Pugh, Dr. John

  Kemp, Fraser

  Purchase, Ken

  Khabra, Piara S.

  Purnell, James

  Kidney, David

  Quin, rh Joyce

  Kilfoyle, Peter

  Quinn, Lawrie

  King, Andy (Rugby)

  Rammell, Bill

  King, Ms Oona (Bethnal Green &

  Rapson, Syd (Portsmouth N)

  Bow)

  Raynsford, rh Nick

  Kirkwood, Sir Archy

  Reid, rh Dr. John (Hamilton N &

  Knight, Jim (S Dorset)

  Bellshill)

  Kumar, Dr. Ashok

  Robertson, John (Glasgow

  Ladyman, Dr. Stephen

  Anniesland)

  Lammy, David

  Rooney, Terry

  Laws, David (Yeovil)

  Ruddock, Joan

  Laxton, Bob (Derby N)

  Russell, Bob (Colchester)

  Lazarowicz, Mark

  Russell, Ms Christine (City of

  Lepper, David

  Chester)

  Leslie, Christopher

  Ryan, Joan (Enfield N)

  Levitt, Tom (High Peak)

  Salter, Martin

  496

  Sanders, Adrian

  Truswell, Paul

  Sarwar, Mohammad

  Turner, Dennis (Wolverh'ton SE)

  Savidge, Malcolm

  Turner, Neil (Wigan)

  Sedgemore, Brian

  Twigg, Derek (Halton)

  Shaw, Jonathan

  Tynan, Bill (Hamilton S)

  Sheerman, Barry

  Vaz, Keith (Leicester E)

  Short, rh Clare

  Vis, Dr. Rudi

  Simon, Siôn (B'ham Erdington)

  Walley, Ms Joan

  Singh, Marsha

  Ward, Claire

  Skinner, Dennis

  Wareing, Robert N.

  Smith, Angela (Basildon)

  Watts, David

  Smith, Jacqui (Redditch)

  Webb, Steve (Northavon)

  Soley, Clive

  White, Brian

  Spellar, rh John

  Whitehead, Dr. Alan

  Squire, Rachel

  Wicks, Malcolm

  Starkey, Dr. Phyllis

  Williams, rh Alan (Swansea W)

  Steinberg, Gerry

  Williams, Betty (Conwy)

  Stewart, Ian (Eccles)

  Williams, Roger (Brecon)

  Stinchcombe, Paul

  Wills, Michael

  Stoate, Dr. Howard

  Winnick, David

  Stuart, Ms Gisela

  Winterton, Ms Rosie (Doncaster

  Stunell, Andrew

  C)

  Sutcliffe, Gerry

  Wood, Mike (Batley)

  Tami, Mark (Alyn)

  Woolas, Phil

  Taylor, rh Ann (Dewsbury)

  Worthington, Tony

  Taylor, Dari (Stockton S)

  Wray, James (Glasgow

  Taylor, David (NW Leics)

  Baillieston)

  Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

  Wright, Anthony D. (Gt

  Thomas, Gareth (Clwyd W)

  Yarmouth)

  Thomas, Gareth (Harrow W)

  Wright, David (Telford)

  Timms, Stephen

  Wright, Tony (Cannock)

  Tipping, Paddy

  Todd, Mark (S Derbyshire)

  Tellers for the Ayes:

  Touhig, Don (Islwyn)

  Mr. Nick Ainger and

  Trickett, Jon

  Margaret Moran

  NOES

  Ainsworth, Peter (E Surrey)

  Gillan, Mrs Cheryl

  Ancram, rh Michael

  Goodman, Paul

  Arbuthnot, rh James

  Gray, James (N Wilts)

  Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)

  Grayling, Chris

  Baron, John (Billericay)

  Green, Damian (Ashford)

  Bercow, John

  Greenway, John

  Beresford, Sir Paul

  Grieve, Dominic

  Blunt, Crispin

  Hammond, Philip

  Boswell, Tim

  Hawkins, Nick

  Bottomley, Peter (Worthing W)

  Heald, Oliver

  Brady, Graham

  Hendry, Charles

  Burns, Simon

  Hermon, Lady

  Butterfill, John

  Hoban, Mark (Fareham)

  Cameron, David

  Hogg, rh Douglas

  Chapman, Sir Sydney (Chipping

  Horam, John (Orpington)

  Barnet)

  Howard, rh Michael

  Clarke, rh Kenneth (Rushcliffe)

  Howarth, Gerald (Aldershot)

  Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey

  Jack, rh Michael

  Collins, Tim

  Jackson, Robert (Wantage)

  Conway, Derek

  Jenkin, Bernard

  Cormack, Sir Patrick

  Key, Robert (Salisbury)

  Curry, rh David

  Kirkbride, Miss Julie

  Davies, Quentin (Grantham &

  Knight, rh Greg (E Yorkshire)

  Stamford)

  Laing, Mrs Eleanor

  Davis, rh David (Haltemprice &

  Lait, Mrs Jacqui

  Howden)

  Lansley, Andrew

  Djanogly, Jonathan

  Leigh, Edward

  Duncan Smith, rh Iain

  Letwin, rh Oliver

  Evans, Nigel

  Liddell-Grainger, lan

  Ewing, Annabelle

  Lidington, David

  Fabricant, Michael

  Lilley, rh Peter

  Fallon, Michael

  Llwyd, Elfyn

  Field, Mark (Cities of London &

  Loughton, Tim

  Westminster)

  Luff, Peter (M-Worcs)

  Flight, Howard

  McIntosh, Miss Anne

  Forth, rh Eric

  Mackay, rh Andrew

  Fox, Dr. Liam

  Maclean, rh David

  Gale, Roger (N Thanet)

  McLoughlin, Patrick

  Gibb, Nick (Bognor Regis)

  Malins, Humfrey

  497

  Maples, John

  Spelman, Mrs Caroline

  Maude, rh Francis

  Spicer, Sir Michael

  Mawhinney, rh Sir Brian

  Spring, Richard

  May, Mrs Theresa

  Stanley, rh Sir John

  Mitchell, Andrew (Sutton

  Streeter, Gary

  Coldfield)

  Syms, Robert

  Moss, Malcolm

  Taylor, Ian (Esher)

  Murrison, Dr. Andrew

  Taylor, John (Solihull)

  O'Brien, Stephen (Eddisbury)

  Taylor, Sir Teddy

  Osborne, George (Tatton)

  Tredinnick, David

  Ottaway, Richard

  Turner, Andrew (Isle of Wight)

  Page, Richard

  Tyrie, Andrew

  Paice, James

  Walter, Robert

  Pickles, Eric

  Waterson, Nigel

  Prisk, Mark (Hertford)

  Watkinson, Angela

  Randall, John

  Whittingdale, John

  Robathan, Andrew

  Wiggin, Bill

  Robertson, Laurence (Tewk'b'ry)

  Wilkinson, John

  Roe, Mrs Marion

  Willetts, David

  Rosindell, Andrew

  Williams, Hywel (Caernarfon)

  Ruftley, David

  Wilshire, David

  Sayeed, Jonathan

  Yeo, Tim (S Suffolk)

  Selous, Andrew

  Young, rh Sir George

  Shephard, rh Mrs Gillian

  Shepherd, Richard

  Tellers for the Noes:

  Simmonds, Mark

  Hugh Robertson and

  Simpson, Keith (M-Norfolk)

  Gregory Barker

  Question accordingly agreed to.

Orders of the Day
  Courts Bill
  Lords message considered.
  Courts Bill

    After Schedule 5
    Lords amendment: No. 24A to Commons amendment No. 24.
    4.13 pm
    The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs (Mr. Christopher Leslie): I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
    Mr. Speaker: With this we may discuss Lords amendments Nos. 24B to 24D.
    Mr. Leslie: The Government tabled substantial amendments in Committee to the fine enforcement provisions. Those amendments were widely welcomed and demonstrated the Government's strong commitment to improving enforcement of fine across the country.
    The amendments from the other place make small changes to the new schedule that this place added in Committee in relation to the discharge of fines by unpaid work. Amendments Nos. 24A, B and C are drafting amendments and remove redundant references to "parts of" schedule 6, for which there is no need. I am grateful to their lordships for taking the opportunity to agree to that drafting improvement.
    The fourth amendment, No. 24D, subjects the regulations setting the hourly rate for converting a fine into unpaid work to affirmative resolution, rather than to the negative procedure provided for in the Bill as drafted. That reflects the Government's acceptance of the recommendation in paragraph 4 of the 26th report of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee. Hon. Members often prefer powers to be taken by positive resolution, as that allows for greater scrutiny, so I hope that the House will welcome the small but important change that the Government have agreed to.
    Mr. Nick Hawkins: As the Minister explained, the discharge of fines was debated in another place. We also had, as he will recall, quite a lot of discussion in Committee of fines and the scandal that many fines imposed by the courts are not collected. My hon. Friend the Member for Woking (Mr. Malins), who shares my shadow Home Office responsibilities and also serves as a recorder and district judge, has expressed concern to the House on many occasions about the large number of fines that are not collected from offenders. It is therefore a good thing that the Government are going to pay greater attention to fines.
    It will also be beneficial for the rate at which fines can be discharged by unpaid work if the affirmative rather than the negative procedure is adopted. As the Minister rightly said, Conservative Members have regularly called for such a procedure, not only for this Bill but for many other measures. My noble Friend Baroness Anelay of St. Johns had discussions about this matter

    499
    with Ministers in another place, and we have made it clear that we would strongly prefer the rates to be set by affirmative resolution. We were therefore delighted that the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee made the same recommendation, and we are pleased that the Government agree with us about that, in addition to other significant concessions that we discussed on Report and Third Reading and which the Government have made.
    I welcome not only the three drafting changes that the Minister mentioned but the substantial concession that the affirmative procedure will be adopted if changes are made in future. I do not doubt, as I said on Report and Third Reading, that the amendment is a further change that proves that Parliament has done its job in both Houses, and the Bill is a great deal better than it was when the Government originally introduced it.
    Mr. David Heath: It is always dangerous to say so, but I suspect that we may not use all the time allocated for debate on the amendments, as they are entirely welcome. That is particularly true of amendment No. 24D because, as the Minister pointed out, it provides for the use of affirmative resolution in the setting of rates, for which we, along with Conservative Members, argued in Committee and elsewhere. Such powers are an important part of secondary legislation. I still have concerns, as the Minister knows, about the level at which rates are set, but I will have an opportunity to debate that with him when the orders are laid, and I look forward to doing so at the earliest opportunity.
    The three drafting amendments suggest the perils of amendments not receiving proper scrutiny if they are introduced at a late stage in proceedings on a Bill. Clearly there must have been a word-processing problem that allowed references to "parts of" schedule 6 to remain, or there may have been an alternative schedule to the Bill or—who knows?—another Bill has been truncated and modified to fit the legislation. Either way, it would have been better, as I think the Minister accepts, if the change had been introduced earlier, so that it could have had the benefit of proper consideration in Committee. The proposals were effectively rubber-stamped in the House and in the other place, and there was no debate on the content of the amendment. Had it not been for sharp-eyed draftsmen in the Department, the error would not have been noticed in time to be corrected before the Bill completed its passage. Once we remove references to "parts of" schedule 6 and the redundant title of part 1, we will have a better Bill, and I certainly do not intend to oppose the amendments.
    Mr. Graham Allen: I know that the Minister is anxious to join up parts of Government in the criminal justice system. Will he bear in mind the probation service, young offenders teams and the community by ensuring that it is possible for the community to make suggestions for the unpaid work to be done by people who have committed offences? That applies not just to community service but to unpaid work as proposed in the new schedule, which may include tasks such as cleaning up verges in the countryside. From speaking to the probation service, I know that reasons are found—not least because of guidance issued by the
    500
    Government—not to have such work done by people who are on probation. It is often difficult to have such work done by people on young offenders teams who are under the relevant age.
    Mr. Heath: I do not want to prolong the debate, but the hon. Gentleman will recall that we debated these matters during proceedings on both the Criminal Justice Bill and the Courts Bill. He is on to an important point. If any form of community sentencing is to be seen as a viable alternative, it must be visible to the communities affected by the original offences. I entirely concur with the hon. Gentleman's views.
    Mr. Allen: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his support. Such visibility is important for the community. I am not proposing that unpaid work, whatever form it takes in the criminal justice system, should be only punitive because there is a need for rehabilitative work as well. In afflicted communities such as mine, which includes many outer-city estates, appropriate work, such as cleaning up graffiti or filth and litter, which sadly blight our communities, would be seen as relevant punishment, even if it is only part of the sentence or part of the unpaid work. I underline the need for a balance between the punitive and the rehabilitative. I hope that my hon. Friend will consider that with his colleagues in the Solicitor-General's office and the Home Office.
    Mr. Leslie: That short but perfectly formed debate covered a number of useful points. My hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen) urged the Government to bear in mind the need to join up all aspects of the criminal justice system and to reflect the needs of local communities and neighbourhoods in any voluntary activity undertaken as part of the unpaid work programme. Clearly, we must engage not just probation and young offenders teams but the voluntary organisations to which we will look to supervise some of the unpaid work in those petty session areas in which we intend to pilot the programme. We need visible justice, and such unpaid work must be useful to the neighbourhoods that are affected by crime.
    The hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Mr. Hawkins) rightly stressed that fine enforcement must be a continuing and constant priority. We agree that revenue collection is not the only issue. but it is critical for the justice system to prove that when the magistrates bench or any other court issues a fine as a punishment, it must be carried through. We will not tolerate default.
    I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's welcome for the affirmative procedure for setting the hourly rate for the unpaid discharge of fines. The affirmative procedure will also give opportunities to debate some of the issues raised by the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath), who asked about the rate, which we are still considering but which is likely to be no less than equivalent to the national minimum wage. I apologise for the drafting improvements that are now required but we are, at least, taking the opportunity to correct the Bill.
    There is no need to take up any more time. It is pleasing that there is consensus on these important matters at the final stage of the Bill.
    Lords amendment agreed to.
    Lords amendments Nos. 24B to 24D agreed to.

    Anti-social Behaviour Bill [Money] (No. 2)
    Queen's recommendation having been signified—
    4.25 pm
    The Minister for Crime Reduction, Policing, and Community Safety (Ms Hazel Blears): I beg to move,
    That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Anti-social Behaviour Bill ("the Act"), it is expedient to authorise the payment of money provided by Parliament of any expenses incurred by the Secretary of State in consequence of the Act.
    The motion relates to some welcome Lords amendments to the Bill that would create a new procedure for dealing with complaints about high hedges. The motion is necessary to plug a gap in the original money resolution relating to the Bill, which was agreed by the House on 8 April. The costs associated with the high hedges provisions were fully debated on 7 April, when the House considered and agreed the money resolution relating to the High Hedges (No. 2) Bill, which was introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Pound). We are delighted to have found a suitable vehicle to introduce those measures, which enjoy strong support across the House, but as the issues relating to the money resolution have been debated on a number of occasions, I shall not detain the House any further. I commend the motion to the House.
    4.26 pm
    Mr. Eric Forth: That is all very well, but it does not cover the potential consequences of the money resolution. Since we never see the details of money resolutions, the Minister is asking us to sign a blank cheque, which is what such resolutions always amount to, so it is worth pausing to explore the implications of where we are and where we might be going.
    One oddity of the procedure that has always puzzled me is that we are being asked to approve a motion stating
    "That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Anti-social Behaviour Bill"—
    let us note that it refers to any Act rather than to a specific one—
    "it is expedient to authorise the payment of money … of any expenses incurred by the Secretary of State".
    That is asking rather a lot of the House. At this stage in the proceedings, we, the supposed custodians of taxpayer's money, are being asked to say, "Yes, we will sign up to that form of words," relating to any Act and any expenses, and without any knowledge of what they may be.
    Although the Minister has highlighted a particular part of the Bill, which I will deal with in a moment, I have quickly perused the Lords amendments that we are about to consider. I make that point because one of our difficulties is that we do not really know—the Minister did not tell us—whether the money resolution purports to cover the assumed expenditure under the previous working of the Bill or whether the Government have attempted to take into account the financial implications of the Lords amendments, which have yet to be considered and agreed by the House. That puts us in a rather odd position. We do not know whether the
    502
    House will agree to the substantive and substantial Lords amendments that follow this motion on the Order Paper.
    Here is the position: we are being asked to sign up to a motion authorising the expenditure of unspecified moneys, and the Minister has told us in her charming way that it is all to do with high hedges, but I wonder whether that is the whole story. I have glanced through the Lords amendments, and I think I have picked up considerable implications for the courts, local authorities, the Secretary of State, the police, waste authorities and something called the appeal authority, which I may return to in a moment.
    The array of potential costs is substantial, and this question arises immediately: are we being asked to assume that all those different institutions will absorb into their existing financial structures the undoubted additional costs that the Lords amendments would impose if we approved them, or will the Secretary of State give more money to each of those institutions in order to offset the additional costs that may or may not be incurred if we agree to the amendments?
    We can already see that an awful lot of conditionality is involved here. Nothing is certain—nothing has been clearly laid before the House—so we are being asked collectively, as the custodians of taxpayers' money, to sign up to a whole series of conditional propositions to which we know none of the answers. I might even go so far as to say that it would have been better had we considered the money resolution after the Lords amendments, because we might have had a rather clearer idea of what we are supposed to be financing.
    Mr. Graham Allen: Did the right hon. Gentleman make any of those proposals when he was shadow Leader of the House?
    Mr. Forth: The hon. Gentleman perceptively puts his finger on the fact that now, as I glory in the freedom of the Back Benches, I am able more thoroughly to explore what is put before the House. When I was constrained by my responsibilities as shadow Leader of the House and by collective responsibility, I left that to others. If the hon. Gentleman did not do it, he should explain why not; but I do not have to explain myself. I invite the hon. Gentleman to participate in these proceedings as a good parliamentarian: he may seek to catch your eye, Madam Deputy Speaker, when I have completed my analysis, which has barely started. I look forward to his contribution. He is obviously very keen to participate in matters relating to money resolutions: I welcome that. Perhaps he and I can form an informal partnership—linking arms, as it were, across the
    Chamber to hold the Government to account on money resolutions and many other matters.
    As I was saying before the hon. Gentleman enabled me to make those remarks, let us look at one or two of the provisions that have the potential to affect the money resolution in ways as yet unspecified by the Minister. Amendment No. 1 to clause 13 suggests replacing the words "residing in" with
    "with a right (of whatever description) to reside in or occupy".
    To my mind, that immediately hints at a considerable broadening of the scope of the clause. That continues in

    503
    amendment No. 2, which refers to
    "a person with a right (of whatever description) to reside in or occupy other housing accommodation".
    Such a broadening of the provisions has a potential impact on court costs. It is self-evident that introducing the potential for more cases to be brought before the courts must have cost implications. The money resolution does not tell us whether the courts will be expected to bear those costs from within their own budgets or whether there are implications for the Secretary of State's budget. One way or another, of course, it all comes back to the taxpayer. Sadly, that is a given in this place—it is always the hapless taxpayer who picks up the bill. Our concern should be to dig underneath that to try to identify whether the additional tax burden falls on the taxpayer through the court budget, per se—which implies that another part of courts' activities will have to suffer—or through the Secretary of State's coming forward to give more money to the courts to recompense them for their additional responsibilities as a result of the amendment, were we to agree to it.
    I do not apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the degree of conditionality in my remarks. I think that it is legitimate for me to link the money resolution, which is before us without detail or specification, and the
    following business—our consideration of the Lords
    amendments—because the amendments have cost
    impacts—
    Madam Deputy Speaker (Sylvia Heal): Order. I am afraid that the right hon. Gentleman will be out of order if he goes into those: he must address his remarks to the money resolution.
    Mr. Forth: In that case, Madam Deputy Speaker, I remind hon. Members that the money resolution says that
    "for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Anti-social Behaviour Bill … it is expedient to authorise the payment of money provided by Parliament of any expenses incurred by the Secretary of State".
    I am trying to tease out the extent to which the Secretary of State will have to provide those expenses and the way in which he or she will be obliged to do so. I am unclear as to the exact link between the Secretary of State, who is specifically referred to in the money resolution, and the institutions that are inevitably drawn in by the Bill and the amendments. Local authority costs frequently occur. There is a direct implication of costs in references to guidance by the Secretary of State. One could argue that a Secretary of State can issue guidance cost free because the gigantic bureaucracy of any Department can produce and distribute guidance without additional cost. I query that because I have always believed that simply assuming that bureaucracy can costlessly provide an additional product, in this case guidance, implies either sleight of hand and even dishonesty or poor management. Nothing in life and certainly nothing in Government should be cost free. One should be able to account for everything, even something as apparently simple as issuing guidance. If that cannot happen in a money resolution, where can it occur?
    504
    Clause 61 has clear implications for police costs. Again, an additional responsibility has been placed on—
    Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. I remind the right hon. Gentleman that the original money resolution to the Bill was agreed after Second Reading on 8 April.
    Mr. Forth: I am aware of that, Madam Deputy Speaker, but may I invite you to follow my logic? Surely the Lords amendments that we are about to consider may materially affect the Bill. If you can tell me that if we agree the Lords amendments, the Government will have to introduce a further money resolution to take account of them, that part of my case will be satisfactorily laid to rest.
    Madam Deputy Speaker: In reply to the right hon. Gentleman's point, the money resolution relates only to the high hedges provisions, and nothing else in the amendments.
    Mr. Forth: That is an interesting ruling, which I accept, but it does not answer my other question. If a previous money resolution gave effect to the original Bill and if we subsequently agreed Lords amendments that would materially affect the contents, at what stage would the House of Commons be invited to agree a further money resolution to take account of the alterations?
    Madam Deputy Speaker: Perhaps I can clarify the position. The money resolution that we are currently debating relates merely to the provision for appeals to the Secretary of State against enforcement notices on high hedges.
    Mr. Forth: With respect, that does not answer my question, which I hope you will accept as legitimate, Madam Deputy Speaker. You have given an assurance that a prior money resolution related to the previous form of the Bill. You now tell us that the money resolution simply reflects the potential cost implications of the part of the measure that deals with high hedges, with which I shall deal in a moment. However, that leaves unanswered an interesting question. Were we later to agree to several Lords amendments, which, in my view have clear cost implications, would not that necessitate a further money resolution? That puzzles me, and I am happy to see that you are about to help me.
    Madam Deputy Speaker: Again, if it will assist the right hon. Gentleman, I make it clear that if what he outlines had been the case, further money resolutions would have been tabled to cover the point.
    Mr. Forth: The helpful implication is therefore that the Government want to argue that the Lords amendments have no money implications. I shall ask the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee to take full account of that. If it turns out that any additional burdens on the taxpayer arise from the Lords amendments, I hope that the Public Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office will want to examine that closely.

    505
    If, as appears to be the case, we are being told, by implication if not explicitly, that the Government have not seen fit to table a further supplementary money resolution to allow for the possible cost implications of the Lords amendments, I shall rest content with that for the moment. I simply flag up for the Minister the fact that she had better be very careful about the
    expenditures in her Department—and, perhaps, in other Departments and institutions—because we are apparently being reassured that there will be no cost implications for the courts, the police, the waste authorities or any of the others that I listed earlier. I am rather reassured by that, but frankly, I shall believe it when I see it.
    Mr. Michael Fallon: Are we not caught between the clarity of Madam Deputy Speaker's ruling and the ambiguity of money resolution No. 2, which simply refers to "any Act resulting from" the Bill? Surely it was incumbent on the Minister to have drafted her money resolution better, so as to express the interpretation that Madam Deputy Speaker has given to it—that it is limited to that articular part of the Bill?
    Mr. Forth: I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who is a distinguished member of the Treasury Committee—to whose attention I think I should also draw this matter. I am happy that he is in his place. He is right: the Minister cannot expect both to present vague drafting of that kind yet also to say, in her very brief introductory remarks, that it applies only to the additional costs resulting from the insertion, in this Bill at this stage, of an entirely new Bill, in the form of new clauses. We have to have one thing or the other. The Minister said that what she was asking us to approve related only to the high hedges provisions—and what I am now saying to the House, to the Treasury Committee and to the Public Accounts Committee is that we shall watch carefully to see whether that is the case.
    One of the values of this little debate is that we may have teased out a lacuna in our procedures. Even after several centuries of practice, perhaps we can still occasionally drop a ball here or there—who knows? In the context of what we have just found out, we may want to re-examine the relevance of money resolutions—but that debate is for another day.
    You have helpfully guided me in the direction of the high hedges provisions, Madam Deputy Speaker. Indeed, the Minister identified those as the sole reason for the money resolution before us. That is interesting because I, and one or two of my hon. Friends, took issue with those ideas when they were part of a private Member's Bill—a badly drafted one, we thought, and full of anomalies. Many questions were asked about it when it was laid before the House, and I am happy to say that it expired, partly because its promoter failed to answer any of the questions that he was asked at the time.
    Sadly, the Bill's subject matter has now re-emerged in the guise of an enormous series of amendments to a different Bill, and will therefore receive no further effective scrutiny in this House, because of the absurdity of the timetable that is about to be imposed on us.
    Mr. John Gummer: Has it occurred to my right hon. Friend that it is an outrage that a Bill
    506
    that was so unsatisfactory that the House did not bother to give it even the slightest of fair winds should now be reintroduced in a way that gives the House no chance whatever of discussing it? This is a constitutional disgrace, and the Government should be ashamed.
    Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. Whatever the right hon. Gentleman's feelings are, we are discussing the merits of the money resolution, not of the Bill.
    Mr. Forth: I am grateful to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and although I completely agree with my right hon. Friend, I am unable to say so, because you have denied me that opportunity—but if I am lucky, my words might just get into Hansard.
    Mr. Gummer: On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I hope that Mr. Speaker is aware of precisely what this means: we cannot talk about the subject under the money resolution, and we shall not be able to talk about it under the rules that the Government are imposing. It remains—although I am sure that my right
    hon. Friend will not wish to comment on this—a parliamentary disgrace.
    Mr. Forth: Let us look, so far as we are allowed to, at the implications of the insertion in the Bill of an entire controversial, complicated Bill involving enormous bureaucracy at local authority level and potential infringements of property and—dare I say it?—civil rights. All those things have many money implications. It has been argued that a large number of people are concerned about what have loosely come to be known as high hedges. However, if bureaucracy has to be provided in local government as a result of the money resolution, we do not know with any clarity whether the mechanism will allow local authorities to ask for additional funding from the Secretary of State to recompense them for the additional costs. We do not know any of the details at all.
    We know that the Government have a regrettably long record of imposing additional responsibilities on local authorities and not giving them the funding to reflect that. We could find ourselves in the ridiculous position where a highly controversial measure is introduced by this back-door method and a huge bureaucracy has to be developed in local authorities to give effect to it, without the compensating finance being given to local authorities.
    Mr. Fallon: My hon. Friend is, perhaps, suggesting some addition to the local government settlement in respect of the bureaucracy and appeals arising from the Bill. Would not those shires or districts with lower hedges have to subsidise those with higher hedges?
    Mr. Forth: Of course, that is one of the possible implications—but we do not know. My hon. Friend and I, and the House, are left guessing about that. Sadly and typically, the Minister did not do us the courtesy of giving us any details at all. She thought that she could get away with a charming smile at the Dispatch Box and a few words of introduction, in the hope that this would all float through. The days of money resolutions floating through are over, as of now. There will now be some

    507
    attempt to scrutinise them—I give my modest personal guarantee on that. I should be grateful if the Minister could pass that on to her colleagues.
    I see that the hon. Member for Nottingham, North (Mr. Allen) is gasping to get into the debate and add his little contribution—it is true to say that he would be thought a lesser parliamentarian if he were not. However, let me not digress, because I am very focused on this part of the Bill and I want to tease out as much of the detail as possible.
    The Minister mentioned that the money resolution was supposed or intended to provide additional funding for the appeals mechanism. Indeed, you helpfully mentioned that, Madam Deputy Speaker, having singled it out on the advice of your experts. I wonder, however, whether it goes further than that. Are we supposed to assume that the other provisions contained in this enormous additional Bill which is being sneaked into the Bill at this late stage, without any potential for real amendment or scrutiny, are cost free? I never thought that, when I was here on Fridays participating in the scrutiny of what was then a private Member's Bill. The promoter of that Bill, my good Friend the hon. Member for Solihull (Mr. Taylor), is with us because of his long-standing, passionate interest in this matter. He is smiling because he knows that the Government will do his work for him. I congratulate him on that. He has got what he wanted and argued passionately for at the time. He and I managed to be on different sides of this hedge and not fall out, which I value greatly.
    My hon. Friend will agree that this is not a satisfactory way for us to examine the cost implications of this large addition to the Bill, even if it were assumed that it could be related only to the appeals mechanism, to which you referred some little time ago, Madam Deputy Speaker. The truth is that these complex provisions, which occupy pages, must surely involve additional costs to local authorities throughout the land. Even though some provisions are supposedly for the recovery of those costs, I do not think that anyone in the House would be prepared to believe that there would ever be a full recovery of all the costs involved in a measure such as this to the satisfaction of the taxpayer. After all, should not this stage of the proceedings begin and end with the taxpayer? We are in the House on behalf of the taxpayer, and it is on their behalf that we should be considering the matter and speaking this afternoon.
    I am very unhappy about how this has been brought about. I have a request to the Government and to the Minister in this particular case: I would wish that when we have money resolutions brought before us, the wording were much more precise so that the House is given an opportunity properly to weigh the validity of the request being made. The words we have before us are effectively a blank cheque. Although the Minister said that the matter involves simply the amendments on high hedges, you, Madam Deputy Speaker, helpfully referred more specifically to the appeals mechanism. We are considering either the whole provision or part of it, but we are not sure about that.
    Angela Watkinson: The proposed new clause 45 refers to a fee, which a complainant under this new legislation must submit to the "relevant authority". Does my right hon. Friend anticipate that the size of the fee will have to be calculated to cover the costs of a local authority in dealing with a complaint from one of its residents?
    Mr. Forth: I am grateful to my hon. Friend, because that is exactly the point. What we do not know, because the Minister has not told us, is whether the Secretary of State will give local authorities a sum sufficient to cover all the costs of the additional bureaucracy, the initial applications, the complaints mechanism, the appeals mechanism and the enforcement mechanism—all those are in this Bill within a Bill. Alternatively, will an estimate, or an attempt to estimate, be made as to recovering some of those costs by way of fees, or indeed land charges, which are also referred to in the Bill? We simply do not know.
    We are thus in the absurd position of having a money resolution before us that seeks at a very late stage to give effect to a large addition to the Bill of which we know no details at all, although they will be of crucial interest to us as council tax payers and as taxpayers at large. We have no idea what the relationship will be between the Secretary of State and local authorities and no idea what the relative impact is likely to be on rural authorities on the one hand and urban authorities on the other.
    My hon. Friend the Member for Solihull, who represents a suburban seat, was the last Member but one to attempt to take such a Bill through the House. The hon. Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Pound) made the subsequent attempt. I know that a lot of my hon. Friends who represent rural seats were concerned about the implications of such provisions for rural areas. They might well be, because even supposing that the implications are to be restricted to the appeals mechanism—s you so helpfully told us a few moments ago, Madam Deputy Speaker—we still do not know what the relative impact is likely to be on hard-pressed authorities, be they urban, suburban, or indeed rural. That is a range of random thoughts that I had on glancing at the proposals.
    Mr. John Taylor: I am extremely grateful to my right hon. Friend for giving way. He is making his point with great force and he referred to me with considerable chivalry. It is true that we were on opposite sides of the argument but have remained honourable friends—in his case, right honourable. I invite him to share my view and analysis that the problem is primarily suburban. Although he is making his very powerful—
    Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. There have been points at which I have made it clear that the resolution under discussion is a money resolution relating to that part of the Bill that relates to appeals rather than anything else.
    Mr. Taylor: Thank you so much for your guidance, Madam Deputy Speaker. On that very point, I put it to my right hon. Friend that inasmuch as there may be a cost to local authorities, there could be a saving in the law courts.
    Mr. Forth: That is a typically incisive comment from my hon. Friend, who is not only effectively the author of the series of amendments that relates directly to the money resolution, but a distinguished lawyer—a lawyer who has practised in a community with exactly these problems. So in this case I defer to him and accept what he is saying, which the Minister would not dream of telling us, probably because she does not know about these things and is not going to help us at all. There may be an offset in the cost between, for example, fees and court costs or police and other costs.
    Mr. Fallon: My right hon. Friend should be a little wary of a lawyer telling us that something is good news. He may well mean that there may be a reduction in private expenditure by those pursuing their cases through the courts, with a consequent increase in public expenditure through extra levies raised on council tax payers or taxpayers generally.
    Mr. Forth: I hope that the Treasury and Public Accounts Committees will be watching such matters like a hawk, lest either you, Madam Deputy Speaker, or even—who knows?—the Minister has been misinformed.
    In this short debate, we have managed to pin down one fact very precisely on the taxpayer's behalf: the fact that the only additional costs arising from the motion relate to the appeals part of the Bill that is being smuggled into the overall Bill.
    Mr. Taylor: My hon. Friend the Member for Sevenoaks (Mr. Fallon) rightly said that the measure might save many people a lot of money in their own pockets, but public expenditure is involved in running the law courts. That is the point that I was making earlier.
    Mr. Forth: Of course. Law courts, local authorities and waste authorities all have the potential to become involved, but that, it appears, is a matter for another day.
    For every citizen who is agitated about the height of a hedge, there is a proud owner on the other side of the hedge. Those who imagine that this is a vote-winner ought to think a little more carefully. My point is that, ultimately, all these people are taxpayers. I am not going to stand on one side of the hedge or the other; we ourselves are all taxpayers, and we are supposed to be representing taxpayers here. I am not sure that we have been given the best opportunity to do so today.
    4.56 pm
    Mr. Michael Fallon: I apologise for missing the beginning of the debate and am sorry that I did not hear the Minister offer some explanation for the motion.
    When I heard your ruling, Madam Deputy Speaker, I felt rather troubled. As my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) pointed out, the motion neither refers to the appeals mechanism—although you informed us that it did—nor confines itself to the new part A of the Bill that will constitute the high hedges legislation.
    510
    You kindly informed us, Madam Deputy Speaker, that this expenditure would be dedicated to the appeals mechanism. I always wonder at the wisdom of the Chair, but in this instance I am bound to wonder how you acquired information that has not been laid before the rest of us. Surely if the motion is to apply only to a specific section—the appeals mechanism—of a specific and discrete part of the Bill, there is no reason why it should not say so. You therefore need not have been troubled, Madam Deputy Speaker, to explain the motion that the Minister has been championing.
    Mr. Forth: Before my hon. Friend continues with his analysis, let me worry him a little more. As he will know, Lords amendment No. 45(1)(b) refers to
    "such fee (if any) as the authority may determine".
    Subsection (7), however, states that the
    "fee determined … must not exceed the amount prescribed in regulations made … by the Secretary of State".
    First the amendment implies that the local authority can set the fee; then, almost immediately, it says that the Secretary of State can place limits on that fee. Does that not have cost implications for the authority, let alone the appeals mechanism?
    Mr. Fallon: It certainly does. It is a shame that the Financial Secretary is not here to move her own motion and explain it properly. I well recall that, under past Governments, the Treasury Minister who had tabled a motion appeared and did her, or his, best to explain it. That would have been helpful in this case—not least because, as my right hon. Friend has said, it is obvious from the tabling of the motion, and the clarification offered from the Chair, that someone somewhere has made an estimate. Somebody, somewhere has realised that quite considerable additional expenditure could be involved, and someone at the heart of Government has already started to wrestle with the much more interesting question of which group of taxpayers should fund it. Should it be the generality of taxpayers, which is why the measure is being brought before us? Should it be council tax payers, who are of course being cross-subsidised in any case by the grant from central Government, or should it be only a section of council tax payers, which was the import of my earlier intervention, with those shires with only a small number of high hedges, or those shire districts with smaller numbers of high hedges, being called upon to cross-subsidise to deal with all the fees, appeals, rulings and bureaucracy involved in high hedges in urban areas?
    We are told that we all have to help fight crime and deal with antisocial behaviour, but I am not sure that all my constituents in Sevenoaks realise that the measure may involve some cross-subsidising of the high hedges of Solihull. There might be no objection to that. The council tax payers or the national taxpayers of Solihull might be quite happy to chip in to the fees and expenditure incurred in dealing with high hedges in
    Sevenoaks—and we do have some high hedges in
    Sevenoaks—but if this is to be a new line of public expenditure and a new element of council taxation, Ministers must be a little more forthcoming about the scale of the expenditure involved and exactly how they see it falling vis-à-vis council tax payers and taxpayers generally. We are owed a little more explanation.
    5.1 pm
    Ms Blears: I am delighted that the right hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Mr. Forth) now has, in his own words, the glory of the freedom of the Back Benches and is able to range across these issues. Perhaps I can put his mind at rest—I hope so.
    I listened carefully to the right hon. Gentleman's arguments. There are two main issues, the first of which is whether the original money resolution covered the costs arising from the Bill and the amendments to it, including amendments tabled in the Lords. The original money resolution covered all the provisions of the original Bill, amendments made in the Commons and amendments on those subjects in the Lords—it covered any Act arising out of the original areas of the Bill. This resolution is necessary because the provisions on high hedges were added in the Lords; the Commons was not in a position, at that point, to approve expenditure on high hedges.
    Mr. Forth: I am grateful to the Minister for coming back to us, with her usual graciousness and courtesy, with her explanation, but can she tell me what the difference is in substance between what is being added to the Bill by way of the High Hedges (No. 2) Bill, which was smuggled in, and the substantive additional elements that have been added by their lordships? There may be differences in scale and scope, but what is the difference in substance? How can an open-ended money resolution that we passed previously cover some but not all? Can she make the distinction?
    Ms Blears: Yes. I thought I had done so in my earlier remarks, but the right hon. Gentleman clearly did not quite understand it, so I will repeat it. The difference is that the original money resolution applied to all the areas that were under consideration in the original Bill. It therefore included amendments to the Bill in the Commons and amendments in the Lords on any of those matters falling outside the original subject areas. The proposals on high hedges did not form part of the subject matter of the original Bill, so we need to plug the gap in the money resolution.
    512
    The proposals on high hedges are new, whereas the subject matter of the Lords amendments—raves, travellers, parenting orders and housing injunctions—formed substantive parts of the original Bill and were therefore covered by the original money resolution. The proposals were not smuggled in but were welcomed by many people and enjoyed cross-party support in the House, so I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will accept, in the spirit of the debates on the Bill, that there is good logic and intellectual coherence in our introducing a new resolution.
    Mr. Fallon: I am very grateful to the Minister for explaining that. I fully understand why the first resolution should necessarily be general, but I do not understand why the second resolution is not more specific. Why does it not specifically refer either to the appeals mechanism or to the part of the Bill that has been introduced?
    Ms Blears: I was about to deal with the second issue that has been raised: the extent of the money resolution and, indeed, how the appeals mechanism fits with other provisions on administering the system for high hedges. Hon. Members will know that we intend to consult local government on how the administration of the system should proceed, what the appropriate fees should be, and whether the fees should be calculated on a full cost recovery basis or whether any additional expenditure is needed to deal with the appeals process. It is right to consider those matters with local government during the consultation on the regulations, which will determine the procedure for dealing with these important and welcome measures. On that basis, I commend the money resolution to the House.
    Question put and agreed to.
    Resolved,
    That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Anti-social Behaviour Bill ("the Act"), it is expedient to authorise the payment of money provided by Parliament of any expenses incurred by the Secretary of State in consequence of the Act.

    Anti-social Behaviour Bill (Programme) (No. 3)
    Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Orders [28 June 2001 and 29 October 2002],
    That the following provisions shall apply to the Anti-social Behaviour Bill for the purpose of supplementing the Orders of 8th April 2003 and 24th June 2003:

    Anti-social Behaviour Bill (Programme) (No. 3)

      Consideration of Lords Amendments
      1. Proceedings on consideration of Lords Amendments shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion three hours after their commencement at this day's sitting.
      2. Those proceedings shall be taken in the order shown in the first column of the following Table, and each part of those proceedings shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at the time shown in the second column.

      TABLE

      Lords Amendments

      Time for conclusion of proceedings

      Nos. 1 to 22

      An hour and a quarter after the commencement of proceedings on consideration of Lords Amendments.

      Nos. 23 to 41

      Two and a quarter hours after the commencement of those proceedings.

      Nos. 42 to 74

      Three hours after the commencement of those proceedings.

      Subsequent stages
      3. Any further Message from the Lords may be considered forthwith without any Question put.
      4. The proceedings on any further Message from the Lords shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour after their commencement.—[Gillian Merron.]
      The House divided: Ayes 310, Noes 161.

      Division No. 364]

      [5.06 pm

      AYES

      Adams, Irene (Paisley N)

      Brown, rh Nicholas (Newcastle E

      Ainger, Nick

      Wallsend)

      Ainsworth, Bob (Cov'try NE)

      Brown, Russell (Dumfries)

      Alexander, Douglas

      Browne, Desmond

      Allen, Graham

      Bryant, Chris

      Anderson, rh Donald (Swansea E)

      Buck, Ms Karen

      Anderson, Janet (Rossendale &

      Burden, Richard

      Darwen)

      Burgon, Colin

      Armstrong, rh Ms Hilary

      Cairns David

      Atherton, Ms Candy

      Campbell, Alan (Tynemouth)

      Atkins, Charlotte

      Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge)

      Austin John

      Campbell, Ronnie (Blyth V)

      Bailey, Adrian

      Caplin, lvor

      Banks, Tony

      Casale, Roger

      Barnes, Harry

      Cawsey, lan (Brigg)

      Barron, rh Kevin

      Challen, Colin

      Bayley, Hugh

      Chapman, Ben (Wirral S)

      Beard Nigel

      Chaytor, David

      Clapham, Michael

      Bell, Stuart

      Clark, Mrs Helen (Peterborough)

      Bennett, Andrew

      Clark Dr. Lynda (Edinburgh

      Benton. Joe (Bootle)

      Pentlands)

      Berry, Roger

      clark Paul (Gillingham)

      Best, Harold

      Clarke, rh Tom (Coatbridge &

      Betts, Clive

      Chryston)

      Blackman, Liz

      Clarke Tony (Northampton S)

      Blears, Ms Hazel

      Clelland, David

      Blizzard, Bob

      Clwyd, Ann (Cynon V)

      Blunkett, rh David

      Coffey, Ms Ann

      Boateng, rh Paul

      Coleman, Iain

      Borrow, David

      Colman, Tony

      Bradley, rh Keith (Withington)

      Connarty, Michael

      Bradley, Peter (The Wrekin)

      Cook, Frank (Stockton N)

      Brennan, Kevin

      Cook, rh Robin (Livingston)

      514

      Cooper, Yvette

      Jackson, Helen (Hillsborough)

      Cousins, Jim

      Jamieson, David

      Crausby, David

      Jenkins, Brian

      Cruddas, Jon

      Johnson, Alan (Hull W)

      Cryer, John (Hornchurch)

      Johnson, Miss Melanie (Welwyn

      Cummings, John

      Hatfield)

      Cunningham, Jim (Coventry S)

      Jones, Helen (Warrington N)

      Cunningham, Tony (Workington)

      Jones, Lynne (Selly Oak)

      Dalyell, Tarn

      Joyce, Eric (Falkirk W)

      Davey, Valerie (Bristol W)

      Kaufman, rh Gerald

      David, Wayne

      Keen, Alan (Feltham)

      Davidson, lan

      Keen, Ann (Brentford)

      Davies, rh Denzil (Llanelli)

      Kelly, Ruth (Bolton W)

      Davies, Geraint (Croydon C)

      Khabra, Piara S.

      Davis, rh Terry (B'ham Hodge H)

      Kidney, David

      Dawson, Hilton

      Kilfoyle, Peter

      Dean, Mrs Janet

      King, Andy (Rugby)

      Denham, rh John

      King, Ms Oona (Bethnal Green &

      Dismore, Andrew

      Bow)

      Dobson, rh Frank

      Knight, Jim (S Dorset)

      Donohoe, Brian H.

      Kumar, Dr. Ashok

      Doran, Frank

      Ladyman, Dr. Stephen

      Dowd, Jim (Lewisham W)

      Laxton, Bob (Derby N)

      Eagle, Angela (Wallasey)

      Lazarowicz, Mark

      Eagle, Maria (L'pool Garston)

      Lepper, David

      Edwards, Huw

      Leslie, Christopher

      Efford, Clive

      Levitt, Tom (High Peak)

      Ellman, Mrs Louise

      Lewis, Ivan (Bury S)

      Ennis, Jeff (Barnsley E)

      Liddell, rh Mrs Helen

      Farrelly, Paul

      Linton, Martin

      Field, rh Frank (Birkenhead)

      Lloyd, Tony (Manchester C)

      Fisher, Mark

      Love, Andrew

      Fitzpatrick, Jim

      Luke, Iain (Dundee E)

      Fitzsimons, Mrs Lorna

      McAvoy, Thomas

      Flynn, Paul (Newport W)

      McCabe, Stephen

      Follett, Barbara

      McDonagh, Siobhain

      Francis, Dr. Hywel

      MacDonald, Calum

      Gapes, Mike (llford S)

      McDonnell, John

      Gardiner, Barry

      MacDougall, John

      Gerrard, Neil

      McFall, John

      Gilroy, Linda

      McGuire, Mrs Anne

      Godsiff, Roger

      McIsaac, Shona

      Goggins, Paul

      McKechin, Ann

      Griffiths, Jane (Reading E)

      McKenna, Rosemary

      Grogan, John

      Mackinlay, Andrew

      Hall, Mike (Weaver Vale)

      McNulty, Tony

      Hall, Patrick (Bedford)

      Mactaggart, Fiona

      Hamilton, David (Midlothian)

      McWilliam, John

      Hamilton, Fabian (Leeds NE)

      Mahmood, Khalid

      Hanson, David

      Mahon, Mrs Alice

      Havard, Dai (Merthyr Tydfil &

      Mallaber, Judy

      Rhymney)

      Mandelson, rh Peter

      Healey, John

      Mann, John (Bassetlaw)

      Henderson, Doug (Newcastle N)

      Marris, Rob (Wolverh'ton SW)

      Henderson, Ivan (Harwich)

      Marsden, Gordon (Blackpool S)

      Hepburn, Stephen

      Marshall, David (Glasgow

      Heppell, John

      Shettleston)

      Hermon, Lady

      Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)

      Hesford, Stephen

      Marshall-Andrews, Robert

      Hewitt, rh Ms Patricia

      Martlew, Eric

      Heyes, David

      Merron, Gillian

      Hill, Keith (Streatham)

      Milburn, rh Alan

      Hoey, Kate (Vauxhall)

      Miliband, David

      Hope, Phil (Corby)

      Miller, Andrew

      Hopkins, Kelvin

      Mitchell, Austin (Gt Grimsby)

      Howarth, rh Alan (Newport E)

      Moffatt, Laura

      Howells, Dr. Kim

      Mole, Chris

      Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N)

      Moran, Margaret

      Humble, Mrs Joan

      Morley, Elliot

      Hurst, Alan (Braintree)

      Mountford, Kali

      Hutton, rh John

      Mudie, George

      Illsley, Eric

      Murphy, Denis (Wansbeck)

      Ingram, rh Adam

      Murphy, Jim (Eastwood)

      Irranca-Davies, Huw

      Murphy, rh Paul (Torfaen)

      Jackson, Glenda (Hampstead &

      Naysmith, Dr. Doug

      Highgate)

      O'Brien, Mike (N Warks)

      515

      Olner, Bill

      Spellar, rh John

      Organ, Diana

      Squire, Rachel

      Osborne, Sandra (Ayr)

      Starkey, Dr. Phyllis

      Palmer, Dr. Nick

      Steinberg, Gerry

      Pearson, lan

      Stevenson, George

      Perham, Linda

      Stewart, Ian (Eccles)

      Picking, Anne

      Stinchcombe, Paul

      Pickthall, Colin

      Stoate, Dr. Howard

      Pike, Peter (Burnley)

      Stringer, Graham

      Plaskitt, James

      Stuart, Ms Gisela

      Pollard, Kerry

      Sutcliffe, Gerry

      Pond, Chris (Gravesham)

      Tami, Mark (Alyn)

      Pope, Greg (Hyndburn)

      Taylor, rh Ann (Dewsbury)

      Pound, Stephen

      Taylor, Dari (Stockton S)

      Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lewisham

      Taylor, David (NW Leics)

      E)

      Thomas, Gareth (Clwyd W)

      Prentice, Gordon (Pendle)

      Thomas, Gareth (Harrow W)

      Prescott, rh John

      Timms, Stephen

      Primarolo, rh Dawn

      Tipping, Paddy

      Prosser, Gwyn

      Todd, Mark (S Derbyshire)

      Purchase, Ken

      Touhig, Don (Islwyn)

      Purnell, James

      Trickett, Jon

      Quin, rh Joyce

      Truswell, Paul

      Quinn, Lawrie

      Turner, Dennis (Wolverh'ton SE)

      Rammell, Bill

      Turner, Neil (Wigan)

      Rapson, Syd (Portsmouth N)

      Twigg, Derek (Halton)

      Raynsford, rh Nick

      Tynan, Bill (Hamilton S)

      Reid, rh Dr. John (Hamilton N &

      Vaz, Keith (Leicester E)

      Bellshill)

      Vis, Dr. Rudi

      Robertson, John (Glasgow

      Walley, Ms Joan

      Anniesland)

      Ward, Claire

      Rooney, Terry

      Wareing, Robert N.

      Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)

      Watson, Tom (W Bromwich E)

      Roy, Frank (Motherwell)

      Watts, David

      Ruddock, Joan

      White, Brian

      Russell, Ms Christine (City of

      Whitehead, Dr. Alan

      Chester)

      Wicks, Malcolm

      Ryan, Joan (Enfield N)

      Williams, rh Alan (Swansea W)

      Salter, Martin

      Williams, Betty (Conwy)

      Sarwar, Mohammad

      Wills, Michael

      Savidge, Malcolm

      Winnick, David

      Sawford, Phil

      Winterton, Ms Rosie (Doncaster

      Sedgemore, Brian

      C)

      Shaw, Jonathan

      Wood, Mike (Batley)

      Sheerman, Barry

      Woolas, Phil

      Sheridan, Jim

      Worthington, Tony

      Short, rh Clare

      Wray, James (Glasgow

      Simon, Siôn (B'ham Erdington)

      Baillieston)

      Singh, Marsha

      Wright, Anthony D. (Gt

      Skinner, Dennis

      Yarmouth)

      Smith, Angela (Basildon)

      Wright, David (Telford)

      Smith, rh Chris (lslington S &

      Wright, Tony (Cannock)

      Finsbury)

      Smith, Jacqui (Redditch)

      Tellers for the Ayes:

      Smith, John (Glamorgan)

      Vernon Coaker and

      Soley, Clive

      Mr. Fraser Kemp

      NOES

      Ainsworth, Peter (E Surrey)

      Breed, Colin

      Amess, David

      Brooke, Mrs Annette L.

      Ancram, rh Michael

      Burns, Simon

      Arbuthnot, rh James

      Burstow, Paul

      Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)

      Burt, Alistair

      Bacon, Richard

      Butterfill, John

      Barker, Gregory

      Cable, Dr. Vincent

      Baron, John (Billericay)

      Calton, Mrs Patsy

      Bercow, John

      Cameron, David

      Beresford, Sir Paul

      Campbell, rh Menzies (NE Fife)

      Blunt, Crispin

      Chapman, Sir Sydney (Chipping

      Boswell, Tim

      Barnet)

      Bottomley, Peter (Worthing W)

      Chidgey, David

      Brady, Graham

      Chope, Christopher

      Brake, Tom (Carshalton)

      Clappison, James

      516

      Clarke, rh Kenneth (Rushcliffe)

      Maclean, rh David

      Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey

      McLoughlin, Patrick

      Collins, Tim

      Malins, Humfrey

      Conway, Derek

      Maples, John

      Cormack, Sir Patrick

      Marsden, Paul (Shrewsbury &

      Curry, rh David

      Atcham)

      Davey, Edward (Kingston)

      Maude, rh Francis

      Davies, Quentin (Grantham &

      Mawhinney, rh Sir Brian

      Stamford)

      May, Mrs Theresa

      Davis, rh David (Haltemprice &

      Mercer, Patrick

      Howden)

      Mitchell, Andrew (Sutton

      Djanogly, Jonathan

      Coldfield)

      Doughty, Sue

      Moore, Michael

      Duncan Smith, rh Iain

      Moss, Malcolm

      Evans, Nigel

      Murrison, Dr. Andrew

      Ewing, Annabelle

      Norman, Archie

      Fabricant, Michael

      Oaten, Mark (Winchester)

      Fallon, Michael

      O'Brien, Stephen (Eddisbury)

      Field, Mark (Cities of London &

      Osborne, George (Tatton)

      Westminster)

      Ottaway, Richard

      Flight, Howard

      Page, Richard

      Flook, Adrian

      Paice, James

      Forth, rh Eric

      Pickles, Eric

      Foster, Don (Bath)

      Prisk, Mark (Hertford)

      Fox, Dr. Liam

      Pugh, Dr. John

      Francois, Mark

      Redwood, rh John

      Gale, Roger (N Thanet)

      Rendel, David

      Gibb, Nick (Bognor Regis)

      Robathan, Andrew

      Gidley, Sandra

      Robertson, Angus (Moray)

      Gillan, Mrs Cheryl

      Robertson, Laurence (Tewk'b'ry)

      Goodman, Paul

      Roe, Mrs Marion

      Gray, James (N Wilts)

      Rosindell, Andrew

      Grayling, Chris

      Ruffley, David

      Green, Damian (Ashford)

      Russell, Bob (Colchester)

      Greenway, John

      Sanders, Adrian

      Grieve, Dominic

      Sayeed, Jonathan

      Gummer, rh John

      Selous, Andrew

      Hague, rh William

      Shephard, rh Mrs Gillian

      Hammond, Philip

      Shepherd, Richard

      Hawkins, Nick

      Simmonds, Mark

      Hayes, John (S Holland)

      Simpson, Keith (M-Norfolk)

      Heald, Oliver

      Spelman, Mrs Caroline

      Heath, David

      Spicer, Sir Michael

      Heathcoat-Amory, rh David

      Spring, Richard

      Hendry, Charles

      Stanley, rh Sir John

      Hoban, Mark (Fareham)

      Streeter, Gary

      Hogg, rh Douglas

      Stunell, Andrew

      Holmes, Paul

      Syms, Robert

      Horam, John (Orpington)

      Taylor, Ian (Esher)

      Howard, rh Michael

      Taylor, John (Solihull)

      Howarth, Gerald (Aldershot)

      Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

      Jack, rh Michael

      Taylor, Sir Teddy

      Jackson, Robert (Wantage)

      Tredinnick, David

      Jenkin, Bernard

      Turner, Andrew (Isle of Wight)

      Kennedy, rh Charles (Ross Skye &

      Tyrie, Andrew

      Inverness)

      Walter, Robert

      Key, Robert (Salisbury)

      Waterson, Nigel

      Kirkbride, Miss Julie

      Watkinson, Angela

      Kirkwood, Sir Archy

      Webb, Steve (Northavon)

      Knight, rh Greg (E Yorkshire)

      Whittingdale, John

      Laing, Mrs Eleanor

      Widdecombe, rh Miss Ann

      Lait, Mrs Jacqui

      Wiggin, Bill

      Laws, David (Yeovil)

      Wilkinson, John

      Leigh, Edward

      Willetts, David

      Letwin, rh Oliver

      Wilshire, David

      Liddell-Grainger, Ian

      Yeo, Tim (S Suffolk)

      Lidington, David

      Young, rh Sir George

      Loughton, Tim

      Luff, Peter (M-Worcs)

      Tellers for the Noes:

      McIntosh, Miss Anne

      Mr. John Randall and

      Mackay, rh Andrew

      Hugh Robertson

      Question accordingly agreed to.

      Anti-social Behaviour Bill
      Lords amendments considered.
      Madam Deputy Speaker: I draw the attention of the House to the fact that privilege is involved in Lords amendments Nos. 14, 28, 45 to 48 and 54, which are to be considered today. If the House agrees to these Lords amendments, I shall ensure that the appropriate entry is made in the Journal.

      Clause 13

        INJUNCTIONS AGAINST ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR ON APPLICATION OF CERTAIN SOCIAL LANDLORDS
        Lords amendment: No. 1.
        5.21 pm
        The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Yvette Cooper):: I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
        Madam Deputy Speaker: With this we may discuss Lords amendments Nos. 2 to 8, 62, 64, 72 and 73.
        Yvette Cooper: Many of the amendments are for clarification. The aim of amendments Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 is to clarify who is eligible to be protected by injunctions under new section 153A of the Housing Act 1996. The intention, which remains unchanged, is for social landlords to be able to apply for injunctions to protect tenants, leaseholders and anyone else who occupies property owned or managed by a relevant landlord, and to protect staff providing housing management and related services on behalf of the landlord.
        Mr. Gerald Kaufman: Does my hon. Friend agree that the votes cast a few minutes ago by the Liberal Democrats to prevent the Bill from becoming law this Session are consistent with the votes they cast in the summer to prevent it from becoming law at all, and consistent with the votes of the Liberal Democrats on Manchester city council, who voted against the Bill and said that too much antisocial behaviour legislation is already on the statute book?
        Yvette Cooper: My right hon. Friend is right. Many Liberal Democrats have opposed a large number of the Bill's most important measures during its passage through this House and the other place. I am sorry to hear that the Liberal Democrats on Manchester city council have taken a similar line. We often find that those working most closely with local people and communities are most strongly aware of the difficulties faced by people who live on local estates where there is severe antisocial behaviour. The strongest advocates of greater action are often local councillors and those involved in the local community.
        The amendments also allow social landlords to apply for injunctions to protect visitors engaged in lawful activity in the locality, including the work force, staff or contractors employed by social landlords, and other residents in the area, including owner-occupiers and tenants of other landlords.
        Mr. James Paice: The Minister says that the amendments will protect visitors
        518
        to social housing. How is that to be done? As the specific reference to visitors has been removed, which parts of the clause will ensure that they are covered?
        Yvette Cooper: We think that the issue is covered in clause 13. The specific reference to visitors has been removed because of concerns raised by practitioners that the existing provisions might give the courts leeway to adopt a narrow interpretation and assume that the provisions apply only to visitors. The reference has been removed to ensure that the wide range of people in the area is covered and that the courts do not use a narrow interpretation. We made our intention clear throughout our debates in this House and in the other place, and we decided that it was better and clearer to remove the reference. New section 153A(4)(c) of the Housing Act 1996 deals with the matter. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to pursue the matter further in his remarks, I shall be happy to respond. Practitioners wanted to be reassured that the provisions would cover the full range of people in the area and that their application would not be restricted by decisions made in the courts.
        Mr. Paice: I am grateful to the Minister for her reply, but I have to press her a bit further. If I understand her correctly, she is saying that the matter is covered by new section 153A(4)(c), which extends protection to
        "a person employed (whether or not by the relevant landlord) in connection with the exercise of the relevant landlord's housing management functions."
        I cannot see how that covers all types of visitor—friends, for example.
        Yvette Cooper: The hon. Gentleman is right about new section 153A(4)(c), but the overall impact of Lords amendments Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 and new section 153A combined is to include everyone who is visiting the area. It is important that, for example, a regular visitor to a particular area who finds himself being intimidated by antisocial behaviour is protected by decisions made by social landlords. The impact of the Lords amendments to new section 153A is to cover those who are visiting as well as those who are already resident in the area, including owner-occupiers and tenants.
        Lords amendments Nos. 1 and 2 also ensure that injunctions are available to protect residents in the area, even if they are temporarily absent from their home. If someone has been forced out of their home by racial or sexual harassment, for example, an injunction under new section 153A should be available to protect them if they wish to return.
        The effect of Lords amendment No. 4 is twofold: it replaces "locality" with "neighbourhood" and changes "the housing accommodation" to "housing accommodation". Those appear to be relatively minor wording amendments, but they are designed to make it clear that landlords have a responsibility for the protection of the communities who live in and around their housing stock. The new wording better reflects that role.
        Lords amendment No. 6 makes it clear that "housing accommodation" refers not to single premises, but to the whole of the landlord's stock in a particular neighbourhood. It also encompasses, for example, the common parts of an estate.

        519
        Lords amendments Nos. 7 and 8 enhance the use of demotions as a tool to prevent antisocial behaviour. They require landlords to serve notice before issuing demotion proceedings and specify the information that the notice should contain. That is valuable in ensuring that tenants are aware of the sanction that is being applied, and that they are given a chance to amend their behaviour and to have a proper hearing.
        Lords amendment No. 72 is designed to ensure that tenants who have the preserved right to buy lose it on demotion. The purpose of Lords amendment No. 73 is to ensure that time spent as a demoted assured shorthold tenant does not count towards the right to buy qualification or discount periods. The existing provisions of the Bill ensure that time spent as a local authority or housing action trust demoted tenant will not count towards the qualifying period for right to buy or the accrual of discount. The amendment ensures that the same rules will apply to time spent as a demoted assured shorthold tenant.
        Lords amendments Nos. 62 and 64 apply to the powers of social landlords to seek antisocial behaviour injunctions. There are times when antisocial behaviour will not fall within the responsibility of social landlords. In those cases we want to ensure that local authorities have sufficient powers to tackle antisocial behaviour more generally within their areas.
        5.30 pm
        Where antisocial behaviour injunctions are not available, the local authority can use other powers, including applying for an injunction under section 222 of the Local Government Act 1972. Local authorities already use that section to deal with antisocial behaviour, including, for example, the activities of drug dealers.
        The purpose of the amendments is to ensure that injunctions that prohibit antisocial behaviour that are obtained by local authorities in such proceedings can be properly enforced. Where the conduct that is prohibited includes violence, threatened violence or a risk of significant harm, we want to give the courts a right to attach a power of arrest to the injunction. The changes that the amendments make are modest, but the practical effect is potentially significant.
        Lords amendment No 64 provides that the provision will be commenced in England by the Secretary of State and in Wales by the National Assembly for Wales.
        The amendments are relatively straightforward. They attempt to clarify and improve the Bill and I ask the House to support them.
        Mr. Paice:I am grateful to the Minister for explaining things to the House. I think that she is coming to the Bill for the first time. The two principal issues in this group of amendments, which relate to clarification, are ones that we raised in Committee, when we sought clarification ourselves. I cannot help but note that in Committee the hon. Member for Coventry North-East (Bob Ainsworth) Minister who was then dealing with the Bill—he is now the Under-Secretary of State for Transport—rebutted our concerns and said that the Bill
        520
        was perfect. I am delighted that the Government have recognised since then that changes need to be made but I am concerned about some of the changes.
        In Committee, I challenged the Government about the definition of "visitors", which seemed a broad term. I could see that it was a problem that, as the Minister has said, was open to interpretation by the courts. It could be interpreted narrowly or much more broadly. In Committee, the then Minister said:
        "'Visitor' means what it says and the meaning is unusually clear in the law."—[Official Report, Standing Committee G, 13 May 2003; c. 241.]
        It is fine that it is unusually clear in the law, but the fact that the Government have now introduced changes makes me wonder how clear other things are in the law.
        The serious point is that the Minister has repeated this afternoon what Lord Bassam said in the other place. He said that part of the objective of this part of the Bill was
        "to protect visitors engaged in lawful activity in the locality."— [Official Report, House of Lords, 11 September 2003; Vol. 652, c. 503.]
        We all want to protect visitors, but, assuming that the amendments are agreed to, I am perplexed by what the Bill will provide. It seems that protection will be extended to
        "a person with a right … to reside in or occupy other housing accommodation in the neighbourhood of housing accommodation mentioned in paragraph (a)",
        or to
        "a person employed … in connection with the exercise of the relevant landlord's housing management functions."
        I accept that effectively the Minister is making it clear in Hansard that she wishes the provision to extend to visitors, but I fail to see how the two criteria of
        "a right to … reside in or occupy"
        or "a person employed" necessarily cover all visitors, and especially the visitors about whom we are most concerned. For example, such visitors may be friends of elderly residents who come round for afternoon tea. They are certainly not occupying and do not appear to be covered.
        We are in the final throes of our consideration of the Bill. I shall not take up the time of the House by opposing the amendment, but I am concerned about the implications of the Minister's proposals. I should be grateful if she would be kind enough to write to me, and perhaps put a copy of her letter in the Library, about the way in which visitors are to be protected, given that she is excising reference to them from the Bill. The provision is apparently restricted to people who reside in an area, who have a right of occupation, or who are employed in connection with the exercise of the relevant landlord's housing management functions.
        The other significant issue is locality. In Committee, the hon. Member for Harrow, East (Mr. McNulty) resisted our concerns about the definition of locality, which were shared by our noble Friends in another place and by Liberal Democrat Members in the House. He said:
        "At the moment, locality is determined by judicial discretion in each case. That is as it should be. It is up to the courts to decide exactly what is covered in given circumstances, and we do not intend that it should be defined as narrowly as pertaining to particular residences."—
        [Official Report, Standing Committee G, 13 May 2003; c. 228.]

        521
        That is precisely what the Government are doing—they are defining "locality" narrowly so that it pertains to all the residences owned in an estate by a social landlord. I am not going to revisit the arguments that we had in Committee about specifying a distance. We proposed a distance of within 100 m of a particular property, but any figure would have done, as the purpose was to challenge the definition of locality. The Minister has changed "locality" to "neighbourhood", which is defined as
        "the whole of the housing accommodation owned or managed by a relevant landlord in the neighbourhood and any common areas used in connection with the accommodation."
        That does exactly what the Government said they would not do. They define "neighbourhood"
        "as narrowly as pertaining to particular residences."
        I emphasise the plural used by the hon. Member for Harrow, East.
        I should be grateful if the Minister explained precisely how the Government are defining "neighbourhood". At what stage, for instance, does the neighbourhood cease? If a social landlord owned a cluster of properties and, in the next street, owned another cluster of properties, would that be the same neighbourhood? Would the provision apply to the second group of houses? What sort of boundaries, borders or even horizons have been created to define a particular neighbourhood in Lords amendment No. 6?
        None of the other amendments in the group causes the Opposition any great concern, so we support them. However, I am extremely concerned about the excision of the reference to visitors and the definition of locality. I support the Minister's desire to clarify the provision, but I am not sure that she has achieved that in the amendments, so I would be grateful if she could comment further.
        Mrs. Annette L. Brooke: I echo the comments of the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice), as I have been reassured by what the Minister has said today but remain doubtful about the effect of the amendments on the Bill. I, too, would be grateful for clarification. On the use of "locality" versus "neighbourhood", we did indeed have a lengthy and, it appeared at the time, unproductive discussion of the issue. I therefore welcome the amendments.
        In the other place, Lord Bassam said:
        "We want to support landlords who wish to do more than manage or protect their own tenants and take action to tackle anti-social behaviour more generally in the neighbourhoods in which their properties are situated."
        He went on to say that
        "there must be a link with the housing management function."— [Official Report, House of Lords, 11 September 2003; Vol. 652, c. 503.]
        I felt comfortable with that, because it seemed to extend the provision outside the individual residence, but it is still not entirely clear. I would welcome clarification of the matter. If the amendments reflect what was said in the other place, it would be good to put back a link to the local crime and disorder reduction partnership, as there would almost certainly be scope for working together beyond an individual residence. Will the Minister consider that?
        522
        One of my greatest concerns remains the amendments to clause 14. A demotion order can move quickly to a loss of property and homelessness. There has been a great deal of debate about that. I welcome the amendment, which requires a notice to be served, so that there is a warning prior to the demotion order. I hope that that will slow down the process slightly, but does the full amendment, including the 12-month limit specified, address the concerns expressed in both places that somebody could become homeless not purely because of antisocial behaviour, but possibly because of a technical knock-out? Once a demotion order was made, a landlord could dispossess people of their property rather easily.
        Aside from those points, I generally agree with this group of amendments.
        Yvette Cooper: The hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice) wanted me to clarify the effect of removing the reference to visitors. This is a case when the procedures of the House and the way that documents are made available to us, with the Lords amendments on one piece of paper and the original Bill as a separate document, instead of a version that combines the two, mean that it takes longer to understand the proposals.
        Let us consider the revised clause, if the amendments removing the reference to visitors were accepted. There would be a revised section 153A(4)(c) under the new wording, although the amendment is to paragraph (b) under the old wording. The new section 153A(4)(c) would read:
        "The second condition is that the conduct is capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to any of the following …
        (c) a person engaged in lawful activity in or in the neighbourhood of housing accommodation mentioned in paragraph (a)".
        The hon. Gentleman has in front of him the original Bill. Section 153A(4)(b), which currently reads:
        "a person visiting the housing accommodation or otherwise engaged in lawful activity in",
        would be renumbered (c) and read:
        "a person engaged in lawful activity in or in the neighbourhood of the housing accommodation".
        Removing the words
        "visiting the housing accommodation",
        means that the reference is to
        "a person engaged in lawful activity".
        Someone visiting a friend in the housing accommodation under discussion is clearly engaged in lawful activity. Removing the phrase
        "visiting the housing accommodation"
        puts the emphasis on everybody who is engaged in lawful activity in that area, rather than on those who are visiting or otherwise engaged in lawful activity. Although we do not believe that that has a substantial legal impact on the wording, it ensures that when the courts interpret the measure, we have provided as much clarity as possible. We do not focus too much attention on those who are visiting, and have made it clear that everybody is covered. Visitors would clearly continue to be covered by the new wording.

        523
        5.45 pm
        The hon. Gentleman's second point was also raised by the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Mrs. Brooke) and concerns the switch of wording from "locality" to "neighbourhood". Again, the impact of the change is small. "Locality" is the word used in the previous legislation. Practitioners raised concerns about the narrow interpretation of case law in particular examples such as the Enfield and Nottingham cases. "Neighbourhood" was added instead to ensure that existing case law was not simply read forward because "locality" had again been used. That has been done purely to try to reassure practitioners while providing as much clarity as possible to the courts.
        "Neighbourhood" is just as flexible a term as "locality". It includes the whole area and clearly includes owner-occupied property and property owned by other landlords on multi-tenure and jointly managed estates. Changing the word does not negate any of the earlier discussions about this matter.
        The hon. Lady also referred to demotions. I know that Liberal Democrat Members raised that point in Committee. We believe that demotions are a potential alternative to what landlords may currently have to do. As landlords do not have any way of providing a sanction or clear warning to tenants where there is problem antisocial behaviour, they may need to go straight to trying to evict them, perhaps making somebody homeless because of unacceptable antisocial behaviour.
        The demotions have been introduced as an alternative sanction for landlords. They allow tenants one last chance to amend their behaviour by responding to the sanction. Notices should be given to ensure that tenants are aware of the threatened sanction and that they have the chance to make appropriate representations and give their side of the story. Equally, we are not discussing changing the overall approach to demotions, which provide an alternative to evictions and give social landlords a sanction to address antisocial behaviour. We know that many social landlords currently feel that they cannot act with sufficient flexibility because there are not enough measures to address that problem.
        I have responded to hon. Members' concerns and hope that all hon. Members will support these relatively straightforward measures.
        Lords amendment agreed to.
        Lords amendments Nos. 2 to 8 agreed to.

        INTERPRETATION
        Lords amendment: No. 9.
        Ms Blears: I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
        Madam Deputy Speaker: With this it will be convenient to take Lords amendments Nos. 10 to 22.
        Ms Blears: Amendment No. 9 removes clause 24(2), which was made redundant by Government amendments moved on Report. Amendment No. 10 corrects an earlier drafting error.
        524
        Amendment No. 11 specifies that the term "guardian" in clauses 25 to 29 has the same meaning as in the Children and Young Persons Act 1933. That makes the law consistent, because that meaning is already applied to parenting orders for criminal conduct or antisocial behaviour under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.
        The Government listened carefully to the points that were made in the other place about the importance of the work of local authorities in tackling antisocial behaviour in their areas, particularly through local crime and disorder partnerships. That is the context in which we agree with amendment No. 12, which ensures that the agreement of the local authority is given before powers to disperse groups can be used. Local authorities and the police already work closely together in a whole range of partnerships to tackle crime and disorder in local communities, and are implementing strategies for dealing with many of the issues addressed in the Bill. It is right that we should expect there to be agreement on the authorisation of the powers that are used as part of that process. The amendment will strengthen the Bill and lead to even greater partnership working between local authorities and the police.
        The provisions of part 4 extend to the British Transport police. Amendment No. 13 merely updates a cross-reference to the Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003.
        The aim of amendments Nos. 14. 15 and 16 is to give to county councils the power to apply for antisocial behaviour orders that is currently available to the police, district councils and registered social landlords. It was requested for county councils by the County Councils Network. We recognise that county councils have responsibilities that encompass tackling antisocial behaviour because in many cases they are responsible for youth services, the provision of education, and social services. The amendments therefore extend to county councils the power to apply for ASBOs on the same basis as registered social landlords, the British Transport police and, under the Bill, housing action trusts. Moreover, sometimes the main legal department for an area rests within the county council. It is important that county councils be played into the provisions, because they can often provide essential legal and technical support to district councils in terms of exercising those powers.
        Amendments Nos. 17 to 22 are largely technical. They move all the clauses in part 5 to the end of the Bill, in accordance with the drafting convention that dictates that parts of Bills entitled "Miscellaneous powers" should be placed at the end. The important matters of substance relate mainly to the necessity for the police to have the agreement of the local authority in exercising the dispersal powers and to the need to include county councils to ensure that they can play an effective part in the essential partnerships with the police in tackling such matters.
        Mr. Paice: I am grateful to the Minister for explaining that many of the amendments are entirely non-controversial and what I have always described as "technical", probably because I do not understand them.
        I am, however, concerned about the amendment that deals with authorising the use of the dispersal powers that the Bill creates. The Minister clearly foresaw that,

        525
        because it was the only one that she concentrated on. There is no difference between Conservative Members and the Government about the importance of the involvement of local government in dealing with crime, particularly low-level crime. We welcome the setting up of crime and disorder reduction partnerships and, as the Minister knows, have our own proposals on how to enhance local involvement in those matters. Equally, unlike Members of some parties, the official Opposition welcome the measures on dispersal powers. We believe that it is right that the Government should give the police powers to disperse groups of people in such circumstances. In Committee—the Minister will not remember this, because she was not the Minister responsible at the time—we discussed why the power needed to be restricted to a particular authorised area. We said that if the police saw that there was a problem, they should be able to deal with it there and then, rather than having to go through the panoply of procedures involved in authorising a specific area.
        Nevertheless, I still do not understand why the Minister wants effectively to give local authorities the veto over an area. If, as the Government intend, the power is to be restricted so that it does not—as we contend that it should—apply across the country, the local authority should of course be consulted. But there is a great difference between consulting an authority and saying to it, "You must make the decision: yes or no. If you say that the police should not have dispersal powers in this particular neighbourhood area, that will be the final say on the matter." In all honesty, the Minister knows as well as I do that there is a huge variety of local authorities. One or two—thankfully, it is only a minority—are not always as helpful to the police as we would like. The amendment creates the risk that however much local communities and the police want to be able to use dispersal powers in a particular authorised area, the local authority may say, "No, we don't agree. We don't want the police riding roughshod over our community"—or whatever kind of language it chooses to use.
        I do not wish to comment on any of the other amendments, but I stress to the Minister that I am worried that her attempt to involve local authorities through consultation, which is a worthy objective, may backfire. I fear that by saying, in the words of the amendment, that authorisation
        "may not be given without the consent of the local authority",
        she will add to a concern that many local people express when they tell us, as they often do: "Local authorities do not really care about us." I want local authorities to be involved, but I am very concerned about giving them a complete veto.
        Mrs. Brooke: I am pleased to see the amendment, because we are talking about serious measures to disperse young people for their mere presence. I contend that legislation is already in place to move young people on when serious problems arise. Given the way in which the dispersal orders are to be enacted, involving the local authority means increased democratic accountability and shared responsibility for decisions. That is welcome. In some areas, there could be great sensitivities in relation to different ethnic minorities. The amendment provides a protection when the local authority needs to work so closely with the police in those circumstances.
        526
        As members of the Committee will verify, I maintained throughout our deliberations that we should refer all the measures to the local crime and disorder reduction partnerships. It is not enough simply to move people on; one has to know where they will go and what they will do once they have been moved.
        6 pm
        The amendment, by including the local authority, offers a genuine opportunity to consider what other measures we should introduce to support the dispersal order. The amendment is therefore a positive, not a stopping provision. It could encourage the inclusion of all the supportive measures about which I spoke at such great length.
        The Local Government Association suggests the inclusion of county, district and unitary authorities in the Bill. It is interesting that county councils are being allowed to issue ASBOs. It makes sense to ensure that consultation takes place with the county council because in areas where there is a county council plus a district council, the former provides the youth and education services. Although I would not like the veto to be extended, the consultation element should be made clear. The amendment should be welcomed and we shall wait to ascertain the outcome: whether the new curfew orders will be used more than the previous orders and whether the dispersal orders will be greatly used.
        Ms Blears: The hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice) and the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Mrs. Brooke) have shown how providing a balance is genuinely a matter of fine judgment when deciding whether there should be consultation or agreement between local authorities on the appropriate steps to take. It is my judgment that there should be a strong relationship between the police and local government in implementing the powers. I was disappointed when the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole and the Liberal Democrats took such great exception to the powers when they were originally introduced in the Bill. They could be useful in specific circumstances when antisocial behaviour occurs and local people are intimidated by others gathering in an area and causing harassment and distress.
        The local authority is an essential partner in tackling crime, disorder and antisocial behaviour and it should therefore be engaged in a joint enterprise with the police in dealing with it. I stress to the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire that I do not like to view the amendment as a veto because if we implement section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 properly, we should not be in a position whereby one partner pulls against the other. The partnership should be strong and influence matters on the ground. From my experience, crime and antisocial behaviour are tackled effectively in places where the police, the local authority, businesses, voluntary groups and the local community are engaged together, bringing added value to the partnership and making it work. If the local authority and the police pull against each other, that is evidence of a poor partnership, which we would want to investigate further.
        We do not want a veto, but if the dispersal powers are exercised in the case of very young children on the streets and they need to be taken to their home or, if they are

        527
        likely to suffer significant harm, a place of safety, social services and possibly the education authorities need to be involved to ensure that the needs of the young people are taken into account.
        The dispersal provisions have been controversial. I recently met members of the Youth Parliament and we had a couple of hours of useful debate during which the young people asked me some searching questions. To some extent, they put me on the spot and I thoroughly enjoyed discussing the provisions with them. I want to put on record the fact that the provisions are as much about protecting young people in the community so that they feel free to go about their lawful business without being intimidated by others as they are about tackling antisocial behaviour.
        Our attempt to involve local authorities through the amendment is evidence of our twin-track approach, which is apparent throughout the Bill. That means support for those who want to change their behaviour, for parenting and for young people, coupled with tough and effective enforcement. That twin-track approach will help to tackle antisocial behaviour in our communities. I am pleased that we have come down on the side of involving local authorities and ensuring that local councils, with their elected members, play a genuine role.
        I am sure that the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire knows that local authorities and the police increasingly use the national intelligence model together, share information and are involved in joint tasking and co-ordination. That is another big step change in the partnerships' successful operation.
        Mrs. Brooke: I welcome the Minister's comments on twin tracking. When we held our discussions in Committee, there was great emphasis on enforcement and not enough emphasis on support. It has therefore been pleasing to hear her comments today.
        Ms Blears: I am delighted that the hon. Lady is delighted because it is important that we constantly consider the issue with the two points in mind. Our aim is to try to divert young people especially—I accept that antisocial behaviour is not confined to them—from crime and disorder. As a former public health Minister, I believe that prevention is better than cure and that if we can act to reduce crime, we should do that. I am equally convinced of the merits of tough and effective enforcement and sanctions. Any responsible policy should encompass both.
        Mr. Paice: The Minister may be delighted that I was not delighted. I re-emphasise that I agree with her about the importance of local authorities, the police and other agencies working together. I passionately believe in that. She is also right that the better they work together, the more effectively they operate. I am worried that she effectively said that if that ideal relationship is not in place, the local authority will call the tune and that whatever other agencies, community organisations and the police may say, unless the local authority consents to making an area authorised, it cannot happen. That is my only point of concern. I support encouraging bodies to work together, consultation and the rest of the panoply
        528
        of relevant measures, but I am worried that the Minister claims that whatever the police or the community says, the local authority has the final word.
        Ms Blears: The hon. Gentleman knows as well as I do that we have a wide range of tools not only to encourage good partnerships but to take positive steps to ensure that they are in place. It is occasionally necessary to put our money where our mouth is. If we talk about involving local government in what we do, it is occasionally right to put that at the heart of our policy making. We have agreed to the amendment and are prepared to say that the local authority's agreement is an integral part of our ability to get the most out of the powers that we have put on the statute book. That is not only a symbolic indication of the importance of local government but something more fundamental. It stresses that the crime and disorder partnerships must have equal buy-in from every partner if we are genuinely to tackle crime and antisocial behaviour.
        The hon. Gentleman also knows that we, like his party, have proposals for the future direction of the police services and community safety. At the heart of the proposals is a genuine commitment to more local involvement from the community, local authorities, businesses, the voluntary sector and all of us as citizens in taking responsibility for tackling crime and antisocial behaviour. It is occasionally right that the commitment is reflected in the words of legislation. In this instance, there should be a joint enterprise for using the dispersal powers.
        I hope that I have given sufficient reassurance about the reasons for the decision that the Government have made. I believe that we have made the right judgment. I am sure that I have not convinced the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire, but I am delighted to have convinced the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole.
        Lords amendment agreed to.
        Lords amendments Nos. 10 to 22 agreed to [one with Special Entry].

        DEALING WITH NOISE AT NIGHT
        Lords amendment: No. 23.
        Ms Blears: I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
        Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst): With this we may take Lords amendments Nos. 24 to 38, and 65.
        Ms Blears: This group of amendments relates to environmental matters that were originally in the Bill: night noise, graffiti, fly posting, spray paints and data on waste. Clause 48 amends the Noise Act 1996 to end, for England and Wales, the previously adoptive character of sections 2 to 9 of that Act. From now on, all local authorities in England and Wales will have the power to investigate complaints of excessive noise at night, give warning notices in respect of such noise and, where the noise remains excessive after the service of a warning notice, either prosecute or, more likely, issue a fixed penalty notice. Those powers will now be available for all local authorities, rather than having to be adopted.

        529
        Amendment No. 23 will allow local authorities to retain their receipts from night noise fixed penalty notices for use on any qualifying functions. The amendments will encourage and support the increased use of night noise fixed penalty notices by local authorities, with resulting benefits for people who suffer noise from their neighbours at night. The provisions are similar to those for the fixed penalty notices that can now be issued for littering and dog fouling, and we feel that if local authorities can keep the income from their fixed penalty notices, they will be more inclined to use their powers to relieve the considerable nuisance caused by excessive noise late at night.
        Clauses 54 and 55 give local authorities the power to clean graffiti from property owned by public utility companies and statutory undertakers. I am delighted to say that amendments Nos. 24 to 33 will allow local authorities to recover the costs of removal from the owners of that property.
        Siobhain McDonagh: I thank the Government, and especially my hon. Friend for her work on the amendments. They embody suggestions that I made in Committee, and I am thrilled that statutory undertakers will now be responsible for maintaining their street furniture, which when covered in graffiti not only causes offence, but makes people worried about moving about their local high streets and other areas. I am also thrilled that if local authorities remove that graffiti, they will have the power to recharge.
        One of the many themes supported by Members on both sides of the Committee was that powers that are given must be workable and usable. I believe that these powers will be used, precisely because the local authorities will be able to recharge. I also think that many of the statutory undertakers will—
        Mr. Deputy Speaker: Order. [Interruption.] Order. The hon. Lady has been here long enough to know that she must resume her seat when the occupant of the Chair is on his feet, and also that there is a distinction between an intervention and a speech. However congratulatory she means to be, she must keep that balance.
        Ms Blears: As I was saying, Mr. Deputy Speaker, amendments Nos. 24 to 33 will allow local authorities to recover the costs of removal from the owners of such property. I am delighted to pay tribute to the work of my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Siobhain McDonagh), who has pursued this matter with such vigour, and without whose tenacity and determination these provisions might not have reached the statute book, as I hope they will.
        We are aware of the concerns that have been raised about the financial impact that the amendments might have on the industries concerned. That is why we propose to pilot the measures in 12 authorities, so that they will not put an undue burden on business. The pilots will give us the opportunity to evaluate the impact of the measures, and we shall consult the companies and local authorities concerned to ensure that we get the scheme right.
        The amendments also provide for guidance to be issued by the Secretary of State, or the National Assembly for Wales, on the operation of the provisions,
        530
        and local authorities will have to comply with it. The guidance will be drawn up in consultation with the industries and local authorities concerned.
        Hand in hand with the clean-up measures goes tougher enforcement action against the perpetrators. That is a common theme: more action, but more enforcement as well. Amendment No. 34 will increase the fine for those prosecuted under section 224 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 from level 3, a fine of up to £1,000, to level 4, a fine of up to £2,500. That increase recognises the growing incidence of fly posting, and the need for a more punitive deterrent for those responsible for that environmental crime.
        Mr. Eric Martlew: Will the fly-posting provisions apply to political parties?
        Ms Blears: Anybody who contravenes the Town and Country Planning Act will be liable to a fine higher than the current level 3 fine. I am aware that there are different provisions in different parts of the country about what kind of party political advertising can be permitted. For example, I know that in Birmingham there is a tradition of allowing posters to be stuck on street furniture. That certainly is not a tradition in my community, so the position varies from local authority to local authority. None the less, where those provisions are contravened, the fine will be up to £2,500 rather than the present level of £1,000.
        Mr. Martlew: If there were a general election, and a political party—the Liberal Democrats, for example—was fined £2,500, would that be added to its election expenses?
        6.15 pm
        Ms Blears: That would be a matter for the returning officer and the Electoral Commission; it would be determined by electoral law at the time.
        Amendments Nos. 35 and 36 concern the age below which sale of aerosol paint should be restricted. The Government have been open to argument on that point throughout the passage of the Bill. We remain convinced of the need to take the tools of the criminal damage trade out of the hands of the taggers, but the precise age at which it is proportionate to restrict sale of those items is a matter for debate. Having listened carefully to arguments both in this House and in another place, we agree that an age limit of 16 is more appropriate than one of 18.
        Amendments Nos. 37 and 38 relate to the Secretary of State's power to require data returns to be made by local authorities and the Environment Agency about cases of fly-tipping with which they deal. There are currently no national data on levels of fly-tipping. The Environment Agency and most local authorities already collect some data, but not in any standardised way. It is important that we develop our information base on the extent of fly-tipping, to help inform future policy development both nationally and regionally. Local authorities will also benefit from the measure, as they will be able to access reports from the database.
        The amendments introduce a new wording of section 71(4) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 with regard to the requirement for information. The previous

        531
        provisions introduced a reporting requirement only in section 59 of that Act. The revised wording will ensure that local authorities may be required to report all the incidents with which they deal, no matter which power they use to do so. This is a wider provision, and I understand that local authorities welcome the power, rather than seeing it as a bureaucratic burden, because they want access to the database that will be developed. We shall try to ensure that it is a web-based facility, which can be accessed with minimum cost and trouble to local authorities, and I think that it will prove useful in determining our future policy on waste and fly-tipping, which, unfortunately, is an increasing problem.
        Mr. Paice: I broadly welcome this group of amendments, and I particularly welcome the introduction of an appeal system. It is always a matter of concern to me when we give public bodies—be they local authorities or any other public body—powers over the private sector against which there is no appeal. The matter was debated in Committee. I am particularly concerned when we create a power for an authority to take action and to reclaim moneys from the private sector, so the introduction of an appeal mechanism is extremely welcome, and I thank the Minister and the Government for it.
        I was interested to hear the Minister's remarks about the money side of this question and about the fact that she is putting into the Bill the way in which local authorities will be able to utilise the money that they have raised for approved purposes. It is worth bearing in mind that my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath (Mr. Hawkins) made precisely such a suggestion in Committee and was, not for the first time, rebuffed by the Government and told that they did not believe in hypothecation and that it would not happen. Of course, they are now putting that precisely into the Bill, enabling income to be hypothecated directly for particular items of expenditure.
        I cannot help but gloat a little—I suspect that the Liberal Democrats will, too—at the way in which the Minister so charmingly said that the Government had now been persuaded that 16, rather than 18, should be the minimum age in relation to the sale of aerosols. If my recollection is correct, the hon. Lady was not the Minister in Committee, but, if my recollection is correct, there are Members in the Chamber today—including the former Minister with responsibility for the police—who were around at that time, and who were members of the Committee. They will remember how totally and utterly the Government rejected the logic of the arguments put by my hon. Friends and me for reducing the age at which someone should be prevented from buying an aerosol. I remember drawing attention to the fact—I think it was on Second Reading—that someone can, at 16, use a shotgun, go into a pub and have a drink, or even get married. At that age, they can have a driving licence and buy a car, but if they bend the car, they cannot go and buy the paint to mend it until they are 18. That seems utterly ludicrous. I am delighted that the Government have heeded the arguments made in the other place, albeit at the eleventh hour, but I cannot pretend to be surprised or even disappointed that they
        532
        did not heed the argument made in this place that 18 was too high an age at which to ban something as everyday as the purchase of a can of aerosol paint.
        I do not wish to deny the damage that graffiti does. It is a serious problem, and my hon. Friends and I support the Government's efforts in that regard. I would also say in all honesty to the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Siobhain McDonagh) that I do not in any way resent the fact that she has been extremely successful in getting her proposals into the Bill. As I said earlier, I support the amendments in their entirety, but I have to say to the Minister that she is extremely courageous to suggest that the Government have listened to the arguments and been persuaded on the issue of age, given the strength and volubility of the way in which several Ministers—and, indeed, Back Benchers who supported the Government in Committee—sought to decry the efforts that some of us were making to reduce the age to 16. Even at this late hour, however, this is a welcome concession, and I am delighted to support it.
        Mrs. Brooke: I, too, welcome this group of amendments. The hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice) welcomed the qualifying functions in amendment No. 23 in relation to what the money could be spent on. I would like a little clarification on that. In know from my past life in a local authority that sometimes, when money is ring-fenced too tightly, it cannot be spent on sensible things. Obviously, we want the receipts to be able to finance extra activity. My councils, like others, can barely afford noise patrols at the moment, for example. I wonder whether there will be any consultation before the provisions are finally drawn up.
        I welcome the fact that amendment No. 29 puts guidance on to the face of the Bill. I have not seen such a provision on any other of the relatively few Bills with which I have been involved so far. I strongly support amendments Nos. 35 and 36. I well remember discussing those issues in Committee; in fact, I got the Committee report out so that I could revisit that debate. However, given the spirit in which we are discussing the Bill today, it would be unkind to quote some of the comments that were made. I am sure that these measures are the right ones. The obvious point has been made that if someone can have a driving licence at the age of 17, it is nonsense that they cannot go out and buy spray paint. Overkill such as that can be counter-productive.
        I would like to make a serious point about amendment No. 30, which states that one of the grounds for appeal is that
        "the defacement is neither detrimental to the amenity of the area nor offensive".
        I am all in favour of collaborative work to involve young people in creating attractive graffiti, but whenever that sort of work is undertaken, it should be with the permission of the property owner or landowner. I am concerned that this provision could create a complex situation if used as a general defence. I imagine that whether the graffiti was detrimental to the amenity of the area would be a subjective judgment.
        Mr. David Heath: I, too, am slightly puzzled by that defence, because it appears to invite those on the magistrates bench to substitute their

        533
        artistic taste for that of the local authority. That does not seem to be an entirely sound legal ground for exemption, and I wonder whether guidance will be specifically given to the bench and to local authorities as to how they should interpret
        "detrimental to the amenity of the area".
        Mrs. Brooke: I thank my hon. Friend for making more clearly than I was the point that I was trying to make about subjective judgment. I support the measures on removing offensive graffiti, but I do not want to see a loophole that could lead to some rather strange debates about whether graffiti was detrimental to an area. I emphasise that I am very much in favour of partnership working and creating interesting graffiti, but it must be done with the permission of all the parties involved.
        Mr. Stephen Pound: Can the hon. Lady come up with a single example anywhere in these broad and sweeping kingdoms of any bit of this foul, feral scrawl that we call graffiti that could possibly be described—even by a Liberal Democrat—as attractive and interesting?
        Mrs. Brooke: A person who has painted something on a property could stand up in court and argue that it was beautiful. I probably would not think that it was, but if it was not obviously offensive, the person who had painted it could create a certain amount of legal difficulty. I am sure the Minister will reassure us on that.
        Ms Blears: I shall deal first with the issues raised by the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice). He argued that our decision to allow the retention of moneys from the fixed penalty notices for night noise was inconsistent. However, we are already proposing, in clause 51, that local authorities should have the right to retain the income from fixed penalty notices for graffiti and fly posting. That builds on existing powers to retain fee income from littering and dog fouling. This is therefore nothing new. We are allowing local authorities to retain the money from the fixed penalty notices issued for night noise, in an attempt to encourage them to use the powers more widely. That is why we are getting rid of the adoptive provisions and making them apply across local authorities. It is therefore not new for us to introduce a measure to enable the authorities to retain such income. There is a consistency of approach here, and probably also a read-across to the retention of moneys by the police in relation to the income from fixed penalty notices for speeding, which is ploughed back into road safety measures. The Government have a coherent and consistent approach on those issues.
        6.30 pm
        The hon. Gentleman indulged in some unfortunate gloating in relation to spray paints. I never saw him as the kind of person who would gloat in such circumstances—perhaps I was mistaken—but I think that every Member of the House would acknowledge that graffiti is a huge problem for our communities. That is why we have made it a central part not just of the Bill, but of the "Together" action plan, which we issued a few weeks ago. If the hon. Gentleman has read that, he will
        534
        know that we have a major programme called Operation Scrub It, which we hope will lead to the removal of graffiti up and down our land. We also have Operation Scrap It for abandoned cars and Operation Gate It for alley gating, so we have scrub it, scrap it and gate it, and our plans for tackling antisocial behaviour will be very effective indeed.
        I am delighted to say to the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Mrs. Brooke) that I understand that when reducing the age in respect of possession of spray paints was discussed in Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-East (Mr. Ainsworth), who was previously responsible for the Bill, said:
        "I will continue to listen to representations, or any other evidence to show that it is not the age group that the Bill mentions that is presenting the problem. If people think that they have that evidence, they should let us have it, because I do not pretend that we have the whole picture mapped out, or that we know exactly what is going on in our society."—[Official Report, Standing Committee G, 22 May 2003; c. 405.]
        That is perfect evidence of my colleague's open-mindedness and his willingness to listen to evidence, take a rational decision and not reach foregone conclusions.
        Mr. David Marshall: I am delighted at the measures that my hon. Friend is putting through the House, but I am sorry that they do not apply to Scotland. Have there been any joint ministerial discussions between the Scottish Executive and her Department as to the possibility of having the same measures introduced in Scotland?
        Ms Blears: I am grateful for my hon. Friend's support for these provisions. Although there have been no formal ministerial discussions as yet, I am aware that discussions are going on in Scotland around similar areas. Clearly, the matters that concern people living in England and Wales are of equal concern to residents in Scotland. Therefore, there will be discussions and, I hope, the sharing of good practice.
        The hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole raised the issue of night noise and whether her local authority could afford monitoring patrols. If she talks to her local authority, she will find that there are other ways to monitor noise, such as through the use of technology and electronic devices, which are much more cost-effective than local authority officers marauding on the streets late at night seeking out noise.
        There is a serious issue here, and we want to make the powers as easy to use as we can, because the fact that they have been adoptive has militated against local authorities taking such action. Increasingly, when these powers are taken together with some of those to deal with noisy licensed premises under the licensing legislation, we will begin to have a coherent set of powers that really can help to attack the tremendous nuisance caused by excessive noise. Some people have to live with noise day in, day out—or rather night in, night out#x2014;which has a detrimental effect on their well-being.
        The powers will be extremely welcome, and I am pleased that the hon. Lady will support them, although I am surprised by her enthusiasm—whether the powers be on environmental crime, tackling graffiti, fly posting or antisocial behaviour in general—which leads me to

        535
        question why her party finds it impossible to support the Anti-social Behaviour Bill. I find this a very contradictory position to take: she is so supportive of all those proposals to tackle antisocial behaviour, yet her party cannot find it in itself to support the Government and the legislation.
        Mr. Heath: Without any temptation to gloat at the Minister's expense, may I simply say that had her colleagues expressed their views in the way that she has this evening, committed themselves to the dual working that she has committed herself to this evening and introduced at an earlier stage those amendments that she has introduced this evening, the Bill might have taken a different course?
        Ms Blears: It is perhaps more likely that we might have seen a very different response to the proposed legislation if there had been no change of Liberal Democrat spokespeople.
        I reassure my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Shettleston (Mr. Marshall) that I understand that the Scottish Executive have published an antisocial behaviour Bill, which includes a ban on the sale of spray paints to under-16s. I am sure that there will be extensive joint working between us with regard to those issues.
        I am pleased that the amendment, which I commend to hon. Members, commands the support of the House.
        Lords amendment agreed to.
        Lords amendments Nos. 24 to 38 agreed to [one
        with Special Entry].

        RAVES
        Lords amendment: No 39—a new clause.
        Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.—[Ms Blears.]
        Mr. Deputy Speaker: With this we may discuss amendment (a) to the Lords amendment, Lords amendment No. 40, Lords amendment No. 41 and amendment (a) thereto, and Lords amendment No. 74.
        Mr. Paice: I shall speak to my amendment (a) to Lords amendment No. 39. I welcome the debate on the two issues covered by this group of amendments—namely raves and dealing with unauthorised encampments. Indeed, by my recollection, both were raised in Committee and unauthorised encampments were the subject of a lot of discussion. My hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath (Mr. Hawkins) and I spoke at length and, if I dare say it, with some passion because of constituency experiences—this is a serious problem.
        I shall take the two issues separately if I may and deal first with raves, to which amendment No. 39 and my amendment (a) are relevant. I welcome what the Government are doing about raves. Reducing the relevant number from 100 to 20 is extremely sensible. It means that organising a rave for 99 people, which I
        536
        understand has been the practice of a lot of people who tried to get just inside the law, will end. I also strongly welcome the removal of the term "open air" from subsection (2) of section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. However, the purpose of my amendment (a) is to challenge the Government as to why they have not removed the same term from subsection (1).
        Subsection (1) states:
        "This section applies to a gathering on land in the open air of 100 or more persons".
        The Government are making an amendment by striking out 100 and inserting 20, but they have left in the words "open air". Subsection (2) refers to
        "as respects any land in the open air, a police officer of at least the rank of superintendent",
        but the term "open air" is to be deleted. I cannot help but feel that that is an oversight by the Government. The Minister is looking perplexed, which leads me to think that this has not clicked with either the Government or her advisers. The number in the 1994 Act as amended by the Lords amendment will be reduced from 100 to 20 without the term "open air" being removed. It seems to me that the gathering has to be on land in the open air.
        Mr. Heath rose—
        Mr. Paice: I give way to the hon. Gentleman, who may be able to correct me.
        Mr. Heath: I think that the hon. Gentleman is right in his drafting amendment, but I also think that passing his amendment, whose wording is simpler than that used by the Government, would make subsections (3) and (4) of amendment No. 39 redundant. Those would no longer be necessary, as the hon. Gentleman would have extended the application to an occurrence in the open air or within a closed building.
        Mr. Paice: I understand what the hon. Gentleman is saying. Perhaps the Minister will persuade me that subsection (3) is indeed sufficient, but I do not see for the life of me why the Government could not have simply struck out the words "in the open air" in both instances.
        Let me now deal with the other amendments concerning travellers and the 1994 Act. I think this discussion will illustrate the absurdity of automatically timetabling all our debates. The travellers issue was not debated during the main part of the Bill's passage; the Government introduced it in the form of an amendment on Report, and the timetabling meant that it was not reached. This, therefore, is our only opportunity to debate the amendments to the 1994 Act involving travellers—and because we are discussing Lords amendments, that opportunity is extremely limited.
        It is a tragedy that the Government have arranged matters in this way. I am not saying that I object to the amendments, which move in a direction that I urged on the Government in Committee. I am merely saying that had the Government allowed more time on Report, when the amendments first appeared, we might have felt more certain that they were getting this absolutely right.
        I am still concerned about the fact that there is nothing in the Government's amendments, now incorporated in the Bill, or in the Lords amendments to

        537
        deal with the detritus left by travellers, which was raised by almost everyone in Committee. That is a huge problem on both public and private land, but in many ways it is worse on private land, because it is for the owner of that land to pay the cost of clearing what may be huge piles of unpleasant waste. I welcome the addition of a power for the police to move on unauthorised travellers, the removal of the numbers limit, and many other new measures. However, as I said on Third Reading, I am worried about the loophole created by the Government in regard to alternative sites.
        The Bill seems to say that police officers can move travellers on if they are illegally encamped and an alternative site is available. The Minister kindly nods, implying that my simplistic mind has got it right in this instance. On Third Reading, I feared that the Government risked driving a coach and horses through the intention of the relevant clauses. Since then they have tabled Lords amendment No. 40, which would insert the word "suitable". That worries me chiefly because "suitable" is a subjective term. I do not want to return to the issue of what constitutes appropriate graffiti, but "suitable" is subjective as opposed to objective. One person's definition of a suitable alternative site might not be another person's definition.
        I speak as one with some years' standing in the House, representing a constituency where hundreds of travellers are going in and out all the time. They and their advisers know the law back to front, and if there is a loophole to be exploited they will exploit it. The word "suitable" immediately creates an opportunity for travellers and advisers to seek to undermine the law by challenging the suitability of a site in the eyes of the law.
        6.45 pm
        Lords amendment No. 41 seems to constitute an attempt by the Government to define a suitable alternative site, although it does not say as much. It states that a police officer
        "must consult every local authority within his area the land is situated as to whether there is a suitable pitch for the caravan…in the local authority's area."
        That seems to me to restrict the scope of clause 61 dramatically. If, for example, travellers were encamped in a local authority area but close to its border, the officer would have to consult that authority. If there were no alternative site in the authority's area, the powers in the clause could not be used. There might, however, be a suitable alternative site only a mile away, in the area of another authority that would not have to be consulted.
        My constituency shares its boundary with two other counties, as well as the rest of Cambridgeshire. We have serious problems with unauthorised encampments, often within a mile or two of the Essex and Suffolk borders. There may be very convenient alternative sites in those counties, but if I understand the Bill correctly, the authority that must be consulted is the one whose area contains the illegal encampment. I am being parochial here, but I would hope that we all know our constituencies better than anywhere else.
        538
        The Minister will confirm whether "local authority" means a county or a district authority—
        Ms Blears: Both.
        Mr. Paice: In any event, because South Cambridgeshire borders many miles of the Essex boundary, if there is no alternative site in the rest of Cambridgeshire—which there may well not be, because of the large number of travellers—but there is one just over the border in Essex, that cannot be taken into consideration.
        I do not pretend that I have necessarily got the drafting right in my amendment, but it is too late to change it now. Let me again use the example of South Cambridgeshire. You will know the adjoining district of Uttlesford, Mr. Deputy Speaker, because it is in your constituency. I suggest that if it contained an alternative site, its authority should be consulted.
        Mr. Heath: The hon. Gentleman is making an excellent point, which I fear we will not able to resolve at this late stage. Will he also consider county authorities which, under the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960, made provision for transit sites covering all district council areas within their boundaries? Those sites will be discounted for the Bill's purposes unless they happen to be in the same district council area as an illegal encampment.
        Mr. Paice: I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman's support. The Minister said a moment ago that the county area would be covered, but what worries me is the possibility of a site's being just outside the county area. I could have framed my amendment to include all adjoining counties—indeed, I suspect that many of my constituents would have preferred "adjoining countries"—but I am trying to be reasonable, and to propose an amendment that the Government might consider acceptable.
        Mr. Martlew: In my county of Cumbria, there is a transit site very near my constituency. From the south of the county, it is 90 miles away. I suspect that it would not be suitable to ask travellers to go 90 miles.
        Mr. Paice: The hon. Gentleman makes the point that I made earlier about the use of the term "suitable". What is suitable? How far is suitable? Is 90 miles suitable? I do not know. It will require a court eventually to decide. As the hon. Gentleman knows, travellers are fully aware of every aspect of legislation affecting them and they will test it.
        I come back to the issue of alternative sites and what may be a suitable distance. It would be easy to suggest that a suitable alternative site should be one within five, 10, 15 or even 90 miles, whatever distance one chose. Rather than have a debate about how far is suitable for an alternative site, I suggest merely that we should ensure that all adjoining districts to the district in which the unauthorised encampment is located should be taken into account. Please do not think from my earlier comments, Mr. Deputy Speaker, that I am entirely desirous of deporting all the unauthorised encampments in my constituency to yours. I simply use it as an example of what I am trying to get across with the amendment.

        539
        I fear that what has happened is that the Home Secretary and indeed the hon. Member for Coventry, North-East (Mr. Ainsworth), the previous Minister who dealt with the Bill in Committee, were determined to be tough but that, since the Government tabled their amendments, there have been voices urging that they be weakened. I fear that amendments Nos. 40 and 41 do weaken the original proposals, even though, as I said earlier and as the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath) said, this is the first time that we have debated them; we did not have a chance to debate them in earlier proceedings. The purpose of my amendment on travellers is simply to ensure that, where we are searching for what may be a suitable alternative site, not just that district or the county but all adjoining districts are consulted, so that, if the unauthorised encampment is close to a county boundary, we ensure that the other districts surrounding it are also consulted under new subsection (3B) in amendment No. 41.
        This is in many ways the most important group of amendments that we shall discuss this evening. I hope that I have managed to explain to the Minister the import that I attach to them and the reasons why I tabled them. I look forward to her response.
        Mr. John Denham: I will be brief and make a few remarks on the amendments to clause 61. I listened with interest to what the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice) said. I personally am pleased to see these clauses in the Bill because they enact a strategy that was announced during my time as a Home Office Minister. If time were not pressing, I might discuss why they did not get into the Bill at an earlier stage, but I will leave that for another occasion. However, I am pleased that that approach is being taken.
        I can see both sides of the argument. The difficulty is that far too few local authorities, including district councils, have made provision for the type of temporary move-on site that I take to be meant by "suitable". I hope that the Minister will be able to reassure the House that we are talking not about an all-singing, all-dancing long-term residential camp site but about a suitable site to which someone can be directed, with the basic facilities that are necessary. Without an incentive for local authorities to make that provision, it is unlikely that they will do so. The police will be hampered in the use of the power by the lack of any facilities in the surrounding area.
        I agree that in an entirely sensible and utterly co-operative world the position taken by the hon. Gentleman—that all provision should be taken into
        account—would make sense, but we are at a period when district councils must be focused on making that provision. It is an argument that needs to be advanced. In my local authority area, the cost of clearing up just two encampments in the past year has been £50,000 and we are not yet at the end of the financial year. We need to get local authorities—the incentive is in the Bill—to invest that money in the sort of move-on facilities that can cut the costs that they are incurring on clearing up waste. I think that what the Government are doing will provide the incentive for local authorities to act and not
        540
        just to say, "We assume that someone else will deal with the problem and the police can direct people in that direction."
        The issue may need to be revisited when there is an adequate pattern of provision in every area, and it is logical to look at everything that is available in the whole of Hampshire, in my case, but we are not in that situation at the moment. Therefore, provided that the term "suitable"—I trust that there will be Government guidance—clearly means basic, hard-standing chemical soak-away facilities, a standpipe or whatever, and not the all-singing, all-dancing residential complexes, for which it has been difficult to get planning permission, the Bill will take us a significant way forward.
        Mr. Nick Hawkins: As the right hon. Gentleman knows, I raised Committee concerns I had in respect of my constituency, which abuts Hampshire. Does he recognise that there are considerable difficulties even in areas where there is substantial local authority provision? Chobham in my constituency, a small village, was hugely over-run by a massive new site being created in breach of all the planning rules, even though there was already an existing proper site provided by the local authority, so a local authority-provided site does not necessarily solve the problems.
        Mr. Denham: Of course, there are problems. The difficulty ever since the original Act has been that local authorities have been reluctant to provide the transit move-on sites that are necessary. The Bill and the logic of the approach says, "Here is a power that is available to the police but only if the local authority in that area acts to make suitable provision." Without that early incentive, we will not see an expansion in the type of facilities that need to be available, and then in practice the much faster move-on powers will not be available to the police.
        As we all know, it can take weeks to move on an unauthorised encampment. In one case in Southampton recently, there was a dispute as to whether the landowner or leaseholder should take action. Things dragged on even longer, so I welcome the moves that are being taken, even though I suspect that, if we are successful at providing more temporary camp sites, there may be a case in years to come to revisit the debate that the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire has started.
        While I am on my feet, may I say to the Minister in supporting the overall approach that is being taken that I was a little disconcerted to find last week that the guidance coming from the Home Office on the use of antisocial behaviour orders and the new powers to deal with travellers is not exactly extensive? If we wish to see the police use the new ASBO power against travellers, some extended guidance from the Home Office on how to do it, how to collect evidence and how to get the ASBO to court would be enormously useful. I am convinced that that complements the measures in the Bill well but we need to ensure that it can be used at local level.
        Mrs. Brooke: I await with interest the Minister's response on amendment No. 40 and amendment (a). We had an interesting exchange. It is a matter of waiting for her pronouncement on that.

        541
        On the amendment on travellers, I was interested in the interpretation by the right hon. Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Denham). I had not realised before he spoke that there would be an incentive to provide transitional sites. I understand the logic now that it has been expressed in that way, but I question whether that is sufficient incentive. I suspect that it will take a lot more and a lot of persuasion to get local authorities to do something about what is a serious issue for all our constituents.
        I favour amendment (a) to amendment No. 41. It seems to make a lot of sense. Indeed, I do not see how one can argue against it. If we have a site 100 yd over the border, surely it needs to come into play. There must be some wording that could pick that point up.
        Amendment (a) to Lords amendment No. 41 could have greater longer-term significance. The principle of making local authorities work together is surely another way forward because some local authorities will argue that they simply have not got places, whereas a number of different types of council, covering larger areas, can truly work together. County councils were specifically mentioned. I represent part of the unitary authority of Poole, which is in the county of Dorset, although it is a separate authority. We would have big problems with moving travellers on without that amendment because of the proximity of the unitary authority boundary and the county council boundary. So I very much support that amendment and await the Minister's comments.
        7 pm
        Ms Blears: I wish to respond to the Opposition amendments that have been tabled to Lords amendments Nos. 39 and 41.
        During previous stages, hon. Members mentioned the problem of raves, so the Government took the opportunity in the other place to introduce measures to deal with that important issue. The Lords amendments will change existing legislation to include indoor trespassory raves, reduce the numerical threshold for action from 100 to 20 people and make it an offence for a person on whom a direction has been served to attend another trespassory rave within 24 hours of the direction being given. Those three trends, which show how legislation was being gradually undermined, were identified by our work with the Association of Chief Police Officers. People were organising events for just under 100 people, events that took place one after another in similar places and an increasing number of indoor events.
        Amendment (a) to Lords amendment No. 39, tabled by the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice), may appear attractive at first sight, as its wording is simpler—the words "in the open air" would be omitted—but I assure hon. Members that section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, as amended by the Bill, will address the problem both of raves in the open air and of indoor trespassory raves. I emphasise that fact. If we were to agree with the hon. Gentleman's proposal, we would catch all indoor
        events—for example, house parties where people were not trespassing and were present with the agreement of the person organising the event. I cannot imagine that
        542
        he wants to include a provision that would catch people who were not trespassing. The Bill is intended to catch people who are trespassing on other people's land.
        Mr. Heath: I have been reading section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act. It applies only where serious distress is being caused to the inhabitants of a locality, so there is still a heavy qualification.
        Ms Blears: Yes, but Lords amendment No. 39 will meet the requirements that we want to achieve to address the trends, which ACPO identified, that are undermining the existing legislation. We want to deal with events that are organised indoors and that still have all the elements of the unacceptable raves that were being organised outdoors. The Government's proposal will do that, and the hon. Gentleman's proposals would go wider than would be appropriate for the legislation. I hope, therefore, that I have assured the hon. Gentleman that Lords amendment No. 39 will achieve what he wants and that he will not press amendment (a) to a Division.
        I turn now to the amendments on travellers. Lords amendments Nos. 40 and 41 provide swifter eviction powers to deal with trespassers on land when an alternative site is available. Again, those amendments were tabled as a result of the Government listening to concerns that were expressed in the Lords. Lords amendment No. 40 will ensure that, before the police issue a direction for trespassers to leave land, a suitable pitch will be available on a local authority site.
        Hon. Members, including my right hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Denham). asked what sites might be suitable. A transit site could certainly be suitable. If such issues are the subject of litigation, the courts will ultimately decide what falls within the ambit of a suitable site. We would expect and hope that a fairly pragmatic view would be taken in respect of the practicalities. We will certainly offer guidance on the meaning of the phrase "suitable site". The guidance will not be legally binding, but we will try to give as many indications as we can about what we think falls within that definition.
        Mr. Hawkins: As I mentioned in an intervention on the right hon. Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Denham), I have a big constituency interest in this issue, as the Minister knows. Does she recognise that there is great concern among local authority chief executives, including those in my area, that the Government's proposals may allow a loophole that will make it more difficult to obtain the orders that we were discussing in Committee? Indeed, Labour Back Benchers raised the issue in Committee.
        Does the Minister also recognise that it would be very helpful if the Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the hon. Member for Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper)—who is sitting on the Front Bench with the Minister—agreed, further to what she has already written to me, to talk to her predecessor about what Front Benchers discussed after one of the later Committee sittings, because we need joined-up Government on this issue?
        Ms Blears: I assure the hon. Gentleman that the Under-Secretary will explore those matters. I

        543
        understand that she has been in correspondence with the hon. Gentleman and that she is certainly happy to consider those issues.
        Determining whether a site is suitable is a matter of getting the balance right. Travellers have an interest in gaining access to proper facilities, but hon. Members have clearly expressed views about the rights of the community not to be subject to some of the damage, distress, costs and waste that result from illegal encampments. It is crucial that we get that balance right. I wonder whether there is a fundamental philosophical question about whether a site can be an alternative if it is not suitable; the courts, rather than me, will probably have to decide that. In considering whether a site is suitable, certain factors will have to be taken into account that make it a realistic alternative to which people can be directed. That is a serious matter for us to explore, but getting the right balance between the various interests is very important.
        The new powers in the Bill to deal with trespassers on land aim to provide an additional police power in areas where local authorities have provided authorised sites and there is space on those sites. It important to say that it is an offence for those who are given a direction to leave an unauthorised site to return to that local authority area as a trespasser. That is the incentive in the system for local authorities to make the necessary provision. They can then avail themselves of that power, in addition to the current public order powers, which will allow them swifter eviction and make it an offence for people to return to the area in future.
        It is worth pointing out that, where no space is left on local authority sites, the police still have the power to direct trespassers to leave land under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994—so the police are not left without any power if there is a high degree of antisocial behaviour and problems are caused to the local community.
        Amendment (a) to Lords amendment No. 41, tabled by the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire, would widen the consultation requirements on the police before exercising those new powers. Under amendment (a), rather than simply having to consult the local authorities in whose area the land is situated, the police would also have to consult all adjoining local authorities.
        Mr. Paice: Districts.
        Ms Blears: The hon. Gentleman has accepted that amendment (a) to Lords amendment No. 41 may well not be drafted perfectly—it is a very late amendment—in relation to who needs to be consulted. I have already confirmed—I am happy to do so again for the record—that the existing provisions require consultation with local authorities in the area, so the county and the district authority would be involved in a two-tier area. We believe that that amendment would unhelpfully break the direct link between the provision of sites for travellers in a local authority and the availability of the new powers.
        Those new powers are a key part of the Bill, but they will be available only where local authorities have proper provision. If we were to accept amendment (a) to
        544
        Lords amendment No. 41, we would allow a local authority to rely entirely on a neighbouring authority's site provision to deal with unauthorised encampments in its area. That would remove the incentive for local authorities to provide suitable sites for travellers.
        The hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire asks about cases where local authorities might have extensive provision that is full and suggests that his amendment is necessary to direct people into a neighbouring area. Equally, I am sure that he would accept that amendment (a) to Lords amendment No. 41 would allow authorities that had made no provision to direct people into a neighbouring area. It is crucial to strike the right balance between the interests of travellers in gaining access to facilities and those of the community to be protected from some of the undoubted problems that flow from unauthorised encampments. We have to keep that link. If that link were broken, it would undermine the way in which those powers could be exercised.
        Mr. Paice: The Minister seems to be saying that the rights of whoever owns the land on which travellers are camping without authorisation, which she seemed to be espousing, should be secondary to the obligation of the local authority to provide traveller sites of some form. With respect, I do not think that many people in this country would agree that it is down to the local authority's decisions whether travellers should be able to park illegally on private or perhaps public property on which they are not meant to be parked. That is the gist of what she suggests.
        Ms Blears: Most people in this country would not welcome the position whereby those in a neighbouring local authority who had not made provision for travellers were able to offload their problems on to the residents of a neighbouring local authority that had complied with a responsibility to provide at least minimum services for people in such circumstances. As the hon. Gentleman knows extremely well, making legislation in this place is always a matter of balancing the rights and competing interests of many different groups. Most people would want the Bill to maintain the incentive that encourages local authorities to make appropriate provision. They would view askance the prospect of a local authority, perhaps not one like his, that did not have any provision whatsoever being allowed to direct travellers in their area to a neighbouring local authority, which would have to pick up the bill for providing those facilities.
        Mr. Hawkins: The Minister has not dealt with constituencies such as mine, which are close to a county boundary. A substantial part of my constituency border runs along both the Surrey-Hampshire county boundary and the Surrey-Berkshire county boundary. Surely it cannot be right that, once the Bill becomes law in its current form, only the authorities in Surrey would be consulted, and facilities that might be only a mile or two away but that were just over the county boundary in Berkshire or Hampshire would not be considered. That cannot be common sense.
        Ms Blears: I think the Bill strikes the right balance, whereby the district council and the county council of the area concerned would be consulted. That is an appropriate balance.

        545
        The hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Mrs. Brooke) made a good point about local authorities co-operating, which we are always keen to ensure. She referred, however, to councils being made to work together. We are not in a position to make local authorities work together in those circumstances—again, I am sure that she would share my view about democratic accountability and ensuring that local authorities can take decisions locally. In response to the hon. Lady and the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire, I am prepared to consider, with the Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper), whether the guidance to be issued in relation to travellers' sites can encourage more co-operation and joint working to resolve some of these matters. Clearly, that would enable the police to take advantage of the compulsory sanction available in the Bill, but if we can express in the guidance our will for local authorities to co-operate where appropriate, we shall certainly do that. In response to my right hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Denham), I should say that we will keep the matter under review; there may be further proposals that we can introduce.
        We are keen to ensure that we get the balance right in this important area of law. I am delighted that these matters are now within the ambit of the Bill. They will provide welcome extra powers for the police and the community. We still feel, however, that maintaining the link between the provision of sites and the ability to have this expedited power is essential. There is a dearth of provision in this area in local authorities up and down the country, and if we are to manage things so as to avoid the chaotic situation that existed in the past, more provision is important.
        7.15 pm
        My right hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, lichen, in some welcome, supportive remarks on the Bill, mentioned the issue of guidance to the police and how they can use the antisocial behaviour powers in relation to travellers. I am more than happy to consider that. I want to place on record my view, which is firmly held, that the standard of behaviour that we expect in this country is the same for people wherever they come from, whatever their background, and whatever lifestyle they have adopted. They have a responsibility to live their lives in a decent manner that does not impinge on the rights of the vast majority of people in this country to go about their lawful business. It is essential that everybody, from the range of sections of the community, adheres to the standards of decent behaviour in this country. On that point, the travelling community is just as subject to the provisions in relation to fly tipping and waste disposal as anyone else. I am only too well aware of the enormous costs that have sometimes been faced by local authorities in clearing up the remnants left by unauthorised encampments. Plainly, everybody in this country should be subject to the same legislative requirements in terms of living with other people in the community. I commend amendments to the House.
        Mr. Paice: First, may I address the Minister's response to my amendment (a) to Lords amendment No. 39 on the issue of raves? I bow to the legal advice
        546
        that she has received, which is far wider than that available to the Opposition. If she believes that the problems in relation to the open air are covered better by her way than by mine, so be it. I will not pursue that.
        I want to respond, however, to the hon. Lady's comments about travellers and my amendment. I welcome the comments of the right hon. Member for Southampton, ltchen (Mr. Denham) and the work that he did in pursuing the problems and issues related to travellers to ensure that they are addressed in the Bill. I would be interested on another occasion to hear why the provision was introduced at such a late stage that we have not had a chance to debate it properly in the House, but I welcome its inclusion nevertheless. I wholly agree with the Minister that there is a need to take action, for which I was pressing in Committee.
        I find myself at odds with the Minister, however, in relation to her argument against my amendment (a) to Lords amendment No. 41. It is slightly disingenuous of her to imply that my amendment also relates to counties, as it refers specifically to a district or unitary authority: the adjoining district or unitary authority to the site. Of course I understand her point and that of the right hon. Member for Southampton, Itchen that not every authority is as good as, in my case, Cambridgeshire and its districts—in providing both permanent and transitory sites. Of course some authorities do not make such good provision. I would argue strongly, however, that other avenues are available to the Government, including the district auditor, to make sure that local authorities fulfil their obligations.
        I feel passionately that the people who will suffer if the Government resist my amendment are the landowners—perhaps small or public landowners—on whose land such people descend and park without authorisation. Even if there is no site in a district, but there happens to be one a mile or two over the district boundary in a different county, the Minister says that that cannot be taken into account. It is that landowner who will suffer. I am more than happy to see alternative measures to encourage local authorities to provide satisfactory campsites.
        In relation to the Minister's last remarks, picking up the point about antisocial behaviour orders, of course she is right—everyone in this country has a right to go about their daily life and live their lives without interruption, intervention, harassment and intimidation from other groups of people behaving antisocially. However, I have to tell her that nowhere is that more apparent than in some—I stress the word "some"—cases in which travellers are involved. In constituencies such as mine and many counties such as Cambridgeshire, there are areas in which some—again, I stress the word "some"—travellers make life a misery. All that we tried to do in Committee was to change the Bill to reduce that misery a little.
        The Government have gone some way towards doing what we wanted, but if they resist amendment (a) to Lords amendment No. 41, they will continue to provide a loophole in the law. I fear that the loophole will mean that the powers will be rarely used. That is worrying and it negates the import of what the Minister believes she is trying to do. For that reason, I shall press amendment (a) to Lords amendment No. 41 to a Division. I realise

        547
        that we must first dispose of the other business and, to expedite that, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
        Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
        Lords amendment agreed to.
        Lords amendment No. 40 agreed to.

        POWER TO REMOVE TRESPASSERS; ALTERNATIVE SITE AVAILABLE
        Lords amendment: No. 41.
        Amendment proposed to the Lords amendment: (a) in line 10, at end insert—
        '3C Where the local authority in 3B is a District or Unitary Authority the officer must also consult every adjoining District or Unitary Authority.'.—[Mr. Paice.]
        Question put, That the amendment be made:—
        The House divided: Ayes 156, Noes 311.

        Division No. 365]

        [7:21 pm

        AYES

        Ainsworth, Peter (E Surrey)

        Flook, Adrian

        Allan, Richard

        Forth, rh Eric

        Arbuthnot, rh James

        Fox, Dr. Liam

        Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)

        Gibb, Nick (Bognor Regis)

        Bacon, Richard

        Gidley, Sandra

        Barker, Gregory

        Goodman, Paul

        Baron, John (Billericay)

        Gray, James (N Wilts)

        Barrett, John

        Grayling, Chris

        Bercow, John

        Green, Damian (Ashford)

        Beresford, Sir Paul

        Greenway, John

        Blunt, Crispin

        Grieve, Dominic

        Boswell, Tim

        Gummer, rh John

        Brady, Graham

        Hague, rh William

        Brake, Tom (Carshalton)

        Hancock, Mike

        Brazier, Julian

        Hawkins, Nick

        Breed, Colin

        Hayes, John (S Holland)

        Brooke, Mrs Annette L

        Heald, Oliver

        Bruce, Malcolm

        Heath, David

        Burnett, John

        Heathcoat-Amory, rh David

        Burns, Simon

        Hendry, Charles

        Burstow, Paul

        Hoban, Mark (Fareham)

        Butterfill, John

        Holmes, Paul

        Cable, Dr. Vincent

        Horam, John (Orpington)

        Calton, Mrs Patsy

        Howarth, Gerald (Aldershot)

        Cameron, David

        Jack, rh Michael

        Campbell, rh Menzies (NE Fife)

        Jackson, Robert (Wantage)

        Chapman, Sir Sydney (Chipping Barnet)

        Jenkin, Bernard

        Kennedy, rh Charles (Ross Skye & Inverness)

        Chope, Christopher

        Clappison, James

        Key, Robert (Salisbury)

        Collins, Tim

        Kirkwood, Sir Archy

        Conway, Derek

        Knight, rh Greg (E Yorkshire)

        Curry, rh David

        Laing, Mrs Eleanor

        Davies, Quentin (Grantham & Stamford)

        Lait, Mrs Jacqui

        Laws, David (Yeovil)

        Davis, rh David (Haltemprice & Howden)

        Letwin, rh Oliver

        Liddell-Grainger, Ian

        Djanogly, Jonathan

        Lidington, David

        Doughty, Sue

        Llwyd, Elfyn

        Duncan Smith, rh Iain

        Loughton, Tim

        Evans, Nigel

        Luff, Peter (M-Worcs)

        Fabricant, Michael

        McIntosh, Miss Anne

        Fallon, Michael

        Mackay, rh Andrew

        Field, Mark (Cities of London & Westminster)

        Maclean, rh David

        McLoughlin, Patrick

        Flight, Howard

        Malins, Humfrey

        548

        Maples, John

        Soames, Nicholas

        Marsden, Paul (Shrewsbury & Atcham)

        Spelman, Mrs Caroline

        Spicer, Sir Michael

        Maude, rh Francis

        Spring, Richard

        Mawhinney, rh Sir Brian

        Stanley, rh Sir John

        Mitchell, Andrew (Sutton

        Streeter, Gary

        Coldfield)

        Stunell, Andrew

        Moore, Michael

        Syms, Robert

        Moss, Malcolm

        Taylor, Ian (Esher)

        Murrison, Dr. Andrew

        Taylor, John (Solihull)

        Norman, Archie

        Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

        Oaten, Mark (Winchester)

        Taylor, Sir Teddy

        O'Brien, Stephen (Eddisbury)

        Teather, Sarah

        Osborne, George (Tatton)

        Thomas, Simon (Ceredigion)

        Page, Richard

        Tredinnick, David

        Paice, James

        Turner, Andrew (Isle of Wight)

        Pickles, Eric

        Tyler, Paul (N Cornwall)

        Prisk, Mark (Hertford)

        Tyrie, Andrew

        Pugh, Dr. John

        Viggers, Peter

        Randall, John

        Walter, Robert

        Redwood, rh John

        Waterson, Nigel

        Rendel, David

        Watkinson, Angela

        Robathan, Andrew

        Webb, Steve (Northavon)

        Robertson, Hugh (Faversham & M-Kent)

        Whittingdale, John

        Widdecombe, rh Miss Ann

        Robertson, Laurence (Tewk'b'ry)

        Wiggin, Bill

        Roe, Mrs Marion

        Wilkinson, John

        Rosindell, Andrew

        Willetts, David

        Ruffley, David

        Williams, Hywel (Caernarfon)

        Russell, Bob (Colchester)

        Wilshire, David

        Sanders, Adrian

        Winterton, Ann (Congleton)

        Sayeed, Jonathan

        Winterton, Sir Nicholas

        Selous, Andrew

        (Macclesfield)

        Shephard, rh Mrs Gillian

        Yeo, Tim (S Suffolk)

        Shepherd, Richard

        Young, rh Sir George

        Simmonds, Mark

        Simpson, Keith (M-Norfolk)

        Tellers for the Ayes:

        Smith, Sir Robert (W Ab'd'ns & Kincardine)

        Mr. Mark Francois and

        Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown

        NOES

        Adams, Irene (Paisley N)

        Brown, Russell (Dumfries)

        Ainger, Nick

        Browne, Desmond

        Ainsworth, Bob (Cov'try NE)

        Bryant, Chris

        Alexander, Douglas

        Buck, Ms Karen

        Allen, Graham

        Burden, Richard

        Anderson, Janet (Rossendale & Darwen)

        Burgon, Colin

        Burnham, Andy

        Armstrong, rh Ms Hilary

        Byers, rh Stephen

        Atherton, Ms Candy

        Cairns, David

        Atkins, Charlotte

        Campbell, Alan (Tynemouth)

        Austin, John

        Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge)

        Bailey, Adrian

        Campbell, Ronnie (Blyth V)

        Baird, Vera

        Caplin, Ivor

        Barnes, Harry

        Casale, Roger

        Barron, rh Kevin

        Cawsey, Ian (Brigg)

        Bayley, Hugh

        Challen, Colin

        Beard, Nigel

        Chapman, Ben (Wirral S)

        Bell, Stuart

        Clapham, Michael

        Bennett, Andrew

        Clark, Mrs Helen (Peterborough)

        Benton, Joe (Bootle)

        Clark, Dr. Lynda (Edinburgh Pentlands)

        Berry, Roger

        Best, Harold

        Clark, Paul (Gillingham)

        Betts, Clive

        Clarke, Tony (Northampton S)

        Blackman, Liz

        Clelland, David

        Blears, Ms Hazel

        Clwyd, Ann (Cynon V)

        Blizzard, Bob

        Coffey, Ms Ann

        Blunkett, rh David

        Coleman, Iain

        Boateng, rh Paul

        Colman, Tony

        Borrow, David

        Connarty, Michael

        Bradley, rh Keith (Withington)

        Cook, Frank (Stockton N)

        Bradley, Peter (The Wrekin)

        Cook, rh Robin (Livingston)

        Bradshaw, Ben

        Cooper, Yvette

        Brennan, Kevin

        Corbyn, Jeremy

        Brown, rh Nicholas (Newcastle E Wallsend)

        Cousins, Jim

        Crausby, David

        549

        Cruddas, Jon

        Jackson, Glenda (Hampstead &

        Cryer, John (Hornchurch)

        Highgate)

        Cummings, John

        Jackson, Helen (Hillsborough)

        Cunningham, Jim (Coventry S)

        Jamieson, David

        Cunningham, Tony (Workington)

        Jenkins, Brian

        Dalyell, Tam

        Johnson, Alan (Hull W)

        Davey, Valerie (Bristol W)

        Johnson, Miss Melanie (Welwyn Hatfield)

        David, Wayne

        Davidson, Ian

        Jones, Helen (Warrington N)

        Davies, rh Denzil (Llanelli)

        Jones, Lynne (Selly Oak)

        Davies, Geraint (Croydon C)

        Joyce, Eric (Falkirk W)

        Davis, rh Terry (B'ham Hodge H)

        Kaufman, rh Gerald

        Dean, Mrs Janet

        Keeble, Ms Sally

        Denham, rh John

        Keen, Alan (Feltham)

        Dobson, rh Frank

        Keen, Ann (Brentford)

        Donohoe, Brian H.

        Khabra, Piara S.

        Doran, Frank

        Kidney, David

        Dowd, Jim (Lewisham W)

        Kilfoyle, Peter

        Eagle, Angela (Wallasey)

        King, Andy (Rugby)

        Eagle, Maria (L'pool Garston)

        King, Ms Oona (Bethnal Green & Bow)

        Edwards, Huw

        Efford, Clive

        Knight, Jim (S Dorset)

        Ellman, Mrs Louise

        Kumar, Dr. Ashok

        Ennis, Jeff (Barnsley E)

        Ladyman, Dr. Stephen

        Farrelly, Paul

        Laxton, Bob (Derby N)

        Field, rh Frank (Birkenhead)

        Lazarowicz, Mark

        Fisher, Mark

        Lepper, David

        Fitzpatrick, Jim

        Leslie, Christopher

        Fitzsimons, Mrs Lorna

        Levitt, Tom (High Peak)

        Flint, Caroline

        Lewis, Ivan (Bury S)

        Flynn, Paul (Newport W)

        Liddell, rh Mrs Helen

        Follett, Barbara

        Linton, Martin

        Foster, rh Derek

        Lloyd, Tony (Manchester C)

        Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings & Rye)

        Love, Andrew

        Luke, Iain (Dundee E)

        Francis, Dr. Hywel

        McAvoy, Thomas

        Gapes, Mike (llford S)

        McCabe, Stephen

        Gardiner, Barry

        McDonagh, Siobhain

        Gerrard, Neil

        MacDonald, Calum

        Gilroy, Linda

        McDonnell, John

        Godsiff, Roger

        MacDougall, John

        Goggins, Paul

        McFall, John

        Griffiths, Jane (Reading E)

        McGuire, Mrs Anne

        Grogan, John

        McIsaac, Shona

        Hain, rh Peter

        McKechin, Ann

        Hall, Mike (Weaver Vale)

        McKenna, Rosemary

        Hamilton, David (Midlothian)

        Mackinlay, Andrew

        Hamilton, Fabian (Leeds NE)

        McNulty, Tony

        Hanson, David

        Mactaggart, Fiona

        Harris, Tom (Glasgow Cathcart)

        McWilliam, John

        Havard, Dai (Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney)

        Mahmood, Khalid

        Mahon, Mrs Alice

        Henderson, Doug (Newcastle N)

        Mallaber, Judy

        Henderson, Ivan (Harwich)

        Mandelson, rh Peter

        Hepburn, Stephen

        Mann, John (Bassetlaw)

        Heppell, John

        Marris, Rob (Wolverh'ton SW)

        Hermon, Lady

        Marsden, Gordon (Blackpool S)

        Hesford, Stephen

        Marshall, David (Glasgow Shettleston)

        Hewitt, rh Ms Patricia

        Heyes, David

        Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)

        Hill, Keith (Streatham)

        Marshall-Andrews, Robert

        Hoey, Kate (Vauxhall)

        Martlew, Eric

        Hope, Phil (Corby)

        Merron, Gillian

        Hopkins, Kelvin

        Michael, rh Alun

        Howarth, George (Knowsley N & Sefton E)

        Milburn, rh Alan

        Miller, Andrew

        Howells, Dr. Kim

        Mitchell, Austin (Gt Grimsby)

        Hughes, Beverley (Stretford & Urmston)

        Moffatt, Laura

        Mole, Chris

        Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N)

        Moran, Margaret

        Humble, Mrs Joan

        Morley, Elliot

        Hurst, Alan (Braintree)

        Morris, rh Estelle

        Hutton, rh John

        Mountford, Kali

        Illsley, Eric

        Mullin, Chris

        Ingram, rh Adam

        Murphy, Denis (Wansbeck)

        Irranca-Davies, Huw

        Murphy, Jim (Eastwood)

        550

        Murphy, rh Paul (Torfaen)

        Smith, John (Glamorgan)

        Naysmith, Dr. Doug

        Soley, Clive

        O'Brien, Mike (N Warks)

        Spellar, rh John

        Olner, Bill

        Squire, Rachel

        Organ, Diana

        Starkey, Dr. Phyllis

        Osborne, Sandra (Ayr)

        Steinberg, Gerry

        Palmer, Dr. Nick

        Stevenson, George

        Pearson, Ian

        Stewart, Ian (Eccles)

        Perham, Linda

        Stinchcombe, Paul

        Picking, Anne

        Stoate, Dr. Howard

        Pickthall, Colin

        Stringer, Graham

        Pike, Peter (Burnley)

        Stuart, Ms Gisela

        Plaskitt, James

        Tami, Mark (Alyn)

        Pollard, Kerry

        Taylor, rh Ann (Dewsbury)

        Pond, Chris (Gravesham)

        Taylor, Dari (Stockton S)

        Pope, Greg (Hyndburn)

        Taylor, David (NW Leics)

        Pound, Stephen

        Thomas, Gareth (Clwyd W)

        Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lewisham E)

        Thomas, Gareth (Harrow W)

        Timms, Stephen

        Prentice, Gordon (Pendle)

        Tipping, Paddy

        Primarolo, rh Dawn

        Todd, Mark (S Derbyshire)

        Prosser, Gwyn

        Touhig, Don (Islwyn)

        Purchase, Ken

        Trickett, Jon

        Purnell, James

        Truswell, Paul

        Quinn, Lawrie

        Turner, Dennis (Wolverh'ton SE)

        Rammell, Bill

        Turner, Neil (Wigan)

        Rapson, Syd (Portsmouth N)

        Twigg, Derek (Halton)

        Raynsford, rh Nick

        Tynan, Bill (Hamilton S)

        Robertson, John (Glasgow Anniesland)

        Vaz, Keith (Leicester E)

        Vis, Dr. Rudi

        Robinson, Geoffrey (Coventry NW)

        Walley, Ms Joan

        Ward, Claire

        Rooney, Terry

        Wareing, Robert N.

        Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)

        Watson, Tom (W Bromwich E)

        Roy, Frank (Motherwell)

        Watts, David

        Ruane, Chris

        White, Brian

        Ruddock, Joan

        Whitehead, Dr. Alan

        Russell, Ms Christine (City of Chester)

        Wicks, Malcolm

        Williams, rh Alan (Swansea W)

        Ryan, Joan (Enfield N)

        Williams, Betty (Conwy)

        Salter, Martin

        Winnick, David

        Sarwar, Mohammad

        Winterton, Ms Rosie (Doncaster C)

        Savidge, Malcolm

        Sawford, Phil

        Wood, Mike (Batley)

        Sedgemore, Brian

        Woolas, Phil

        Shaw, Jonathan

        Worthington, Tony

        Sheerman, Barry

        Wray, James (Glasgow Baillieston)

        Sheridan, Jim

        Short, rh Clare

        Wright, Anthony D. (Gt Yarmouth)

        Simon, Siôn (B'ham Erdington)

        Singh, Marsha

        Wright, David (Telford)

        Skinner, Dennis

        Wright, Tony (Cannock)

        Smith, Angela (Basildon)

        Smith, rh Chris (Islington S & Finsbury)

        Tellers for the Noes:

        Mr. Fraser Kemp and

        Smith, Jacqui (Redditch)

        Vernon Coaker

        Question accordingly negatived.
        Lords amendment No. 41 agreed to.

        New Clause
        Lords amendment:No. 42, after clause 65, to insert the following new clause—High hedges.
        Yvette Cooper: I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
        Mr.Deputy Speaker: With this we may discuss Lords amendment Nos. 43 to 61, 63 and 66 to 71.
        Yvette Cooper: The amendments give local authorities the power to deal with complaints about high garden hedges that cannot be settled by negotiation and to take action if necessary. They import into the Bill the action if necessary. They import into the Bill the provisions so ably championed by my hon. Friend the

        551
        Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Pound) in his private Member's Bill, the High Hedges (No. 2) Bill. The Government are extremely pleased to incorporate those measures in this Bill. I congratulate my hon. Friend on doing so much to pursue the cause and to raise the concerns of people who are troubled by high hedge disputes.
        There have been seven private Members' Bills on the subject. Most received broad support, certainly from Labour Members. Opposition Members also wrote to the Government on behalf of their constituents. The hon. Member for Solihull (Mr. Taylor) introduced one of those Bills. Baroness Gardner of Parkes recently introduced two Bills on the subject and we have responded to the concerns that she raised in the House of Lords. The Government backed the Bill introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North and looked for other ways to pursue it when it was talked out by a small number of Conservative Back Benchers. We have also responded to Members of both Houses who asked whether the measures could be incorporated into this Bill, which we decided was the right thing to do.
        Unreasonably high hedges can block out light from neighbours' houses and gardens. Hedgeline estimates that there are 10,000 cases across the country of neighbours who are in dispute over the height of a hedge. We are all aware of problems such as bungalows crowded out by towering leylandii. We know that that makes neighbours' lives a misery, especially if the hedge owner refuses to respond. It is unfair on those who are suffering from the problem to leave them with no mechanism for appeal or adjudication.
        Mr. Greg Knight: On fairness, my reading of the new clauses is that they would also apply to a case in which a new property is built on a plot of land next to an existing high hedge. Why should the owner of a high hedge have to cut it back because of a property that is subsequently built next door? Would it not be more reasonable to exempt those cases that arise when the house comes after the hedge?
        Yvette Cooper: We hope that neighbours will resolve such problems themselves. Local authorities can take a wide range of considerations into account when addressing such disputes. They have discretion to respond to the nature of the circumstances involved and to direct remedial action. They may, however, decide that although a hedge has an impact on a house, remedial action is not appropriate in the circumstances. We will consult further on the guidance and the implementation of the measures.
        The problems involve disputes between neighbours that we hope they will resolve. If they do not, the fundamental principle is that it is right to have a dispute resolution mechanism and some way of sorting out the problem. In truth, to those who suffer the most extreme forms of the problem, it can be just as antisocial as graffiti or noisy neighbours. We should not accept the stereotype that antisocial behaviour is only about teenagers on low-income estates. People face a wide
        552
        range of antisocial behaviour and it is right that we can address problems relating to high hedges in the Anti-social Behaviour Bill.
        Mr. John Horam: Following on from the intervention of my right hon. Friend the Member for East Yorkshire (Mr. Knight), I think it important that in this respect we keep the Bill as simple as possible. I strongly support and greatly appreciate the efforts made by the hon. Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Pound) to bring the issue to the attention of the House through his private Member's Bill, and I am delighted that the measure has all-party support. However, we need to keep things simple and rely as far as possible on common sense and neighbours sorting the problem out between themselves. If we make the provision too complicated, with too many exemptions, we will land ourselves in serious trouble.
        Yvette Cooper: The hon. Gentleman is right. Furthermore, we should allow local authorities to take the most appropriate decision in the circumstances, because every case will be different. It would not be appropriate to try to prescribe in legislation the types of hedges that people should have, nor to set down blanket provisions. The approach taken should be one of dispute resolution—finding a way to solve the problem.
        Mr. Jim Cunningham: I agree with my hon. Friend. These are human situations in which emotions are involved, and there has to be some form of resolution. That should be achieved primarily through conciliation, but if that does not work, something has to be done.
        Yvette Cooper: My hon. Friend is right, and I pay tribute to him as one who piloted two of the Bills on high hedges through this House. He has championed the cause strongly in the past few years. We in this House have had many hours of debate on these issues—
        Mr. Pound: Twenty-one.
        Yvette Cooper: As my hon. Friend reminds me, we have had 21 hours of debate during the passage of the many private Members' Bills on the issue. We know that hon. Members receive huge numbers of letters about high hedges from their constituents, and we at the Department have received many as well. The Government are keen to get the measures on to the statute book as rapidly as possible, and I am pleased that the Anti-social Behaviour Bill has provided a mechanism by which to achieve that.
        Mr. Geoffrey Clifton-Brown: The Opposition called for a provision to deal with high hedges in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill. Will the Minister say what the regulations, which I understand are not yet published, will contain? Will they be based on the current Building Research Establishment guidelines? Will she say something about costs? How much of an extra burden will be placed on local authorities?
        Yvette Cooper: That is the purpose of the consultation. We aim to have regulations published and out for consultation as rapidly as possible. We will consult over the course of next year, with the aim of having the measures fully implemented toward the end of 2004 if possible. Fees and the guidance that is to be

        553
        issued are precisely the type of thing on which we shall consult. I do not think that they are appropriate matters to deal with in the Bill—we should consult on and deal properly with such details through regulation.
        Mr. Paice: As the Minister rightly says, high hedges have taken a great deal of the House's time throughout the years that I have been a Member. The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, the hon. Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Mullin), who is present on the Treasury Bench, and I entered the House at the same time, I think, and we have witnessed most of the innumerable debates that the Minister described. The hon. Lady is right to say that the issue is one that has featured in every MP's postbag—except perhaps that of the hon. Member for Western Isles (Mr. MacDonald), because there are not many hedges in his constituency.
        Shona McIsaac: Or in the City of London.
        7.45 pm
        Mr. Paice: The Minister's Parliamentary Private Secretary is being wholly improper in speaking in the Chamber, given that her Minister is in charge of this issue.
        High hedges are of huge concern to many people, but although the fact that they can be a problem is indisputable, views vary on the best way to tackle it. Several attempts have been made to deal with the problem in private Members' Bills—not all of which were the same—but the most recent and, if the measure is passed tonight, the most significant attempt was that of the hon. Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Pound).
        When scrutiny of the Anti-social Behaviour Bill started many months ago, few of us realised just what a Christmas tree it would become. In Standing Committee, my hon. Friends and I and the Liberal Democrats thought that we were pushing our luck in trying to introduce measures to deal with animal rights activists, travellers and raves, but all those things are now well and truly in the Bill, and I am delighted about that. The Government's decision that high hedges constitute an antisocial activity and therefore come within the compass of the Bill was a surprising, albeit worthwhile, piece of initiative on their part.
        As my hon. Friend the Member for Cotswold (Mr. Clifton-Brown) said, the Opposition have supported measures to deal with problems of high hedges, and we shall not oppose this provision tonight. The Government have taken an opportunity to address the problem—I was going to press my luck by saying "Once and for all", but rarely does any piece of legislation solve any problem once and for all. However, for a period, the Bill will address the problem of high hedges and the Government are right to have acted.
        I do not want to sound churlish, but I should sound a note of caution. Picking up a private Member's Bill and adding its provisions to a major public Bill is not an idea that I want to be taken up often, because it is not necessarily the right way to legislate. Despite the number of hours spent discussing this issue, most people accept in their heart of hearts that scrutiny of private Members' Bills is not always as robust as scrutiny of
        554
        public Bills, simply because of the number of right hon. and hon. Members present on the days when private Members' Bills are discussed.
        None the less, the subject has had a great deal of time devoted to it, and the Government have taken the opportunity to do something about a problem that besets all our constituents—or at least constituents of us all—and have done so in a way that I hope will deal with the problem without being over-burdensome and over-intrusive.
        Mr. Clifton-Brown: I am sorry to detain my hon. Friend, who is making a cogent case, but will he press the Government on one point? Hedgeline informs us that there are 10,000 outstanding cases which, if they all come to be conciliated immediately after the Bill is passed, will place a significant burden on local authorities. Local authorities up and down the land should have some form of commitment from Ministers that the Government will provide the extra resources required to resolve those cases.
        Mr. Paice: My hon. Friend has been a Member of Parliament almost as long as I have and he knows as well as I do that Governments of all persuasions are remarkably good at giving local authorities extra jobs without giving them the resources to do them. I am conscious that even if the Government say that they will provide the extra resources, it only means that they will take the money from some other area in which they were supporting local authorities. None the less, my hon. Friend is right to point out that the measure carries a potential initial cost impact, because of the large number of outstanding cases. I have no doubt that that impact will be felt; then, as the legislation gradually settles in, use of it will decrease.
        I hope that local authorities will use the powers cautiously and deal with real problems, but not enter into too much vexatious activity. I am not suggesting that they are likely to do the latter, but the power should be used sparingly, to address a problem when all else has failed. Having encountered several such cases in my constituency, I know that they can often be resolved by non-statutory means—obviously, statutory means have not been available until now. I hope that the legislative provision will be used relatively rarely, but I am glad that it will be there if all other means of resolving a case fail.
        As I said, the Opposition do not oppose the Government on this matter. Indeed, we welcome the opportunity that the Government are taking to use the Bill to introduce these measures. We hope that they will fulfil the objective and reduce the postbag of most right hon. and hon. Members.
        Mr. Pound: The hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice) referred to gloating in connection with another group of Lords amendments. With some difficulty, I will resist the opportunity to gloat until the hon. Member for Christchurch (Mr. Chope) assumes his place.
        In a typically wise, generous and positive contribution, the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire referred to the Christmas tree effect. In fact, Christmas has come early, not only for me but for

        555
        the 10,000 hedge victims, who can now face the autumn shades closing in and the prospect of winter stretching before them with the knowledge that, when spring comes, daylight will be allowed to break through to gardens that for too long have been shrouded in darkness at noon, in the perpetual twilight of the garden blighted by the loathsome leylandii. We have the prospect of bringing succour, relief and daylight to those people.
        If I achieve nothing else in my short time in the House, which is entirely likely, the fact that I have been associated with this piece of legislation will not only be a source of immense pride for me but an opportunity that I will use to bore the pants off my neighbours, children and grandchildren in times to come.
        The mood in the Chamber tonight is very different from the mood experienced earlier. These provisions were described—I rather think that the words are carved on my heart—by the hon. Member for Christchurch as representing a threat to this green and pleasant land far greater than the effects of the great storm of 1987, of Dutch elm disease and of the depredations of the Luftwaffe. The fact that we have moved beyond that to realise that before us is sensible legislation that will bring great relief to many people is a tribute to the House, and something for which I could not possibly take any credit personally.
        Where credit is to be given, I remind the House of the sterling efforts of Baroness Gardner of Parkes and Baroness Hamwee, who have exhibited deft footwork in the other place. They struggled constantly to ensure that these sensible provisions are placed on the statute book, and they must be congratulated. While I am dishing out early Christmas presents—I hope that it is entirely appropriate to do so—I thank my hon. Friend the Minister in the most obsequious and generous terms for her contribution and her dedication. She has taken up the ball that was put down reluctantly by the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow, East (Mr. McNulty). That is an immense tribute to her. She has taken it so close to success—I was about to say fruition but that may be an inappropriate metaphor in this context—and that is a great credit to her.
        The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Mullin) has been mentioned. I think that the House was aware that, if all else failed, he had a Bill on the stocks ready to be wheeled out. That prospect concentrated the mind of the House wonderfully. It has encouraged us in the glorious warmth and amity that we are experiencing this evening.
        We should pay tribute also to my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, South (Mr. Cunningham), who introduced a Bill similar to mine. I pillaged many of his ideas with no acknowledgement whatsoever, but I am glad to acknowledge him tonight. I do not say that because he is sitting behind me.
        I must also refer to my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Lynne Jones). I particularly regret that the hon. Member for Solihull (Mr. Taylor) has other urgent business this evening. He and I are occasionally confused with each other. How two
        556
        tonsorially challenged right wingers can possibly be confused in that way is beyond me. However, I consider that I am blessed by the comparison with the hon. Gentleman. He introduced an excellent Bill and allowed me to steal from it in the same way that I pillaged the Bill of my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, South. The devotion and dedication of the hon. Member for Solihull to this legislation is much to his credit. I remember his speeches when his Bill came before the House on one of those benighted Friday mornings of tender memory. They persuaded many people of the efficacy and strength of the Bill. I hope that I have included most hon. Members in the Christmas card list.
        I shall take up the point raised by the hon. Member who I think represents Cotswold. Is it all of the Cotswolds?
        Mr. Clifton-Brown: Most of it.
        Mr. Pound: I refer to the Member who represents most of the Cotswolds, the hon. Member for Cotswold (Mr. Clifton-Brown), who talked about the burden on local authorities. Burdens on local authorities are a subject close to my heart. During my 16 years on Ealing council, I was acutely aware that I frequently added to those burdens. However, in the absence of any legislation, there is a huge burden on local authorities. When people have a dispute with their neighbours about hedges, there is no way in which the local authority can help. At the same time, the average member of the public does not believe that the local authority can help. As a result, hours and hours of officer time are spent telling people, "We can't help you." In many instances officers cannot provide that piece of information. They then have to provide reasons and justifications. There may well be a backlog. The hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire was entirely right and typically generous and far-sighted in his assumption that that peak will pass and that we will drift down into the sunlit uplands of a world without leylandii disputes.
        David Davis: Down to the uplands?
        Mr. Pound: I am sorry. Drift up to the downlands. We may either drift down to the uplands or up to the downlands as we choose.
        I wish to underscore the point that was made with great clarity by my hon. Friend the Minister. She referred to the provisions as an essential adjunct to the Bill. If there be criticism of this modest piece of legislation tonight—if there is, I have yet to hear it—it may come from those who cavil at the way in which this section of the Bill has been brought to the Floor of the House. They may say that it is not directly applicable to antisocial behaviour. I remind the House, if it needs reminding, that two people are dead as a result of fighting and feuding over hedges. There has been one murder and one suicide. The issue is that serious.
        In addition, 4,000 members of Hedgeline and 10,000 people who have reported their problems to Hedgeline are in dispute with their neighbours. I profoundly hope that, once the Bill has passed through the consultation period outside the House and starts to firm up in people's minds as imminent legislation, many sensible

        557
        people will say, "Let's not wait for the Bill. Let's get together, talk and sort it out." There will always be an irreducible minimum. Some people will always use high hedges as a weapon of war in a neighbour dispute. Some people will use these missile-shaped trees as missiles against their neighbour. I accept that that will happen, but it also happens in boundary disputes and disputes about parking access, for example. We are familiar with all the neighbourhood problems that we read about in our postbags.
        Call me naive or call me innocent, but I hope that when people realise that Parliament takes this matter sufficiently seriously to add to the 21 long hours that we have already spent discussing it by bringing it to the House in the form in which it is being considered, they will realise also that the issue is one of great seriousness. I profoundly hope that we will end these appalling disputes over the bizarre invention of Dr. Leyland in 1882. I frequently travel outside my constituency, usually at the request of my constituents, but in doing so I have discovered that a large number of local authorities are already setting in train the mechanism to implement the Bill. There are even companies such as Haygate Engineering, one of our most entrepreneurial engineering companies, that already offer safety platforms to enable local authorities to undertake the work. Councils up and down the country are welcoming the chance, not because they wish to act like some local government gauleiter and dictate how things should or should not be done, but because they have an immense problem and have not been willed the tools to address it.
        8 pm
        This group of amendments will will the tools. We have shown in the House that we want to resolve the issue once and for all. I am delighted that, finally, after all this effort, we are almost on the last lap, and are approaching the prospect that legislation will be made. I do not propose, unless the House insists, to go through every semi-colon and comma of the Lords amendments, which probably constitute the most scrutinised piece of legislation in many a long year. However, for the sake of the House and people outside, who may include my children but not many others, may I stress that the Bill's key aim is not to slice down leylandii? The whirr of the chainsaws will not be heard on every suburban street corner or even most of the Cotswolds. If enacted, the Bill will apply only where there is a problem. People can still have leylandii arching up to the heavens, but if the trees constitute a problem to their neighbours, they will at last have legal recourse to solve the problem.
        The amendments will not mean the end of leylandii, although some of us would be pleased to see the end of that growth. However, where there is a problem, there will be a possible solution. People can still have leylandii and, if they wish, a screen at the end of the garden, but finally there will be a way of dealing with the worst aspects of the problem, such as the soil turning acid from the trees and gardens being in permanent shade. Overall, in the absence of any comments to the contrary, I hope that we accept that the House has taken a problem, addressed concerns, and proposed a resolution.
        In conclusion, I pay particular tribute to the officials who have produced at great personal cost, particularly given the time that they spent in my office, which is not the healthiest environment, a terse, exact, precise,
        558
        effective and workable piece of legislation. The provision may appear to be a modest piece of legislation, and may not be one of the great moments in legislative history or one of the high points of the parliamentary record, but it will make an enormous difference for the better for a large number of people. Can we ask more than that, when we come to the House, we do not do harm but good for some people? Tonight, we have the opportunity to bring relief to many who have suffered for too long. [HON. MEMBERS: "Sit down."] I usually hear the cry of "sit down" from my own side, but tonight it has come from the Opposition. I strongly support this group of Lords amendments and again thank the officials, other hon. Members who have tackled this issue and, in particular, the Minister.
        Mrs. Brooke: I pay tribute to the many Members who have been involved in bringing this piece of legislation to the point where, we hope, it will be passed. I congratulate in particular the hon. Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Pound). I was a bit surprised that, on Report, such a charming and eloquent Member had not gathered enough friends to ensure the smooth progress of his proposals. Indeed, I began to wonder where his friends were. However, the fact that those proposals are now attached to the Anti-Social Behaviour Bill means that he must have gained their support after all, or perhaps he has friends in higher places. It is difficult to match his eloquence, but the Bill has the potential to improve many people's quality of life greatly.
        There may be lots of jokes about high hedges, but they are a serious problem for many of our constituents. We must, however, put the problem into perspective; we must not sound anti-hedge, as hedges are an extremely important part of our urban and suburban environment. On Report, it was suggested that the hon. Member for Ealing, North wanted to cut down every hedge in the country, which is obviously nonsense. We are talking about hedges that affect people's quality of life. Conflicts can arise, as some people want privacy, but achieving it may result in the loss of light for others and a detrimental effect on their environment. It is therefore right to have a statutory framework in which to address the conflict, which, I hope, can be resolved through mediation.
        Mr. Heath: Does my hon. Friend agree that the measure is a helpful addition to our legislative armoury? However, the greatest benefit will come after the first rash of mediation or enforcement, when people will realise that that there is legislation on the statute book and will have sensible regard for the needs of their neighbours as well as themselves.
        Mrs. Brooke: I certainly agree with my hon. Friend. If I have any concerns, they are about the enormous amount of work that will have to be undertaken in the first year or two. It will take a number of cases before clear precedents are set, because it is generally true of planning applications that it takes time to look back at other cases. Once we have reached that point, however, it should be much easier to deal with the problem, and people will be much more respectful of their neighbours' needs in the first place. However, it is important to stress that people have the right to privacy, so we must always look at both sides of the argument.

        559
        On Report, we discussed at great length an amendment that would have excluded schools, but that would have had the effect of preventing the worst case in my constituency, involving a private school with a rapidly growing high hedge, from being tackled. The owners contend that it protects neighbouring properties from balls and other intrusions from the school. In fact, it impacts on a large number of people, so it is important that some of the proposed amendments did not get very far.
        I share hon. Members' concerns about the resources needed to implement the provisions, particularly in the first few years, and the burden on local authorities. There is a council in my constituency that does not have any rate support grant, so funding should be targeted so that the costs are picked up. However, the majority of people will be prepared to pay a few pence more so that the problem is addressed.
        I think of the elderly people whom I have known who have had to live most of their lives in a downstairs room with an electric light on all day long. That is a tragedy when people are coming to the end of their lives and may not be able to go out much. I am delighted that we are dealing with the measure tonight. I give it my wholehearted support, as do my hon. Friends, who did their best to support the Bill introduced by the hon. Member for Ealing, North.
        Lynne Jones: I think I can claim to be the first in the House to suggest that antisocial behaviour legislation should be used to deal with the nuisance caused by giant hedges. That was during consideration of a previous Bill under a previous Home Secretary. The response that I received and the perplexed look that I was given signalled to me that, unfortunately, the time was not yet ripe for such legislation. Since then, as we have heard, private Members' Bills have been introduced by the hon. Member for Solihull (Mr. Taylor) and by my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Pound).
        During that period, a massive amount of lobbying and the effective group Hedgeline, which was founded by my constituent, Michael Jones, have made their mark. A matter which, I am sorry to say, was considered rather a joke eventually came to be taken seriously by the majority of hon. Members, so I am delighted that the Minister, or Ministers, whoever they were, took the decision to incorporate my hon. Friend's Bill into the antisocial behaviour legislation. They were spurred on by the excellent work of Baroness Gardner, who tabled her own less effective amendment, which was subsequently subsumed into the Government's proposals. I congratulate all those responsible, who worked so hard to bring about the legislation.
        I share the hopes expressed by other Members that the prospect of the Bill coming into force will focus the minds of neighbours who are in dispute about high hedges, and that they will come to some amicable arrangement for dealing with the problems. Finally, it is now possible for me to say to my hon. Friend the Minister that the meeting that I had requested, which my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North, the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and
        560
        Commonwealth Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Mullin) and Baroness Gardner had also requested, is no longer necessary, so we can withdraw the request.
        Mr. Adrian Flook: I am pleased that we will not go through every one of the amendments. At 16 pages, the measure is considerably more complicated than I remember it when I served on the Standing Committee and we rather rushed through the private Member's Bill tabled by the hon. Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Pound). I am pleased that after many years the Bill will be enacted and finally has Government support. With reference to the Minister's comments earlier, I note that since August 2000 the Government have said that a new law would be introduced as soon as there was space in the parliamentary timetable.
        Mr. Pound: I am extremely reluctant to interrupt the hon. Gentleman in his flow, but the amendments before us are, in the words of parliamentary counsel, to all intents and purposes almost identical with the Bill that was introduced in my name, so I can assure the hon. Gentleman that nothing else has been smuggled in in the shadow of the cypress leylandii.
        8.15 pm
        Mr. Flook: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I was referring to the fact that his name will be associated not with a private Member's Bill, but with a Bill on antisocial behaviour. With his predilection for smoking, he would know something about that.
        The problem of high hedges is not as gripping an issue in the Taunton constituency as it is in the leafy suburbs of Ealing, but it is nevertheless an issue, judging by the number of letters that I have received. Mr. Bernard Routley of Priorswood has been troubled enough to get in touch with me several times in the two and a half years that I have been a Member of Parliament. No doubt he will be particularly pleased by amendment No. 46 allowing him to seek a remedial notice. I am sure that that will reduce the burden on Taunton Deane borough council, which has had to keep replying to members of the public such as Mr. Routley, who feel constrained by the lack of legislation on the matter.
        Even in the rural parts of my constituency such as Bishopswood, which is nowhere near Priorswood, where the houses are sparsely situated along either side of a declining road and which is at the most southerly tip of Taunton Deane, people are worried about the problems caused by high hedges. A gentleman whose house I visited there will be pleased that hedges that are affecting him from non-domestic properties are not ruled out, as I understand it.
        I support the amendments, but I have some reservations. After all the work put in by Baroness Gardner of Parkes in another place, by the hon. Member for Coventry, South (Mr. Cunningham), by my hon. Friend the Member for Solihull (Mr. Taylor) and of course by the hon. Member for Ealing, North, we still

        561
        await the objective tests from the Building Research Establishment, although I acknowledge that the Minister said she would bring them in as rapidly as possible. I hope that the hon. Member for Ealing, North will make sure that that guidance about the objective tests is forthcoming as soon as possible.
        I am particularly concerned for my local council, Taunton Deane, that the fees that it may be able to charge should compensate for some of the costs that it will no doubt incur. We wait to see the Government guidance on that. I should be grateful if, in the time remaining, the Minister would explain how the planning inspectorate will deal with the great rush of appeals that will no doubt materialise once the legislation is passed, as I am sure it will be.
        Yvette Cooper: I shall reply briefly to the points that have been raised. The hon. Members for Cotswold (Mr. Clifton-Brown), for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Mrs. Brooke) and for Taunton (Mr. Flook) expressed concern about the financial position. They will be aware that that was one of the issues picked up in the debate about the money resolution. Fees can be levied, although consultation is still to take place about the level of those fees and whether they should be set at full cost recovery. If there is a shortfall, we will follow the established procedure for recompensing local authorities for new burdens. The hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole suggested that that was a concern because of the revenue support grant. In fact, since the reforms were introduced, all authorities receive a positive amount of revenue support grant.
        My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Lynne Jones) is right. She and many others have raised the issue of high hedges over a considerable time. I am glad that we have managed to resolve it so publicly before the meeting that she asked for. I pay tribute to her constituent and to Hedgeline for the work that they have done on the matter.
        Although the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice) welcomed the measures in the amendments, he said that he was not entirely happy with the mechanism and the fact that a private Member's Bill had been incorporated into a Government Bill in this way. All of us would have preferred the Bill to have passed through the private Member's Bill procedure, and many of us backed it through that procedure. We would not have done so, had it not been quite such an excellent private Member's Bill introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North.
        We should conclude the debate where we started—by congratulating my hon. Friend, not just on his private Member's Bill, but on his speech, which entertained us and reminded us why we need the amendments. He pointed out that the measures had been debated for a total of 21 hours and 15 minutes. I can now say that, at the end of a total of 22 hours and 20 minutes, I hope that the House will support the Lords amendments and allow us to get the measures finally on to the statute book.
        Lords amendment agreed to.
        Lords amendments Nos. 43 to 74 agreed to [Some with Special Entry].

        DELEGATED LEGISLATION
        Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 118(6)(Standing Committees on Delegated Legislation),

        INCOME TAX
        That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that the Double Taxation Relief (Taxes on Income) (Chile) Order 2003 be made in the form of the draft laid before this House on 8th September.—[Derek Twigg.]
        Question agreed to.
        Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 118(6)(Standing Committees on Delegated Legislation),

        INCOME TAX
        That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that the Double Taxation Relief (Taxes on Income) (Australia) Order 2003 be made in the form of the draft laid before this House on 8th September.—[Derek Twigg.]
        Question agreed to.
        Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 118 (6)(Standing Committees on Delegated Legislation),

        INVESTIGATORY POWERS
        That the draft Retention of Communications Data (Code of Practice) Order 2003, which was laid before this House on 29th October, be approved.—[Derek Twigg]
        The House divided: Ayes 312, Noes 154.

        Division No. 366]

        [8:22 pm

        AYES

        Adams, Irene (Paisley N)

        Bryant, Chris

        Ainger, Nick

        Buck, Ms Karen

        Ainsworth, Bob (Cov'try NE)

        Burden, Richard

        Alexander, Douglas

        Burgon, Colin

        Allen, Graham

        Byers, rh Stephen

        Anderson, Janet (Rossendale & Darwen)

        Cairns, David

        Campbell, Alan (Tynemouth)

        Armstrong, rh Ms Hilary

        Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge)

        Atherton, Ms Candy

        Caplin, Ivor

        Austin, John

        Casale, Roger

        Bailey, Adrian

        Cawsey, Ian (Brigg)

        Baird, Vera

        Challen, Colin

        Banks, Tony

        Chapman, Ben (Wirral S)

        Barnes, Harry

        Chaytor, David

        Barron, rh Kevin

        Clapham, Michael

        Battle, John

        Clark, Mrs Helen (Peterborough)

        Bayley, Hugh

        Clark, Dr. Lynda (Edinburgh Pentlands)

        Beard, Nigel

        Bell, Stuart

        Clarke, rh Tom (Coatbridge & Chryston)

        Bennett, Andrew

        Benton, Joe (Bootle)

        Clarke, Tony (Northampton S)

        Berry, Roger

        Clelland, David

        Best, Harold

        Clwyd, Ann (Cynon V)

        Betts, Clive

        Coaker, Vernon

        Blackman, Liz

        Coffey, Ms Ann

        Blears, Ms Hazel

        Colman, Tony

        Blizzard, Bob

        Connarty, Michael

        Blunkett, rh David

        Cook, rh Robin (Livingston)

        Boateng, rh Paul

        Cooper, Yvette

        Borrow, David

        Cousins, Jim

        Bradley, rh Keith (Withington)

        Crausby, David

        Bradley, Peter (The Wrekin)

        Cruddas, Jon

        Brennan, Kevin

        Cryer, John (Hornchurch)

        Brown, rh Nicholas (Newcastle E Wallsend)

        Cummings, John

        Cunningham, Jim (Coventry S)

        Brown, Russell (Dumfries)

        Cunningham, Tony (Workington)

        Browne, Desmond

        Davey, Valerie (Bristol W)

        563

        David, Wayne

        Jackson, Helen (Hillsborough)

        Davidson, Ian

        Jamieson, David

        Davies, rh Denzil (Llanelli)

        Jenkins, Brian

        Davies, Geraint (Croydon C)

        Johnson, Alan (Hull W)

        Davis, rh Terry (B'ham Hodge H)

        Johnson, Miss Melanie (Welwyn Hatfield)

        Dawson, Hilton

        Dean, Mrs Janet

        Jones, Helen (Warrington N)

        Denham, rh John

        Jones, Lynne (Selly Oak)

        Dobson, rh Frank

        Joyce, Eric (Falkirk W)

        Donohoe, Brian H.

        Kaufman, rh Gerald

        Doran, Frank

        Keeble, Ms Sally

        Dowd, Jim (Lewisham W)

        Kemp, Fraser

        Eagle, Angela (Wallasey)

        Khabra, Piara S.

        Eagle, Maria (L'poolGarston)

        Kidney, David

        Edwards, Huw

        Kilfoyle, Peter

        Efford, Clive

        King, Andy (Rugby)

        Ellman, Mrs Louise

        King, Ms Oona (Bethnal Green & Bow)

        Ennis, Jeff (Barnsley E)

        Farrelly, Paul

        Knight, Jim (S Dorset)

        Field, rh Frank (Birkenhead)

        Kumar, Dr. Ashok

        Fisher, Mark

        Ladyman, Dr. Stephen

        Fitzpatrick, Jim

        Lammy, David

        Fitzsimons, Mrs Lorna

        Lawrence, Mrs Jackie

        Flint, Caroline

        Laxton, Bob (Derby N)

        Flynn, Paul (Newport W)

        Lazarowicz, Mark

        Follett, Barbara

        Lepper, David

        Foster, rh Derek

        Leslie, Christopher

        Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings & Rye)

        Levitt, Tom (High Peak)

        Lewis, Ivan (Bury S)

        Francis, Dr. Hywel

        Liddell, rh Mrs Helen

        Gapes, Mike (llford S)

        Linton, Martin

        Gardiner, Barry

        Lloyd, Tony (Manchester C)

        Gerrard, Neil

        Love, Andrew

        Gilroy, Linda

        Luke, Iain (Dundee E)

        Godsiff, Roger

        Lyons, John (Strathkelvin)

        Goggins, Paul

        McAvoy, Thomas

        Griffiths, Jane (Reading E)

        McCabe, Stephen

        Grogan, John

        McDonagh, Siobhain

        Hain, rh Peter

        MacDonald, Calum

        Hall, Mike (Weaver Vale)

        McDonnell, John

        Hall, Patrick (Bedford)

        MacDougall, John

        Hamilton, David (Midlothian)

        McGuire, Mrs Anne

        Hamilton, Fabian (Leeds NE)

        McIsaac, Shona

        Hanson, David

        McKechin, Ann

        Harris, Tom (Glasgow Cathcart)

        Mackinlay, Andrew

        Havard, Dai (Merthyr Tydfil &

        McNulty, Tony

        Mactaggart, Fiona

        Henderson, Doug (Newcastle N)

        McWilliam, John

        Henderson, Ivan (Harwich)

        Mahmood, Khalid

        Hendrick, Mark

        Mahon, Mrs Alice

        Hepburn, Stephen

        Mallaber, Judy

        Heppell, John

        Mann, John (Bassetlaw)

        Hermon, Lady

        Marris, Rob (Wolverh'ton SW)

        Hesford, Stephen

        Marsden, Gordon (Blackpool S)

        Hewitt, rh Ms Patricia

        Marshall, David (Glasgow Shettleston)

        Heyes, David

        Hill, Keith (Streatham)

        Marshall-Andrews, Robert

        Hoey, Kate (Vauxhall)

        Martlew, Eric

        Hoon, rh Geoffrey

        Merron, Gillian

        Hope, Phil (Corby)

        Michael, rh Alun

        Hopkins, Kelvin

        Milburn, rh Alan

        Howarth, George (Knowsley N & Sefton E)

        Miller, Andrew

        Mitchell, Austin (Gt Grimsby)

        Howells, Dr. Kim

        Moffatt, Laura

        Hoyle, Lindsay

        Mole, Chris

        Hughes, Beverley (Stretford & Urmston)

        Moran, Margaret

        Morley, Elliot

        Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N)

        Morris, rh Estelle

        Humble, Mrs Joan

        Mountford, Kali

        Hurst, Alan (Braintree)

        Mullin, Chris

        Hutton, rh John

        Murphy, Denis (Wansbeck)

        Illsley, Eric

        Murphy, Jim (Eastwood)

        Ingram, rh Adam

        Murphy, rh Paul (Torfaen)

        Irranca-Davies, Huw

        Naysmith, Dr. Doug

        Jackson, Glenda (Hampstead & Highgate)

        O'Brien, Mike (N Warks)

        Olner, Bill

        564

        Organ, Diana

        Squire, Rachel

        Osborne, Sandra (Ayr)

        Starkey, Dr. Phyllis

        Palmer, Dr. Nick

        Steinberg, Gerry

        Pearson, Ian

        Stevenson, George

        Perham, Linda

        Stewart, David (Inverness E & Lochaber)

        Picking, Anne

        Pickthall, Colin

        Stewart, Ian (Eccles)

        Pike, Peter (Burnley)

        Stinchcombe, Paul

        Plaskitt, James

        Stoate, Dr. Howard

        Pollard, Kerry

        Stringer, Graham

        Pond, Chris (Gravesham)

        Stuart, Ms Gisela

        Pope, Greg (Hyndburn)

        Sutcliffe, Gerry

        Pound, Stephen

        Tami, Mark (Alyn)

        Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lewisham E)

        Taylor, rh Ann (Dewsbury)

        Taylor, Dari (Stockton S)

        Prentice, Gordon (Pendle)

        TaV|or' David (NW Leics)

        Prescott rh John

        Thomas, Gareth (Clwyd W)

        Primarolo, rh Dawn

        Thomas, Gareth (Harrow W)

        Prosser Gwyn

        Timms, Stephen

        Purchase, Ken

        Tipping Paddy

        Purnell James

        Todd, Mark (S Derbyshire)

        Quinn, Lawrie

        Touhig Don (lslwyn)

        Rammell, Bill

        Trickett Jon

        Rapson, Syd (Portsmouth N)

        Truswell Paul

        Raynsford, rh Nick

        Turner, Dennis (Wolverh'ton SE)

        Robertson, John (Glasgow Anniesland)

        Turner, Neil (Wigan)

        Jwigg, Derek (Halton)

        Tynan, Bill (Hamilton S)

        Robinson, Geoffrey (Coventry NW)

        Vaz, Keith (Leicester E)

        Vaz, Keith (Leicester E)

        Rooney,Terry

        Vis, Dr. Rudi

        Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)

        Walley, Ms Joan

        Roy, Frank (Motherwell)

        Ward, Claire

        Wareing Robert N.

        Ruane, Chris

        Watson, Tom (W Bromwich E)

        Ruddock, Joan

        Watts David

        Russell, Ms Christine (City of Chester)

        white Brian

        Whitehead, Dr. Alan

        Ryan, Joan (Enfield N)

        wicks Malcolm

        Salter, Martin

        Williams, rh Alan (Swansea W)

        Sarwar, Mohammad

        Williams, Betty (Conwy)

        Savidge, Malcolm

        Winnick, David

        Sawford, Phil

        Winterton, Ms Rosie (Doncaster C)

        Shaw, Jonathan

        Sheerman, Barry

        Wood, Mike (Batley)

        Sheridan, Jim

        Woolas, Phil

        Short, rh Clare

        Worthington, Tony

        Simon, Siôn (B'ham Erdington)

        Wray, James (Glasgow Baillieston)

        Singh, Marsha

        Skinner, Dennis

        Wright, Anthony D. (Gt Yarmouth)

        Smith, Angela (Basildon)

        Smith, rh Chris (Islington S & Finsbury)

        Wright, David (Telford)

        Wright, Tony (Cannock)

        Smith, Jacqui (Redditch)

        Smith, John (Glamorgan)

        Tellers for the Ayes:

        Soley, Clive

        Charlotte Atkins and

        Spellar, rh John

        Paul Clark

        NOES

        Ainsworth, Peter (E Surrey)

        Burns, Simon

        Allan, Richard

        Burstow, Paul

        Arbuthnot, rh James

        Butterfill, John

        Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)

        Cable, Dr. Vincent

        Bacon, Richard

        Calton. Mrs Patsy

        Barker, Gregory

        Cameron, David

        Baron, John (Billericay)

        Campbell, rh Menzies (NE Fife)

        Barrett John

        Chapman, Sir Sydney (Chipping Barnet)

        Bercow, John

        Beresford, Sir Paul

        Chidgey, David

        Blunt, Crispin

        Clappison, James

        Blunt, Crispin

        Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey

        Boswell, Tim

        Collins, Tim

        Brady, Graham

        Conway, Derek

        Brake, Tom (Carshalton)

        Cormack, Sir Patrick

        Brazier, Julian

        Davies, Quentin (Grantham & Stamford)

        Breed, Colin

        Brooke, Mrs Annette L.

        Davis, rh David (Haltemprice & Howden)

        Burnett, John

        565

        Djanogly, Jonathan

        Norman, Archie

        Doughty, Sue

        O'Brien, Stephen (Eddisbury)

        Evans, Nigel

        Öpik, Lembit

        Ewing, Annabelle

        Osborne, George (Tatton)

        Fabricant, Michael

        Page, Richard

        Fallon, Michael

        Paice, James

        Field, Mark (Cities of London & Westminster)

        Pickles, Eric

        Prisk, Mark (Hertford)

        Flight, Howard

        Pugh, Dr. John

        Flook, Adrian

        Randall, John

        Forth, rh Eric

        Rendel, David

        Foster, Don (Bath)

        Robathan, Andrew

        Garnier, Edward

        Robertson, Laurence (Tewk'b'ry)

        Gibb, Nick (Bognor Regis)

        Roe, Mrs Marion

        Gidley, Sandra

        Rosindell, Andrew

        Gillan, Mrs Cheryl

        Ruffley, David

        Goodman, Paul

        Russell, Bob (Colchester)

        Gray, James (N Wilts)

        Sanders, Adrian

        Grayling, Chris

        Sayeed, Jonathan

        Greenway, John

        Selous, Andrew

        Grieve, Dominic

        Shephard, rh Mrs Gillian

        Hague, rh William

        Shepherd, Richard

        Hancock, Mike

        Simmonds, Mark

        Hawkins, Nick

        Simpson, Keith (M-Norfolk)

        Hayes, John (S Holland)

        Smith, Sir Robert (W Ab'd'ns & Kincardine)

        Heald, Oliver

        Heath, David

        Soames, Nicholas

        Heathcoat-Amory, rh David

        Spelman, Mrs Caroline

        Hendry Charles

        Spicer, Sir Michael

        Hogg, rh Douglas

        Spring, Richard

        Holmes Paul

        Stanley, rh Sir John

        Horam, John (Orpington)

        Streeter, Gary

        Howarth, Gerald (Aldershot)

        Stunell, Andrew

        Jack, rh Michael

        Syms, Robert

        Jackson, Robert (Wantage)

        Taylor, Ian (Esher)

        Jenkin, Bernard

        Taylor, John (Solihull)

        Johnson, Boris (Henley)

        Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

        Key, Robert (Salisbury)

        Taylor, Dr. Richard (Wyre F)

        Kirkbride, Miss Julie

        Taylor, Sir Teddy

        Kirkwood, Sir Archy

        Teather, Sarah

        Knight, rh Greg (E Yorkshire)

        Thomas, Simon (Ceredigion)

        Laing, Mrs Eleanor

        Tredinnick, David

        Turner, Andrew (Isle of Wight)

        Lait, Mrs Jacqui

        Tyler, Paul (N Cornwall)

        Laws, David (Yeovil)

        Tyrie, Andrew

        Leigh, Edward

        Viggers, Peter

        Letwin, rh Oliver

        Walter, Robert

        Liddell-Grainger, Ian

        Waterson, Nigel

        Lidington, David

        Watkinson, Angela

        Llwyd, Elfyn

        Webb, Steve (Northavon)

        Loughton, Tim

        Widdecombe, rh Miss Ann

        Luff, Peter (M-Worcs)

        Wiggin, Bill

        McIntosh, Miss Anne

        Wilkinson, John

        Mackay, rh Andrew

        Willetts, David

        McLoughlin, Patrick

        Williams, Hywel (Caernarfon)

        Malins, Humfrey

        Wilshire, David

        Maples, John

        Winterton, Ann (Congleton)

        Marsden, Paul (Shrewsbury & Atcham)

        Winterton, Sir Nicholas (Macclesfield)

        Mawhinney, rh Sir Brian

        Yeo, Tim (S Suffolk)

        Mitchell, Andrew (Sutton Coldfield)

        Young, rh Sir George

        Moore, Michael

        Tellers for the Noes:

        Moss, Malcolm

        Hugh Robertson and

        Murrison, Dr. Andrew

        Mr. Mark Francois

        Question accordingly agreed to.
        Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 118(6)(Standing Committees on Delegated Legislation),

        INVESTIGATORY POWERS
        That the draft Retention of Communications Data (Extension of Initial Period) Order 2003, which was laid before this House on 11th September, be approved.—[Derek Twigg.]
        The House divided: Ayes 307, Noes 156.

        Division No. 367]

        [8:36 pm

        AYES

        Adams, Irene (Paisley N)

        David, Wayne

        Ainger, Nick

        Davidson, Ian

        Ainsworth, Bob (Cov'try NE)

        Davies, rh Denzil (Llanelli)

        Alexander, Douglas

        Davies, Geraint (Croydon C)

        Allen, Graham

        Davis, rh Terry (B'ham Hodge H)

        Anderson, Janet (Rossendale & Darwen)

        Dawson, Hilton

        Dean, Mrs Janet

        Armstrong, rh Ms Hilary

        Denham, rh John

        Atherton, Ms Candy

        Dobson, rh Frank

        Austin, John

        Donohoe, Brian H.

        Bailey, Adrian

        Doran, Frank

        Baird, Vera

        Dowd, Jim (Lewisham W)

        Banks, Tony

        Eagle, Angela (Wallasey)

        Barnes, Harry

        Eagle, Maria (L'poolGarston)

        Barron, rh Kevin

        Edwards, Huw

        Battle, John

        Efford, Clive

        Bayley, Hugh

        Ellman, Mrs Louise

        Beard, Nigel

        Ennis, Jeff (Barnsley E)

        Bell, Stuart

        Farrelly, Paul

        Bennett, Andrew

        Field, rh Frank (Birkenhead)

        Benton, Joe (Bootle)

        Fisher, Mark

        Berry, Roger

        Fitzpatrick, Jim

        Best, Harold

        Fitzsimons, Mrs Lorna

        Betts, Clive

        Flint, Caroline

        Blackman, Liz

        Flynn, Paul (Newport W)

        Blears, Ms Hazel

        Follett, Barbara

        Blizzard, Bob

        Foster, rh Derek

        Blunkett, rh David

        Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings & Rye)

        Boateng, rh Paul

        Borrow, David

        Francis, Dr. Hywel

        Bradley, rh Keith (Withington)

        Gapes, Mike (llford S)

        Bradley, Peter (The Wrekin)

        Gardiner, Barry

        Brennan, Kevin

        Gerrard, Neil

        Brown, rh Nicholas (Newcastle E Wallsend)

        Gilroy, Linda

        Godsiff, Roger

        Brown, Russell (Dumfries)

        Goggins, Paul

        Browne, Desmond

        Griffiths, Jane (Reading E)

        Bryant, Chris

        Grogan, John

        Buck, Ms Karen

        Hain, rh Peter

        Burden, Richard

        Hall, Mike (Weaver Vale)

        Burgon, Colin

        Hall, Patrick (Bedford)

        Byers, rh Stephen

        Hamilton, David (Midlothian)

        Cairns, David

        Hamilton, Fabian (Leeds NE)

        Campbell, Alan (Tynemouth)

        Hanson, David

        Campbell, Mrs Anne (C'bridge)

        Harris, Tom (Glasgow Cathcart)

        Caplin, Ivor

        Havard, Dai (Merthyr Tydfil & Rhymney)

        Casale, Roger

        Cawsey, Ian (Brigg)

        Henderson, Doug (Newcastle N)

        Challen, Colin

        Henderson, Ivan (Harwich)

        Chapman, Ben (Wirral S)

        Hendrick, Mark

        Chaytor, David

        Hepburn, Stephen

        Clapham, Michael

        Heppell, John

        Clark, Mrs Helen (Peterborough)

        Hesford, Stephen

        Clark, Dr. Lynda (Edinburgh Pentlands)

        Hewitt, rh Ms Patricia

        Heyes, David

        Clarke, rh Tom (Coatbridge & Chryston)

        Hill, Keith (Streatham)

        Hoey, Kate (Vauxhall)

        Clarke, Tony (Northampton S)

        Hoon, rh Geoffrey

        Clelland, David

        Hope, Phil (Corby)

        Clwyd, Ann (Cynon V)

        Hopkins, Kelvin

        Coaker, Vernon

        Howarth, George (Knowsley N & Sefton E)

        Coffey, Ms Ann

        Colman, Tony

        Howells, Dr. Kim

        Cook, rh Robin (Livingston)

        Hoyle, Lindsay

        Cooper, Yvette

        Hughes, Beverley (Stretford & Urmston)

        Cousins, Jim

        Crausby, David

        Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N)

        Cruddas, Jon

        Humble, Mrs Joan

        Cryer, John (Hornchurch)

        Hurst, Alan (Braintree)

        Cummings, John

        Hutton, rh John

        Cunningham, Jim (Coventry S)

        Illsley, Eric

        Cunningham, Tony (Workington)

        Ingram, rh Adam

        Davey, Valerie (Bristol W)

        Irranca-Davies, Huw

        567

        Jackson, Helen (Hillsborough)

        Organ, Diana

        Jamieson, David

        Osborne, Sandra (Ayr)

        Jenkins, Brian

        Palmer, Dr. Nick

        Johnson, Alan (Hull W)

        Pearson, Ian

        Johnson, Miss Melanie (Welwyn Hatfield)

        Perham, Linda

        Picking, Anne

        Jones, Helen (Warrington N)

        Pickthall, Colin

        Jones, Lynne (Selly Oak)

        Pike, Peter (Burnley)

        Joyce, Eric (Falkirk W)

        Plaskitt, James

        Kaufman, rh Gerald

        Pollard, Kerry

        Keeble, Ms Sally

        Pond, Chris (Gravesham)

        Keen, Alan (Feltham)

        Pope, Greg (Hyndburn)

        Kemp, Fraser

        Pound, Stephen

        Khabra, Piara S.

        Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lewisham E)

        Kidney, David

        King, Andy (Rugby)

        Prentice, Gordon (Pendle)

        King, Ms Oona (Bethnal Green & Bow)

        Prescott, rh John

        Primarolo, rh Dawn

        Knight, Jim (S Dorset)

        Prosser, Gwyn

        Kumar, Dr. Ashok

        Purchase, Ken

        Ladyman, Dr. Stephen

        Purnell, James

        Lammy, David

        Quinn, Lawrie

        Lawrence, Mrs Jackie

        Rammell, Bill

        Laxton, Bob (Derby N)

        Rapson, Syd (Portsmouth N)

        Lazarowicz, Mark

        Raynsford, rh Nick

        Lepper, David

        Robertson, John (Glasgow Anniesland)

        Leslie, Christopher

        Levitt, Tom (High Peak)

        Robinson, Geoffrey (Coventry NW)

        Lewis, Ivan (Bury S)

        Liddell, rh Mrs Helen

        Rooney, Terry

        Linton, Martin

        Ross, Ernie (Dundee W)

        Lloyd, Tony (Manchester C)

        Roy, Frank (Motherwell)

        Love, Andrew

        Ruane, Chris

        Luke, Iain (Dundee E)

        Ruddock, Joan

        Lyons, John (Strathkelvin)

        Russell, Ms Christine (City of Chester)

        McAvoy, Thomas

        McCabe, Stephen

        Ryan, Joan (Enfield N)

        McDonagh, Siobhain

        Salter, Martin

        MacDonald, Calum

        Sarwar, Mohammad

        McDonnell, John

        Savidge, Malcolm

        MacDougall, John

        Sawford, Phil

        McGuire, Mrs Anne

        Sedgemore, Brian

        McIsaac, Shona

        Shaw, Jonathan

        McKechin, Ann

        Sheerman, Barry

        Mackinlay, Andrew

        Sheridan, Jim

        McNulty, Tony

        Short, rh Clare

        Mactaggart, Fiona

        Simon, Siôn (B'ham Erdington)

        Mahmood, Khalid

        Singh, Marsha

        Mahon, Mrs Alice

        Skinner, Dennis

        Mallaber, Judy

        Smith, Angela (Basildon)

        Mann, John (Bassetlaw)

        Smith, rh Chris (Islington S & Finsbury)

        Marris, Rob (Wolverh'ton SW)

        Marsden, Gordon (Blackpool S)

        Smith, Jacqui (Redditch)

        Marshall, David (Glasgow Shettleston)

        Smith, John (Glamorgan)

        Spellar, rh John

        Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)

        Squire, Rachel

        Marshall-Andrews, Robert

        Starkey, Dr. Phyllis

        Martlew, Eric

        Steinberg, Gerry

        Merron, Gillian

        Stevenson, George

        Michael, rh Alun

        Stewart, David (Inverness E & Lochaber)

        Milburn, rh Alan

        Miller, Andrew

        Stewart, Ian (Eccles)

        Mitchell, Austin (Gt Grimsby)

        Stinchcombe, Paul

        Moffatt, Laura

        Stoate, Dr. Howard

        Mole, Chris

        Stringer, Graham

        Moran, Margaret

        Stuart, Ms Gisela

        Morley, Elliot

        Sutcliffe, Gerry

        Morris, rh Estelle

        Tami, Mark (Alyn)

        Mountford, Kali

        Taylor, rh Ann (Dewsbury)

        Mullin, Chris

        Taylor, Dari (Stockton S)

        Murphy, Denis (Wansbeck)

        Taylor, David (NW Leics)

        Murphy, Jim (Eastwood)

        Thomas, Gareth (Clwyd W)

        Murphy, rh Paul (Torfaen)

        Thomas, Gareth (Harrow W)

        Naysmith, Dr. Doug

        Timms, Stephen

        O'Brien, Mike (N Warks)

        Tipping, Paddy

        Olner, Bill

        Todd, Mark (S Derbyshire)

        568

        Touhig, Don (Islwyn)

        Williams, Betty (Conwy)

        Trickett, Jon

        Winnick, David

        Truswell, Paul

        Winterton, Ms Rosie (Doncaster C)

        Turner, Dennis (Wolverh'ton SE)

        Turner, Neil (Wigan)

        wood, Mike (Batley)

        Twigg, Derek (Halton)

        Woolas, Phil

        Tynan, Bill (Hamilton S)

        Worthington, Tony

        Vaz, Keith (Leicester E)

        Wray, James (Glasgow Baillieston)

        Walley, Ms Joan

        Ward, Claire

        Wright Anthony D. (Gt Yarmouth)

        Wareing, Robert N.

        Wright David (Telford)

        Watson, Tom (W Bromwich E)

        Wright, Tony (Cannock)

        Watts, David

        White, Brian

        Tellers for the Ayes:

        Whitehead, Dr. Alan

        Charlotte Atkins and

        Wicks, Malcolm

        Paul Clark

        NOES

        Ainsworth, Peter (E Surrey)

        Grieve, Dominic

        Allan, Richard

        Hague, rh William

        Arbuthnot, rh James

        Hancock, Mike

        Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)

        Hawkins, Nick

        Bacon, Richard

        Hayes, John (S Holland)

        Barker, Gregory

        Heald, Oliver

        Baron, John (Billericay)

        Heath, David

        Barrett, John

        Heathcoat-Amory, rh David

        Bercow, John

        Hendry, Charles

        Beresford, Sir Paul

        Hermon, Lady

        Blunt, Crispin

        Hogg, rh Douglas

        Boswell, Tim

        Holmes, Paul

        Brady, Graham

        Horam, John (Orpington)

        Brake, Tom (Carshalton)

        Howarth, Gerald (Aldershot)

        Brazier, Julian

        Jack, rh Michael

        Breed, Colin

        Jackson, Robert (Wantage)

        Brooke, Mrs Annette L.

        Jenkin, Bernard

        Burnett, John

        Johnson, Boris (Henley)

        Burns, Simon

        Key, Robert (Salisbury)

        Burstow, Paul

        Kirkbride, Miss Julie

        Butterfill, John

        Kirkwood, Sir Archy

        Cable, Dr. Vincent

        Knight, rh Greg (E Yorkshire)

        Calton, Mrs Patsy

        Laing, Mrs Eleanor

        Cameron, David

        Lait, Mrs Jacqui

        Campbell, rh Menzies (NE Fife)

        Laws, David (Yeovil)

        Chapman, Sir Sydney (Chipping Barnet)

        Leigh, Edward

        Letwin, rh Oliver

        Chidgey, David

        Liddell-Grainger, Ian

        Clappison, James

        Lidington, David

        Clifton-Brown, Geoffrey

        Llwyd, Elfyn

        Collins, Tim

        Loughton, Tim

        Conway, Derek

        Luff, Peter (M-Worcs)

        Cormack, Sir Patrick

        McIntosh, Miss Anne

        Davies, Quentin (Grantham & Stamford)

        Mackay, rh Andrew

        McLoughlin, Patrick

        Davis, rh David (Haltemprice & Howden)

        Malins, Humfrey

        Maples, John

        Djanogly, Jonathan

        Marsden, Paul (Shrewsbury & Atcham)

        Doughty, Sue

        Evans, Nigel

        Mawhinney, rh Sir Brian

        Ewing, Annabelle

        Mitchell, Andrew (Sutton Coldfield)

        Fabricant, Michael

        Fallon, Michael

        Moore, Michael

        Field, Mark (Cities of London & Westminster)

        Moss, Malcolm

        Murrison, Dr. Andrew

        Flight, Howard

        Norman, Archie

        Flook, Adrian

        O'Brien, Stephen (Eddisbury)

        Forth, rh Eric

        Öpik, Lembit

        Foster, Don (Bath)

        Osborne, George (Tatton)

        Garnier, Edward

        Page, Richard

        Gibb, Nick (Bognor Regis)

        Paice, James

        Gidley, Sandra

        Pickles, Eric

        Gillan, Mrs Cheryl

        Prisk, Mark (Hertford)

        Goodman, Paul

        Pugh, Dr. John

        Gray, James (N Wilts)

        Randall, John

        Grayling, Chris

        Redwood, rh John

        Greenway, John

        Rendel, David

        569

        Robathan, Andrew

        Taylor, Sir Teddy

        Robertson, Laurence (Tewk'b'ry)

        Teather, Sarah

        Roe, Mrs Marion

        Thomas, Simon (Ceredigion)

        Rosindell, Andrew

        Tredinnick, David

        Ruffley, David

        Turner, Andrew (Isle of Wight)

        Russell, Bob (Colchester)

        Tyler, Paul (N Cornwall)

        Sanders, Adrian

        Tyrie, Andrew

        Sayeed, Jonathan

        Viggers, Peter

        Selous, Andrew

        Walter, Robert

        Shephard, rh Mrs Gillian

        Waterson, Nigel

        Shepherd, Richard

        Watkinson, Angela

        Simmonds, Mark

        Webb, Steve (Northavon)

        Simpson, Keith (M-Norfolk)

        Widdecombe, rh Miss Ann

        Smith, Sir Robert (W Ab'd'ns & Kincardine)

        Wiggin, Bill

        Wilkinson, John

        Soames, Nicholas

        Willetts, David

        Spelman, Mrs Caroline

        Williams, Hywel (Caernarfon)

        Spicer, Sir Michael

        Wilshire, David

        Spring, Richard

        Winterton, Ann (Congleton)

        Stanley, rh Sir John

        Winterton, Sir Nicholas (Macclesfield)

        Streeter, Gary

        Stunell, Andrew

        Yeo, Tim (S Suffolk)

        Syms, Robert

        Young, rh Sir George

        Taylor, Ian (Esher)

        Taylor, John (Solihull)

        Tellers for the Noes:

        Taylor, Matthew (Truro)

        Hugh Robertson and

        Taylor, Dr. Richard (Wyre F)

        Mr. Mark Francois

        Question accordingly agreed to.
        Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 118(6)(Standing Committees on Delegated Legislation),

        FEES AND CHARGES
        That the draft Department for Transport (Driver Licensing and Vehicle Registration Fees) Order 2003, which was laid before this House on 3rd November, be approved.—[Derek Twigg.]
        Question agreed to.

        EUROPEAN COMMUNITY DOCUMENTS
        Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 119(9)(European Standing Committees),
        That this House takes note of European Union Document No. 5268/03, draft Directive on the limitation of emissions of volatile organic compounds due to the use of organic solvents in
        570
        decorative paints and varnishes and vehicle refinishing products and amending Directive 1999/13/EC; and supports the Government's objectives both of taking measures to reduce emissions of precursors of ground-level ozone across the European Union, recognising that high concentrations of ground level ozone represent a serious public health risk, and also of seeking to reduce as far as possible adverse effects on United Kingdom industry of new European Union legislation.—[Derek Twigg.]
        Question agreed to.

    PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
    Ordered,
    That Mr David Rendel be discharged from the Committee of Public Accounts and Mr Richard Allan be added.—[Mr. Bob Ainsworth.]

  STANDARDS AND PRIVILEGES
  Ordered,
  That Mr Russell Brown be discharged from the Select Committee on Standards and Privileges and Mr Stephen Pound be added.—[Mr. Bob Ainsworth.]

  HOME AFFAIRS
  Ordered,
  That Mr John Bercow be discharged from the Home Affairs Committee and Mr John Taylor be added.—[Mr. Bob Ainsworth.]

  DEFENCE
  Ordered,
  That Mr Gerald Howarth be discharged from the Defence Committee and Mr Crispin Blunt be added.—[Mr. Bob Ainsworth.]

  INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
  Ordered,
  That Alistair Burt be discharged from the International Development Committee and Mr Quentin Davies be added.—[Mr. Bob Ainsworth.]

  Policing (Surrey)
  Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Derek Twigg.]
  8.49 pm
  Chris Grayling: I am grateful for the opportunity to raise what is an extremely important issue for my constituents and for residents across Surrey. I am delighted to see many of my colleagues from Surrey here tonight. I am delighted also that we are able to start so early in the evening, which gives us the chance to debate the issues fully and properly. I am glad that the Minister is in her place and I look forward to her comments.
  The reason for tonight's debate is the alarming press reports in the past few weeks that the Government plan to make yet another transfer of funding away from the home counties—away from Surrey and Surrey police—to other parts of the country. The fear has been expressed widely, particularly by the chief constable in the wake of those reports, that if Surrey suffers yet another bad funding settlement this year it will become increasingly difficult to provide to our local residents the policing service they expect. All too often, financial pressures mean that they are not getting it.
  I am not expecting the Minister to stand up and say, "Yes, fine. You can have more money for Surrey." However, I hope that she takes away from the debate points that my colleagues and I, want to raise with her to ensure that when the funding settlement is announced it reflects the legitimate concerns of people in Surrey, and that she does not end up short-changing our police service.
  Mr. Nick Hawkins: Does my hon. Friend agree that many Surrey MPs at least hope that the Minister takes account of the exceptional burdens on Surrey police in the last 12 months? I am thinking not only of the operation relating to the so-called Deepcut deaths in my constituency, but of Operation Ruby relating to the disappearance and tragic murder of Milly Dowler, Operation Orb relating to crimes in respect of the south-east serial rapist and the operation relating to anti-terrorist activity around Heathrow airport. Does my hon. Friend share my disappointment that when Surrey police, in the light of all those incredibly important inquiries, put in a claim to the Home Office for £1.6 million additional costs owing to those wholly exceptional burdens, only £0.3 million was approved?
  Chris Grayling: I very much agree with my hon. Friend. Surrey has suffered disproportionately over the past couple of years from major investigations that incur enormous costs from the day-to-day budget, quite apart from the impact of officers being transferred from front-line duties in parts of the county to those central inquiries. That has placed a huge financial burden on the county and made it much more difficult for the chief constable and his colleagues to make a tight budget work effectively in terms of delivery of front-line services.
  Sir Paul Beresford: One of the difficulties, in local government as well as in police forces up and down the country, is that this Government
  572
  tend to give a proportion of the money in grant—the major proportion—but then top up the specific, targeted grants that the local authorities and the police forces have to campaign for. That totally demolishes any predictability, and it is not until part way through the financial year that the police have any idea of their total budget.
  Chris Grayling: I endorse that point. The problem with initiatives and funding that is linked to them is that security of funding is not provided. Core funding is often tighter than is suggested by the overall impression created by budgeting at the centre. The reality is that it takes an enormous amount of administrative time to try to secure such funds and they are, as my hon. Friend suggests, absolutely unpredictable
  —this in a county that already has the lowest per capita policing grant in the country by quite some margin.
  When I was newly elected, I raised those issues in a written question to the Home Office and I was quite startled by the gap between Surrey and comparable parts of the country, even the next county up in the league table of per capita grants. There is no doubt that our police force is short-changed, given the real strategic issues that it faces—not only that, but our local taxpayers pay a disproportionate share of the burden. In most areas, some 25 per cent. of a force's budget comes from the police precept.
  Mr. David Wilshire: Will not the situation continue to worsen if the Government do not change the funding arrangements? Am I right in recalling that the precept was increased by 40 per cent. simply to avoid cuts to make up for money that the Government had taken away? Am I also right in recalling the chief constable's observation that if something was not done about the Government's new regime to penalise police services like the one in Surrey, the Surrey police could face the loss of 500 of their 2,000 officers because—thanks to this wretched Government—
  there would be no money to pay them?
  Chris Grayling: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Last year our council tax payers had to pay an extra 40 per cent. on the precept. The total proportion of police costs met by local taxpayers is approaching 50 per cent.—it is over 43 per cent.—and if we have another bad settlement this year, it may even exceed that level. It is nearly twice as much as is expected in other parts of the country. Moreover, the burden often falls on low-paid people who may have public service jobs in, for instance, teaching, on police officers themselves, and above all on pensioners who face retirement on fixed incomes but see their local taxation costs rise year by year, because Surrey is being short-changed on police grants from central Government.
  The Government emphasise the fact that Surrey is a relatively low-crime area, but ignore the fact that it also suffers from widespread antisocial behaviour, especially among gangs on trains. A huge number of troublemakers go up and down railway lines in and out of London. Gangs often travel out of London to Tattenham Corner in my constituency, simply because it is a quieter, less policed area where it is easier to cause trouble. The Government's information also masks

  573
  crime overflows. Today the chief constable confirmed to me that violent crimes, robberies and burglaries are on the increase.
  Mr. Wilshire: Surrey may be a low-crime area historically, but have not the Government just published figures showing a 30 per cent. increase in violent crime there?
  Chris Grayling: Indeed. As policing in London is tightened up—often as a result of recruitment from neighbouring counties—it becomes easier for those who wish to cause trouble and commit offences to spill into more lightly policed areas.
  The chief constable expects a 15 to 18 per cent. increase in violent crime this year. As for robbery, the force does not believe it will be able to meet its targets, given current trends, and projects an increase of between 6 and 15 per cent. Its target is 0 per cent., but given the spillover from London it is struggling to keep to 15 per cent.
  Town centres pose a huge policing problem. It is somewhat ironic that this week, in what is undoubtedly a difficult security environment nationally, we can put 14,000 police on the streets of London, and that hundreds of police are on duty for a major football match, while in most town centres there are very few on duty on a Saturday night. I have seen that in my own area when out and about with police cars. On Saturday nights there are often only two response cars available to deal with trouble in town centres.
  On Friday and Saturday nights—I am sure you have the same experience in your area, Madam Deputy Speaker—the trouble worsens, but the police are simply not there to deal with the crowds of troublemakers. The message from the Surrey constabulary is that they are struggling to deal with trouble in the county's top 10 disorder towns, because they do not have the necessary manpower on the ground. It cannot be right for the Government to believe they can take funds from a force that is struggling against the trends of increasing robbery, increasing violent crime and increasing trouble in town centres.
  The reality is that those pressures are causing services to disappear or to be curtailed on the ground. At Epsom police station in my constituency—I have no doubt that those experiences are shared by colleagues in Surrey—the custody suite is no longer open except very occasionally; at the moment, it is not open at all, even on a Friday and Saturday night. As I have said, there are few police cars on the roads at peak times. There must be a question mark, if we have another tough funding round, over the future of many of the smaller police stations in the county—that is the reality.
  As all that is happening, front-line officers are facing not just budget cuts but more bureaucracy. A few weeks ago, I had an extremely interesting conversation with one of the senior officers in the county. I asked why we seemed to be able to get so few officers on the road and why, in a force of 2,000 officers, the number out on duty on a Saturday night was so disappointingly small. The answer came back, "It is because we are dealing with the bureaucracy, with the target culture, with the expectations that are placed on us by monitoring at the centre."
  Mr. Wilshire: My hon. Friend said that he spent time going out with Surrey police. I wonder whether he had the experience that I had not long ago going out in Staines, where just after 5 o'clock the officer I was with took someone to the station who was suspected of shoplifting in Sainsbury's. Three and a bit hours later, we finally got back on the street. That is the extent of the paperwork that the Government have imposed on Surrey police—for one officer, three hours for a small case of shoplifting.
  Chris Grayling: I entirely endorse what my hon. Friend has said.
  I looked at the national policing plan and I was shocked by what the Government seem to expect police forces on the ground to do in terms of preparation of materials and information for the centre. Let me quote the policing plan:
  "Local three-year strategy plans and annual policing plans must, while contributing to the delivery of national priorities, reflect local circumstances and be responsive to local needs. It is vitally important that police authorities … engage with and consult their local communities to identify how far national and local priorities should be reflected in forces' plans and what the appropriate targets should be.
  The Government and the public need to be able to judge whether forces are delivering the quality of service that everyone expects. This requires a robust and transparent performance management system for assessing the effectiveness of forces and individual Basic Command Units (BCUs) in tackling crime and the fear of crime. The planning framework at the end of this document sets out how local plans will be measured in terms of raising police performance",
  and so on. What I want as a citizen and what I believe my constituents want is the police to go out to arrest people who have committed offences, to identify where offences are being committed and to get people in front of the courts. All too often, police officers on the front line are saying to us that they are not able to do that job in the way they would wish because so much time is spent on monitoring, on tracking and on the bureaucracy that the Government are imposing on the police service.
  Interestingly, I talked to one officer last week who said not only that the police are being asked to meet targets but that often the targets are contradictory. The Government have imposed new objectives this year. They want more criminals caught and put in front of the courts and more crimes investigated properly, but some of the performance targets require police simply to get to a certain stage with an investigation and to fill out a certain number of forms. If a crime happens and there is very little likelihood of being able to apprehend the person, they are none the less being asked to go through certain bureaucratic processes in order to go up a notch on the ladder towards achieving their target. They say that, if they could spend their time in the way they prefer, they would focus on the crimes that they can solve and on the criminals who are having the most impact on society, and they would be able to have much more impact on crime trends and on reducing levels of offences.
  That is the feedback from the front line. It is not from me as a politician but from police officers to whom I talk. The danger is—we see it across all the public services—that politically imposed targets driven from

  575
  Whitehall, setting out requirements as they are seen by Ministers and by civil servants, deliver to the front line something that in practical terms does not work.
  My fear is that what is happening in my county, which is represented by all those of my hon. Friends who are present tonight, is that our police force is being asked to do more and more to meet the requirements, targets and bureaucracy of the Home Office. Central Government have set two or three objectives in the national policing plan this year. At the same time, our police force is being asked to do that for less and less money. Year by year, the budget increases have not reflected the increased pension costs and the increase in national insurance—additional costs imposed by central Government. The consequence is that, ultimately, local police forces such as Surrey police are being asked to do much more for less money, to a point where the only way they can square the circle is by turning to local taxpayers, who are already being asked to do far more than their counterparts in other areas of the country.
  Mr. Ian Taylor: All hon. Members who represent Surrey share the problem. The Surrey police force is one of the most efficient in the country, and it is led by an excellent chief constable. It has already passed some fairly draconian plans to concentrate resources on the front line. The difficulty is that, with the projected decline in resources relative to other counties, it will have to undertake further cuts, which can only take place at the front line. That is precisely the message that I was hearing even today in Elmbridge from the chief constable and other policemen who were there.
  Chris Grayling: I absolutely endorse what my hon. Friend says. That is the practical consequence of what is happening, but let me tell the Minister about an even more practical consequence—a true story from a few weeks ago. One of my constituents was assaulted on a recreation ground in the village where I live. He was very badly hurt. He was kicked in the head—kicked unconscious—and teeth were kicked out of his mouth. The nearest police car was half an hour away. It took half an hour to arrive at the scene of what was undoubtedly the most serious offence committed in my constituency for the past 12 months.
  Such delays should not happen. Someone who is the victim of a serious crime should not wait half an hour for a police car to arrive. Yet if we look across the force on Friday or Saturday nights, there is a very thin blue line of officers protecting people from unruly behaviour, robbery and violent crime. All too often, the police simply do not have the number of officers to respond to lesser misdemeanours—things that may appear to those in call centres to be not as serious as others, but they may have a great effect on people. They often involve pensioners whose garden fences have been kicked down or who have been terrified by gangs of youths throwing stones at their windows. That is why we need more police on the streets, rather than fewer.
  The Government keep telling us that more police officers than ever are out on the streets protecting us, yet the number of police cars out and about on patrol on Saturday nights in my constituency has fallen from five
  576
  to two, in a good week, during the past three or four years. That is the reality. Where are the rest of the police officers? Well, they are meeting targets, complying with bureaucracy, dealing with initiatives and working in special units. We have not got enough people in the front line.
  The final reason why this is important—I say this genuinely to the Minister—is that it is very easy to look at the areas outside London and say that they are lower-crime areas than the great metropolis. The situation in north Peckham cannot be compared with that in Epsom, Leatherhead or Reigate—I have no doubt at all about that—but, none the less, such forces cannot be bled dry to pay for policing elsewhere. Not only do they deal with the day-to-day concerns of individual residents, antisocial behaviour, robbery and violence, but they are being asked to deal with terrorism and other major incidents, as my hon. Friend the Member for Surrey Heath (Mr. Hawkins) said a moment ago. Ours is a police force that must provide support to Heathrow and Gatwick airports and which must provide policing in an area of the country that is full of potential terrorist targets and of individuals who could be the subject of major criminal activity. It is not the case that many of the security problems that we face in this country will be confined to London. If the forces immediately outside London are bled dry as a result of an attempt to switch finance from one part of the country to another, ultimately, the risks will be enormous.
  Mr. Wilshire: My hon. Friend refers to forces such as Surrey's being bled dry. Does he agree that one of the ways in which Surrey's force is undermined is that once young police officers are recruited and trained, particularly if they are based in Staines in my constituency, they need only change jobs and go about two miles down the road, and they will get £6,000 more for working in the Metropolitan police? Alternatively, they can get much the same pay by going to Cornwall, where the cost of living is lower. Is that not bleeding dry forces such as Surrey, which pay the training costs and then see their officers being poached?
  Chris Grayling: I absolutely endorse my hon. Friend's point. He, I and many other Conservative Members had meetings with the Minister's predecessor, the right hon. Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Denham), who listened carefully to the arguments that we put forward. Although the steps that he took were small, and most of the initiatives that have been taken were at county level, he demonstrated an understanding of the problem that I hope that the current Minister will reflect. The purpose of tonight's debate is to appeal to her intelligent view of the challenges that forces such as Surrey face.
  In a few weeks, the Minister will preside over funding announcements that could make a radical difference to the ability of individual forces to deliver a good or bad service. There are undoubtedly pressures on the Home Office in many parts of the country, but the hon. Lady must not be tempted to look at certain areas as low-crime areas and lesser priorities and therefore not resource them properly. A county such as Surrey has antisocial behaviour problems, adverse crime trends in robbery and violence, and as my hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) says, it has been
  and continues to be bled dry by other forces that have

  577
  the ability to pay more money. Ultimately, the Minister, as much as any of us, needs Surrey police to be able to deliver a quality service. If they cannot do so, everyone will suffer—not just the county but the Government, because their reputation will be affected.
  Our message to the Minister is: please do not allow this funding review to lead to a stripping down still further of Surrey police's budget. Please do not force on the taxpayers of Surrey, many of whom are pensioners on fixed incomes, yet another major ratcheting-up of the tax that they pay. Please make sure that Surrey, as a force on the fringe of London, which will have an important role to play not just in local but in national policing issues, receives an equitable settlement. Do not let this force down because it is politically convenient to do so. The Minister and her colleagues have a duty to protect policing in all parts of the country. I know that she is a lady of integrity and diligence in her role. I look to her to ensure that the area that I represent does not suffer adversely in the review over which she is about to preside.
  9.13 pm
  Mr. Crispin Blunt: First, may I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate? I have been slightly concerned about the body language of the Minister and her Parliamentary Private Secretary during the course of the debate, which seemed to say, "That lot down south don't know they're born," and that the difficulties faced in our constituencies are as nothing compared with those in the constituencies that they represent. My concern is that that perception may feed into the decisions that the Minister takes.
  I want to take a little trouble to try to explain the situation to the Minister, who I have not had the opportunity to congratulate on taking up her new responsibilities. Surrey Members have seen not only the right hon. Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Denham), but his predecessor, who is now Secretary of State for Education and Skills, about Surrey policing.
  The enormous change to the funding for Surrey police since 1997 is at the heart of many of the difficulties that the force faces. It has changed from a reasonably well-funded force to one that, according to any force-by-force comparison, is funded at the bottom end. The Minister's officials will probably be able to give her a proper briefing to that effect, as will Surrey's chief constable, who I am sure will beat a path to her door using not only the representations of Surrey Members but the Home Office chain of command, if I may put it that way.
  There has been a substantial change to the position of Surrey police. The force has been caught by the pressures of the change to the formula and decreasing resources while the relative cost of living in Surrey has continued to rise relentlessly. That means that most of the policemen who live in Surrey do not police Surrey at all—they are Met police. The Minister will be all too aware of the peculiar situation in which policemen are not able to live near the area that they police, and that has consequent disadvantages for the effectiveness of policing and policemen's ability to be present in a community in both their private and public lives.
  Mr. Ian Taylor: Does my hon. Friend realise that there is a specific problem in constituencies such as mine and, I think, Epsom and Ewell? Until a few years ago, part of my constituency was in the Metropolitan police area. I thought that the deal that I did with the then Home Secretary was not only that there would be transitional arrangements, which are now being phased out, but that there would be fair funding to recognise the fact that Surrey police's problems, given that it was adjacent to the Met, were likely to get worse because the Met was withdrawing behind the old Greater London area boundaries. The problem will hit us again because of changes to the Met that will cause a sudden loss of about 1,000 officers. The Met will look for replacements elsewhere, and Surrey is a prime target. It might help my hon. Friend to know that I am talking about the Edmund-Davies reforms.
  Mr. Blunt: My hon. Friend makes a relevant point. I share his sense of responsibility, because both our constituencies were split in 1997 before the Greater London area reforms were implemented. The Met policed half my constituency and the other half was covered by Surrey police. He and I tried to ensure that the police boundaries reflected the county boundaries, which was self-evidently common sense for our constituencies. However, the policing of the whole of my constituency has been under constant challenge since that extremely sensible reform was introduced by the then Home Secretary, the right hon. Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw).
  Of course, an additional problem has arisen owing to the changeover and Surrey's requirement to recruit more officers to police the areas for which it took responsibility from the Met. The Surrey force set up an extremely fine training establishment, but the pressure of the cost of living in Surrey means that newly trained officers discover that, because of the national pay rates that the police enjoy, their quality of life will be substantially better if they move from Surrey to pursue their careers as policemen in other places such as north-west and north-east England. That has had the knock-on effect of increasing the cost of training and retaining officers in Surrey. Surrey has ended up with a young and inexperienced police force compared with other forces throughout the country because the chief constable has had to make a deliberate effort to retain numbers on the ground by reducing the force's payroll. He has done that by shedding experience to save the resources that would pay for it. That has begun to have a serious effect on the style of policing in Surrey. What worries me is that the complaints I now receive from people who are not as well served by the police as they should be are a direct result of the lack of experience of police officers and the challenges that go with trying to police Surrey in a new way with far fewer resources.
  I applaud the chief constable for his efforts to reorganise the police in Surrey to meet his budget constraints, but the Minister needs to understand that the force is about to snap. His strategy will not be sustained if further significant pressure is put on his budget. The Minister should give the issue serious consideration. There is a problem with the quality of policing in Surrey. Its success story in crime prevention is at risk. It is more important to reinforce success than

  579
  to create failure by thinking that because there is no overt problem, Surrey's excellent record on crime prevention will not get significantly worse.
  We temporarily addressed the funding problem when the current Secretary of State for Education and Skills was the Minister with responsibility for policing. He looked imaginatively and openly at bids for specific pots of funding that might meet the crisis in-year. It is disappointing that only £0.3 million of the £1.6 million of bids for special operations has been paid to Surrey. I urge the Minister to consider using Surrey's special bids to relieve the pressures that it faces. That would allow her, at least temporarily and within the limited powers at her immediate disposal, to assist the force in Surrey, which is under threat. Although that would be no more than a Band-Aid for the next financial year, the mechanism would address the funding formula, which is doing enormous damage to long-term policing in Surrey, until an opportunity arose to rebase the formula, in particular on the 2001 census figures. That would also help to improve the overall performance in Surrey.
  The Minister should not think that the problem is new for Members of Parliament who represent Surrey. The delegations to see her predecessors have been around this buoy for at least four years. This debate is yet more evidence of the problems facing Surrey police. The problems are real and I hope that the Minister will genuinely address them.
  9.23 pm
  Mr. David Wilshire: I, too, congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling) on securing the debate and thank the House for giving us the time to do justice to something that is a serious problem at least in my constituency and, I suspect, throughout the county.
  From my observations, there is no doubt in my mind that policing in Spelthorne is in crisis. That is in no way the fault of Surrey police. They could not work harder, try harder or do more. The great problem is, that they are trying to police with one hand tied behind their back because of the lack of resources. I am sick and tired of hearing the Government say, "Ah, well, but, we gave everyone 3 per cent. extra last year." That was only because their formula was so awful that they had to doctor it. Had they applied the formula they introduced to Surrey, the grant would have been cut.
  For one year, we had a 3 per cent. increase to fiddle the figures—something the Government are good at—and I have little doubt that if we exert enough pressure, they will fiddle the figures again and thus disguise the reality of the funding formula. The chief constable of Surrey has predicted that if that funding formula is phased in in full according to the Government's timetable, he will lose a sum equivalent to a quarter of his officers. We in Surrey face rising crime: Government figures show a 30 per cent. increase in violent crime and a 10 per cent. increase in overall crime in Surrey—despite the figures they spin about national rates. Despite that, if the Government do not relent, Surrey is faced with the prospect of losing 25 per cent. of our officers. Perhaps the Minister can tell us what to say to
  580
  our constituents when crime rises even more because we have fewer police officers. What do we say, other than that the Government are making a deliberate attempt to take money from Surrey to give it to their cronies elsewhere in the country?
  I understand that the Government are now thinking of increasing the grant by the rate of inflation. A fat lot of good that will do. It does not take account of factors such as pensions, or the cost of training more and more young officers only to watch them go elsewhere. It takes no account of the impact on a force of only 2,000 officers of tragedies such as the Milly Dowler case. Although the Dowler family are not constituents of mine, the investigation was carried out from Staines police station, and I saw for myself the resources that that tragic case required a small police force to give. The Government make no allowance for such events. They say, "Come cap in hand afterwards, and we'll see if we can help." When we discover that only a small sum is given, it is too late.
  What is a police force to do when its grant is being cut—
  when it is being given only a rate-of-inflation increase and its costs are rising faster than that? I can tell the Minister what Surrey police authority is saying it will have to do if she does nothing. Last year, the precept increased by 40 per cent. simply so that the police authority could stand still in financial terms—the authority was forced to choose between cutting policing in Surrey or making up for the money that the Government were putting elsewhere. Now, on the back of the Government telling us that they will provide only a rate-of-inflation increase, an increase in the precept of a further 17 per cent. is being predicted—yet the Minister's colleagues elsewhere in the Government are saying that they intend to make sure that council tax does not increase by much. If the Minister sticks to a grant increase of 2.5 per cent. or thereabouts, and another Minister comes along and caps council tax increases, it will be the equivalent of Government policy forcing a cut in the police service of the county of Surrey. That is a disgrace.
  I know what answer the Minister will give us: she will say that if we start to tinker with the formula, the whole thing will get out of hand. I therefore suggest that between now and making her announcement the Minister examines the problems that Surrey faces—they are not wholly unique, but they are certainly special. The cost of living issue has been gone over year after year and we have yet to see a solution. My hon. Friends have explained that parts of their constituencies used to be policed by the Met; the whole of mine was until the changes they described occurred. The impact on Surrey has already been mentioned: there is a huge need to recruit new people because the officers who were seconded to Surrey police during the transition period have now returned to the Met. The number of officers recruited is therefore large, and they are young.
  Our recruitment record is excellent. Surrey police are doing a splendid job and recruiting is not an issue. The issue is that a lot of youngsters enter the police service and get themselves fully trained while living in and around Surrey; then, when they need to set up home on their own or move elsewhere in the county, they discover that the salary they are getting simply will not cover the cost of finding a house, getting married and bringing up a child or two.

  581
  What happens? Either they go to a much cheaper part of the country or they say, "All we need to do is walk up the road, cross the Metropolitan police authority boundary and we will be £6,000 better off." They can do that without leaving where they live in my constituency. The Minister needs to do something about that. She should say to police forces elsewhere that if they recruit from authorities such as Surrey, they should make some payment towards the contribution that Surrey has made to training, rather than using Surrey as a soft touch. I recall that the forces of Gloucestershire or Devon and Cornwall have never spent a penny on advertising for police officers for many years. They do not need to. They simply have to pop along the M4 or the M3 to have a chat with people in Surrey. They can then fill all their vacancies. The Minister could usefully stop that without upsetting her formula.
  The Minister could examine carefully the London weighting arrangements. We have been round this course before. Those of us who are right up against the Metropolitan police authority boundary need to have something to give to police officers to encourage them to stay. The chief constable and the Surrey police authority have done a huge amount within the resources that are available to them, but they cannot negotiate their own pay and conditions; they are bound by national agreements. The Minister might care to examine that.
  More than anything else the Minister must treat Surrey and other such places fairly. She must stop regarding my county and my constituency as a ready source of cash that can be squandered among her cronies in the midlands and the north. It is high time that that stopped. It is high time also that the Minister accepted that everybody pays their taxes and that they are all entitled to a fair share. Unfortunately, Surrey is not getting it, but despite that Surrey police are doing marvellously. They are trying harder and harder, but they end up standing still. That is not the fault of Surrey police. Every time the Minister publishes figures showing an increase in crime in Surrey, it is not the fault of the police; it is her fault. The Government should be ashamed of what they are doing to the people of Surrey.
  9.32 pm
  Mr. Ian Taylor: I, too, am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling) for initiating this debate. As long as the Minister does not get too excited or relieved, I shall start by saying something complimentary. The Home Office grant for the CCTV cameras that were launched today in Walton-on-Thames is greatly to be welcomed. It is an interesting benchmark project. The hon. Lady was due to unveil the plaque, but other business unavoidably detained her. Therefore, I carried out that duty for her. I was called Hazel Blears—that is in the sense of a quotation, Madam Deputy Speaker, before you call me to order—because that was the name on the plaque. Nevertheless, I am grateful to the Home Office for the money. I was delighted to see the reassuring effect that it has on the community.
  The second compliment that I would pay is that we are grateful for the reassurance money that has come into Surrey and certainly into Elmbridge, which is the borough in which my constituency resides. That is of great importance and it is much welcomed by the police.
  582
  Given those two positive items, I hope that the Minister will listen carefully when I say that there are some big negatives. The chief constable genuinely believes that if he can prove that reassurance projects work—I know that there is a trial period—their funding will not be withdrawn if a new initiative comes along or if pressures elsewhere in the country demand that Surrey makes further cuts. If that were to happen, it would be catastrophic and would hugely damage the morale of police officers who are working extremely hard on the project. Like my colleagues, I am extremely impressed by the dedication of all the officers, right up to the chief constable.
  The police have serious problems in achieving what they want to achieve on the front line. I have had several conversations with the key officers covering my constituency, who understand the pressures. Each part of the country differs; nevertheless, the borough of Elmbridge has not done well recently on crime. I do not blame Surrey police for that. There is not a great deal of violent crime, although recently there have been worrying instances of gun crime. The problem has not got out of hand but, like other parts of the country, we are increasingly suffering from drug-related crime, which leads to petty theft and sometimes more serious theft. If the police are stretched at the front line, it is difficult for them to respond to such crime.
  Another problem arising from the county's adjacency to London is the fact that London is an avid exporter of criminals. Our road network, not least the M25, means that we are sometimes a target area for criminals from Liverpool or Bristol, who decide that Surrey is a soft touch. In addition, there are unreasonable strains on the police. My hon. Friend the Member for Spelthorne (Mr. Wilshire) mentioned the tragedy of Milly Dowler, whose family live in my constituency. She was abducted from Walton station in my constituency; we know not how or why. We do know that she is dead. At various stages in the inquiry, 100 officers were involved, based at the headquarters in Staines. A core of officers is still involved—the case cannot be allowed to rest unsolved, because it is possible that the perpetrator of the crime lives locally. If so, history tells us the perpetrator will strike again. I do not wish to worry my constituents or other people in Surrey, but we must be concerned about that possibility. We cannot abandon the case simply because we do not know why Milly disappeared in full daylight at 4 o'clock outside Walton station, only to be found in woodlands just over the county border.
  That is a real burden, but other issues in Surrey are stretching resources. Surrey police are ready and willing to react, but there is the problem of whether retrospective compensation is available. The presence at Heathrow, for example, is not an inexpensive burden: it is an added strain on an already stretched budget. We must then consider the points made by my hon. Friends. In my own constituency, I have heard that there are apologies if two policemen or women are spotted walking around together—the explanation is that one of them is being trained. There is a constant loss of trained officers. It is a bit like London buses—you wait for one, then suddenly two come along together. In the case of the police officers, the trouble is, of the two, one is untrained.
  That is a serious problem. I do not know the economics of trying to compensate Surrey for the loss of trained officers to other forces, but it is a big problem

  583
  that deserves serious consideration, not least because Surrey invests in training. Another problem in Surrey is living costs. It is not uncommon for recruits to Surrey police to live a long way away. They do a five-day shift, sleep on someone's floor, then go home to another part of the United Kingdom. That is good for Surrey while they are there, but it is not a sustainable basis for a police force. However, it is the result of the cost of living in Surrey. House prices in my constituency average £410,000, so the problem is not trivial. Our debate is about the police, but other public services are seriously affected by the difficulty of living locally.
  I urge the Minister to bear in mind the fact that some of us willingly negotiated with the Home Secretary of the day the transfer of the bulk of what was then my constituency to the Surrey police area. I have no criticism of the willingness of Surrey police to police. They have a profound interest in community policing, which pleases me, but they are stretched. If Surrey is considered one of the best police forces in the country, the squeeze under the formulae will turn it into one of the less good. I ask the Minister to consider that. It cannot be a Government objective. They surely want to maintain a good force, not with a largesse of resources, but not through under-funding, which means that what the force does well today, it will not be able to do tomorrow.
  My balanced approach is to thank the Minister for what the Home Office has done, which is welcomed. On a non-party political basis, we recognise that certain initiatives that the Government have taken are good. Please will the Minister make sure that those initiatives are not suddenly withdrawn, and please will she realise that, underlying my praise, there is deep concern that she is presiding over a decline, year by year, in the capacity of the Surrey force to deal with a front-line county problem.
  9.41 pm
  Sir Paul Beresford: I shall add a few points to those that my hon. Friends have, I hope, managed to hammer home. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling) for allowing us to take part in the debate.
  The biggest problem facing the police force, not just in Surrey but throughout the country, also faces organisations such as local authorities and the national health service. It is the unpredictability of the funds that they receive. The Government seem unable to resist the temptation to top-slice the funding and maintain control of it even after it is allocated locally. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has a similar approach to local government. Control is maintained by introducing targets, allocating funds for specific purposes and top-slicing, so there is no predictability. Local authorities, the police force and the NHS all have to go through loops and hoops to gain funding, which they receive part of the way through the year. That leaves the police force unable to implement the service in such a way as to meet the targets and demands set by the Home Office.
  Policemen and bureaucrats in the police force in Surrey and elsewhere spend an astronomical amount of time and money to meet demands for best value, Audit
  584
  Commission targets and the requirements of the various inspectorates that descend on every police force. I have not done my homework, but I should do so in preparation for the next occasion we meet the Minister. Can she give us some information about the amount of money spent by various police authorities and the proportion of their time spent providing documentation in response to demands from the Home Office and the Audit Commission, and the demands of best value and all the other targets imposed on the police force? If the top-sliced money were returned and the pressure to meet targets removed, the money could go directly into policing.
  I shall touch on the disadvantage of being close to London, which has already been mentioned and applies to all the surrounding local authorities. The unique feature of Surrey is that the two major London airports are located nearby. The international aspects of crime have been felt by London for many years. As London policing improves, international crime is starting to hit places like Surrey dramatically.
  The other disadvantage is that Surrey's attractiveness to those seeking housing has led to high prices. As my hon. Friend the Member for Esher and Walton (Mr. Taylor) said, the average cost of a house in his constituency is £400,000, and it is not much less in mine. The efforts to establish housing associations to secure low-cost home ownership will achieve a temporary. short-term advantage, but the net effect will be to fuel the fire, as the cost of housing in the area is likely to rise as an indirect result of low-cost home ownership. We need to persuade the Government to consider the problems more broadly and take a regional—if I dare use that phrase, as there is no such thing as a south-east region—and economic approach across the nation, rather than simply taking a national approach.
  Other difficulties in Surrey include traffic problems. There is a list of major roads, including the A25, A24 and A29, as well as the M25 and A3, which are motorways, that have to be policed because they go through villages that have narrow pavements, tiny bending roads and ancient houses, with a constant threat of enormous accidents. As far as I can see, the crime prevention officers dealing with traffic in my patch number only one man, yet there are areas throughout my constituency along the A25, A24 and A29 that are used literally as race tracks. It is well known that motor cyclists have race tracks running through our area.
  The police have to concentrate all their traffic work force on specific areas at specific times to try to deal with that problem, which deprives other areas, including some villages. I have just received a huge petition from Ockley, a little village situated on the A29 that has three fabulous old pubs. In the village, that road is called Staines lane. It is a dead straight Roman road and the speed limit is 40 mph. In much of the area, only one side of the road has a pavement, and it is approximately 1.5 ft wide. Cars and motor bikes travel along it at well over 100 mph at all hours of the day and night. The petition is huge. Indeed, to my dismay, at the bottom of the covering letter, the signatory said that only part of the petition from that tiny village had been sent. The police cannot handle the problem.
  Another problem has been highlighted by the National Farmers Union, which has lobbied me and local police in Surrey about crime on agricultural land

  585
  involving not merely theft of small hand tools, but robberies in which vehicles such as combine harvesters and so on have been removed. The flow of wheeled vehicles from Surrey's agricultural areas to areas as far away as Ireland is becoming notorious. The police have diverted extra efforts, funds and personnel into special campaigns in an attempt to stem the problem, and they have had some success. While they are doing that, the gangs to which my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell referred get back on the trains, come out of London and move through Epsom, Leatherhead, Great Bookham, Effingham and Guildford. The havoc that they create at each of the stops, given half an opportunity, is the sort of thing that I used to expect when I lived in central London, but the policing there was very much greater.
  There is a lot that can be done, even with the little budget that I am sure the police will get, but I ask the Minister above all to consider ways of reducing the strain on the Surrey police force and every other police force in terms of demands to produce papers and meet targets that may not be relevant, as well as to reduce the demands of best value and cut bureaucracy. She and her colleagues have said that they will do that. We hear a lot about it, but see no results. If we do not get such action, policing in Surrey, which is good but slipping, will slump.
  9.49 pm
  The Minister for Crime Reduction, Policing, and Community Safety (Ms Hazel Blears): I am delighted to have the opportunity to reply to hon. Members who raised a whole series of issues about policing in Surrey. I am pleased that we have had a lengthy time in which to discuss the subject, particularly following three hours of debate on the Floor of the House on the Anti-social Behaviour Bill. I am sure that our discussions will be productive.
  I congratulate the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling) on securing an additional debate to the one that he obtained in February last year. I would not go so far as to say that he has a record on the subject, but he is clearly making good points on behalf of his constituents. Other hon. Members said that they have been round the houses on these issues and have been to see various Ministers.
  I congratulate the hon. Members for Reigate (Mr. Blunt), for Esher and Walton (Mr. Taylor) and for Mole Valley (Sir Paul Beresford) on the constructive way in which they made their comments. I certainly undertake to think carefully about the issues that they raised, and I shall do my best to respond to them now.
  I very much thank the hon. Member for Esher and Walton for standing in for me this morning at the launch of the CCTV campaign, and I apologise for not being there. I was devastated to realise that I could not attend, and I have undertaken to carry out a further visit to the force in Surrey as soon as I possibly can. Having had the great pleasure of meeting the chief constable, Denis O'Connor, on several occasions since I took up this post, I am personally very impressed by his creativity, imagination and deep commitment to the people in the community that his force serves. I look forward enormously to returning, and hope that the hon. Gentleman will be able to be present as well.
  586
  I want to deal primarily with police funding, police numbers, recruitment and retention. First, I shall say a few words about funding, because that is clearly a matter of key concern. I will shortly announce details of the 2004–05 provisional police funding settlement; hon. Members will appreciate that until I have done so, I am not in a position to provide specific details. I can say, however, that Government expenditure on policing has increased by 30 per cent. over the past three years—a significant extra investment, as I am sure hon. Members will acknowledge.
  Chris Grayling rose—
  Sir Paul Beresford rose—
  Ms Blears: I want to make a bit more progress. I sat and listened to the hon. Gentlemen for an hour and a half, and enjoyed it enormously, but I want to get through a little more of the funding background and then I will certainly give way.
  Funding is rightly allocated by formula. I assure hon. Members that that is not a capricious system—indeed, I understand that it was originally introduced by the right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard), so it has a pedigree that they would recognise. It allocates available funding on the basis of projected need for policing services, taking into account population, social factors and policing activity. The whole basis of the formula is to try to allocate the resources that we have—even with our significant increases, it is still a finite pot—to the areas of greatest need. The formula also underpins the revenue support grant—RSG—that is provided to every police authority by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and the Welsh Assembly Government. The RSG is an equalising grant that takes into account the resources that are available to each local authority.
  I do not accept, therefore, that Surrey is unfairly funded. However, all Governments have seen the importance of damping the impact of change. As hon. Members said, Surrey received a 3 per cent. increase last year. We have used the damping effects of the formula, as well as floors and ceilings. Surrey has been considerably better funded over the past nine years—not just during the term of this Government—than it would have been had there been an unrestrained application of the formula as it was originally set out. The damping effect has alleviated the pressure on Surrey's funding by some 10 per cent.
  There were additional specific grants as well as the 3 per cent. general policing grant that Surrey received in the past year. The 3 per cent. general policing grant took Surrey police to £85.4 million and they received an extra £10.8 million on top of that. That includes £3.9 million from the crime fighting fund for additional officers, £3.4 million for the Airwave communications project and just under £1 million for DNA funding to ensure that Surrey police can take greater advantage of matches on the DNA database.
  The hon. Member for Mole Valley mentioned top-slicing for specific grants. Almost all the top-slicing is for matters that the police say that they want to pursue. I remind Conservative Members that the previous Government set aside funding for 5,000 extra officers,

  587
  yet not one single extra officer was employed despite the inclusion of the funding in the general formula. The money was spent not on extra police officers but on other items. One of the remarkable successes of the Government's introduction of the crime fighting fund is that the money has gone towards the intended goal: getting extra officers throughout the country, including Surrey. Together with the extra community support officers, of whom there will be 63 in Surrey, we are beginning to experience at least higher visibility policing, for which local people in Surrey and elsewhere have long cried out. I therefore believe that some of the top-slicing is justified for the crime fighting fund, the rural policing fund, which people have demanded to take account of sparsity in rural areas, and the Airwave investment, which is a massive investment in bringing forces' communications technology up to date and making it fit for the 21st century.
  Sir Paul Beresford: The problem with the Minister's argument is that she tries to apply national criteria to local issues and people. We have a local police authority and a local police force. It would be much better to put the money back into the pool, use a proper funding formula to distribute it and let local people determine how they want to use it to meet local demands and the fluctuations and variations in crime in their areas.
  Ms Blears: Earlier, I said that the previous Government put in money for extra police officers but did not manage to get a single one. Surely the hon. Gentleman accepts that that is a top priority. However, I shall deal with local versus national standards, which is an important part of our debate in the public sector as well as specifically in the police force. I hope he acknowledges that the funding formula is not sufficiently sophisticated or sensitive in all cases to target some of the resources at the important issues. That applies to the rural policing grant. That is why we have kept it as a separate pot of money for which people do not have to bid. It is allocated to the forces that operate in rural areas and they have universally welcomed that.
  Sir Paul Beresford: Will the Minister give way?
  Ms Blears: I want to consider police numbers. Under the crime fighting fund, we have provided not only more than 9,000 additional officers nationally but an additional 140 posts in Surrey. Comparisons with 1997 are difficult in Surrey because boundaries have changed, as the hon. Member for Esher and Walton said.
  As well as the extra 140 posts, it is important to note that police staff strength in the force has increased significantly. In the current police area, the number has increased by 248 in the past two years. All hon. Members accept that it is vital to maximize the skills of police staff if we are to release more police officers for front-line duties. We therefore want as much of a skill mix—if I may use that expression—as possible in the police force so that members of police staff increasingly carry out some of the duties that previously only uniformed and full warranted officers undertook. We can thus release warranted officers to do some of the front-line duties that only they can carry out.
  588
  Surrey police force is a leader in developing work force modernisation. Necessity is occasionally the mother of invention and I am delighted that Surrey police have grasped the agenda and are leading the way on projects, which, I hope, will inform the skill mix of the police force nationally. Indeed, we are currently negotiating with them about the way in which we can invest some of the £8 million for work force modernisation in developing some of the ideas of which they are at the forefront.
  Mr. Wilshire: We all accept that the numbers of both police officers and support staff have gone up in the current Surrey police force area, but when the Minister quotes such figures, will she tell us how much of that rise in numbers relates to an overall increase caused by the substantial increase in the size of the police force area, and how much to real extra money?
  It being Ten o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Ainger.]
  Mr. Wilshire: What proportion of the figures that the Minister is citing is the result of the big increase in the size of the Surrey police force area, and what proportion is really extra manpower, after allowance has been made for the fact that the area is bigger? She seems to be taking credit to which she is not entitled to.
  Ms Blears: Far be it from me to seek to present figures that are anything less than absolutely accurate. It is true that Surrey has 140 extra posts and an extra 248 police staff. Part of the money for those is provided through the crime fighting fund—a specific grant designed to increase the number of police officers—as happens in the rest of the country. I have already explained that funding is allocated on the basis of a formula that takes into account the policing needs of an area as well as its population, social deprivation factors and so on. There is a fairly complex balance involved in meeting an area's need for policing services, and I am delighted that Surrey, like every other area in the country, now has record police numbers.
  Mr. Wilshire: Will the hon. Lady give way?
  Ms Blears: No; now I want to move on to retention—an issue that has been raised by several hon. Members. Retention is a problem not only for the police but for public bodies throughout the south-east. I recently had a meeting with the chairs of police authorities and chief constables from several forces in the south-east, to discuss some of the proposals that were made last year to deal with retention, and decide whether we could do anything further to assist. I am very conscious of the difficulties that those problems cause for the force, and of the fact that in recent years there have been significant transfers into the Metropolitan police when it has been recruiting.
  Surrey police have responded well to that agenda, not only on the financial elements of the strategy for retention, but on skills mix, management and corporate culture. They have done a lot of work on analysing why people want to resign and work elsewhere, and they

  589
  have tried to change the way in which the organisation functions, so as to give people a sense that they are part of a force in which they have a future and career options, and are engaged in worthwhile work. I have been impressed by Surrey's grasp of that corporate agenda, which seeks to make the best of the people working for it. Surrey police are quickly positioning themselves as a model in that respect, and we hope to learn from the good practice that the chief constable has introduced.
  Mr. Blunt: The compliments and bouquets that the Minister is handing out to the chief constable and the Surrey force are welcome. She said that necessity is the mother of invention. In a previous incarnation, she was responsible for the provision of health services in the south-east, so how many of the relentless pressures on public services does she think have a common core—the cost of living in the south-east?
  Ms Blears: Everybody would acknowledge that the cost of living, particularly the cost of housing, is one of the biggest pressures on public service workers in the south-east. The hon. Member for Esher and Walton said that the average price of a house in his constituency was £400,000; the average price in my constituency is probably nearer £50,000 or £60,000. That is the measure of the difference that can exist between the north and south of this country. We have been trying to come up with ideas, such as housing for key workers, and shared and joint equity schemes, in which people purchase the first 20 per cent. of their property and then seek to add to that proportion as their income increases. The problem of how to live in the south-east and sustain a family life besets not only the public sector but the lower-paid people in the private sector.
  For the Surrey force, the first thing that we have tried to do is change the criteria for the crime fighting fund, so that there are no rewards for recruiting through transfer. That means that forces in places such as Devon and Cornwall, which people might find attractive to work in, no longer get an incentive through the crime fighting fund to recruit through transfer. They now have to recruit by growing their own officers. That is now beginning to have an effect, and the rate of transfers is slowing down.
  We put £3.6 million into Surrey last year for joint equity housing schemes, and we have raised the threshold for forces in the south-east to make special priority payments—including an increase from the standard 30 per cent. to 40 per cent. in Surrey. Officers now get a £2,000 a year allowance because they live in that area. Just two weeks ago, the Deputy Prime Minister launched the communities plan, which contains a significant element for key worker housing. Surrey police have provided evidence of need and a willingness to engage in putting in a contribution themselves. I am delighted about that, and we are going to explore with the Deputy Prime Minister whether there is room for taking significant steps under the communities plan.
  Mr. Ian Taylor: Will the Minister extend the assurance that she has just mentioned in terms of the crime fighting fund to the Metropolitan police's need to replace officers in the near future? In Surrey, we think that we are going to be raided, and if there were a bar on
  590
  the Metropolitan police's taking what to them is the easy route of taking ready trained police officers from counties such as Surrey, it would be a great reassurance to the people there. It would not necessarily give the police officers staying in Surrey any increase in income, but let us try to separate those two issues. I am trying to prevent a raid from taking place in the near future on what are already scarce officer resources in the county.
  Ms Blears: I understand the hon. Gentleman's concerns, but it would be wrong, and probably unlawful, for me to say to officers that they cannot choose of their own free will where they want to be employed and to exercise their skills. I am conscious, however, of the fact that forces such as Surrey—it is not unique in this regard—invest in training, which entails certain costs, only to see people creamed off and going to another force. That is an issue, and if we can address it without unduly restricting the freedom of officers to work where they want to, I will certainly undertake to look into that.
  Sir Paul Beresford: I agree with the Minister on that matter. In contrast to my hon. Friend the Member for Esher and Walton (Mr. Taylor), I do not think that there should be any restrictions of that kind. We have suggested before, however, that there could be a dowry to cover some of the costs involved in such cases. Such a dowry or penalty could act as a disincentive to the Metropolitan police from taking young, newly trained policemen and women from Surrey. It would partly compensate Surrey for the cost, but it would also provide a disincentive to the Metropolitan police in terms of raiding Surrey's policemen and women.
  Ms Blears: I am aware that that issue has also been raised in the Thames Valley force. It is referred to there as a transfer fee rather than a dowry, but I am sure that it is a similar idea. As I have said, this issue is in my mind, but at the moment I am not convinced that we have an effective mechanism for achieving what we want without impinging on the freedom of individuals. I will keep the matter under review, and I recently met the chairs of the police authorities and the chief constables to discuss recruitment and retention in the south-east. I have undertaken to meet them again in a few months' time to review whether we have made any progress under the communities plan, and what is being achieved on joint equity and key worker housing. I will continue to review that. It is also fair to say that the special priority payments are only now coming into effect. It will be interesting to see what impact they have in places such as Surrey, where we have lifted the cap from 30 per cent. to 40 per cent. I will also keep that matter under review.
  I would like to say a few words about community support officers. I am pleased to say that in Surrey we funded 52 such officers last year. I also understand that there will be a further 11, making 63 altogether. That is a significant body of resource to help to tackle the antisocial behaviour that hon. Members have mentioned—I am aware that antisocial behaviour happens not only in inner-city communities. It happens, unfortunately, right across this country, and in some of our rural areas it is even more of a problem, especially when it is linked with excessive alcohol consumption

  591
  and the intimidation and harassment that are sometimes associated with that. I am very aware of those issues and community support officers in particular can help on the antisocial behaviour agenda.
  That is the case for a number of reasons. One is that such officers are in place all the time, as they do not get abstracted for other things such as major operations. That means that they are able to build relationships with local people, especially the young. Quite often, young people will have a different relationship with a community support officer from that with a fully warranted police officer. That is proving extremely successful.
  I understand that Surrey has created a new post of youth community support officer. Again, that is very innovative. There are 11 of those officers—one for each basic command unit area in Surrey—each with a specific brief to work with young people. Preventing the crime and disorder in the first place is better for the young people and the communities involved. I shall be very interested indeed to look at the force's evaluation of those youth community support officers, because this idea is very exciting indeed.
  Despite the initial misgivings about community support officers that I am sure hon. Members voiced when the Police Reform Act 2002 was considered, I would hope that they acknowledge that those officers are doing an extremely useful job right across the country.
  Chris Grayling: Surely the Minister agrees that, as officers in my constituency have described to me, there are people who commit public order offences on a Friday or a Saturday night who are not arrested, simply because making those arrests would take the officers off the streets for several hours. As there are only a couple of cars in the neighbourhood, such offenders are effectively let off. Surely that situation, regardless of the presence of community support officers and regardless of those other initiatives, means that there is an enormous flaw at the heart of policing.
  Ms Blears: I want to say two things to the hon. Gentleman about that. One involves policing the night-time economy—pubs and clubs—and one involves utilising police civilian staff, but they have a common thread, which is similar to the point that I made to the hon. Member for Reigate: when policing services are under pressure, people often come up with creative solutions that represent genuine progress. I shall give two examples.
  Manchester has a project named Manchester city centre safe. There was a similar problem in Manchester, as there were only 20 police officers to patrol the city centre on Friday and Saturday nights, which was completely insufficient to deal with the problems that arose. A partnership group involving the local authority, the pubs and clubs, the bars and the bus company has been created. They are all wired up to the same police net and they are guaranteed a response from the police officers within a couple of minutes.
  That means that the door supervisors, the bar managers and what are called bus loaders from the bus company—all the sober, responsible adults—are out on
  592
  the street, all in uniform and all highly visible. Instead of there being 20 police officers to police the city centre on Fridays and Saturdays, we have a skills-mix work force of 100 people who are able to ensure that the city centre is a safe and good place for thousands of people to visit. They can have a good time and get home safely. That is about working smarter, and it has been achieved without an extra penny of police expenditure because they have drawn in all the people who are, as it were, community protection workers. That covers a much wider base than simply the narrow police family.
  The second issue is officers being off the streets because they are dealing with paperwork. That is a genuine complaint from many police officers, although I am told that we have got rid of 5,000 forms so far. Under the Police Reform Act, we introduced four new categories of worker: detection, investigating, custody and escort officers. Again, those people would not necessarily have to be fully warranted police officers, but they could do some custody work in terms of processing as well as escort work in terms of taking prisoners to and from different places.
  In one pilot scheme, civilian officers under the supervision of a sergeant are doing the escort duties in a rural area where it normally takes for ever to get people to and from detention. About 1,100 police days have been saved in the work that they have been doing over the past 12 months. That is a real success story for people in the service such as those in Surrey, who are prepared to think differently about policing. Trying to think in that way represents the future of our reform programme.
  As has been pointed out, I used to be a health Minister, and as the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell will know, the skill mix in the health service has been accepted for a long time. Nurses now do things that only doctors used to do, and GPs do things that only consultants used to do. The agenda is the same in the police service.
  Let me say something about Surrey's crime figures. I acknowledge that people are entitled to a minimum level of policing wherever they live, and Members have made a case for national standards rather than locality policing, but it should be noted that recorded crime in Surrey is about half the average in the rest of the country. There are nine burglaries per 1,000 of the population compared with an average of 17 in the rest of the country, and eight cases of violence against the person compared with an average of 16 in the rest of the country—which means that Surrey's figure is well below those in high-crime areas. There are fewer vehicle crimes in Surrey, and there is one robbery per 1,000 of the population compared with a national average of two—admittedly a small figure in itself.
  I am not suggesting that Surrey is safe and therefore does not need policing—it clearly does need policing, as does the rest of the country—but we should see the figures in perspective. They are about half the national average. The top 40 crime and disorder reduction partnerships show much larger figures. People living in those communities can also legitimately expect to live in as much safety as possible. That is why we are trying to

  593
  achieve convergence between forces' performance, so that the worst performers attain the standards of the best.
  Mr. Wilshire: Depriving Surrey of money will cause the crime figures to rise. Presumably the aim of convergence is to raise Surrey's crime figures to the national average. The Minister seems to be saying that because the figures are low, Surrey must not need the money. Crime is rising, and perhaps when it has risen enough the Government will relent.
  Ms Blears: I was trying to make a reasonable, sensible point, unlike the hon. Gentleman.
  There has been an application for special grant, and only £0.3 million has been paid. There is a general agreement with the Association of Chief Police Officers and the Association of Police Authorities that in the event of a special event or a big investigation, the police force involved normally pays 1 per cent. of its budget, although a small force would pay less. In Surrey's case the amount would be £1.49 million, but I understand that it has made another application, and we are considering its request. I will undertake to consider it personally in the light of the work that the force can do.
  The hon. Member for Mole Valley asked about the future reform programme, and wanted to know whether we could find space in the national policing plan and national standards for more local determination of what the emphasis should be. As he probably knows, a couple of weeks ago we issued a major consultation document entitled "Policing: Building Safer Communities Together". We are open to consultation for the next three months on how we can make the police more connected to local communities in terms of both accountability and deciding what their work should be, while retaining a national framework and national standards to ensure that people throughout the country are entitled to decent policing levels. The last thing we want is postcode policing; after all, we have managed to end postcode health services.
  We are also interested in exploring the earned-autonomy agenda as we did in the case of the NHS, and the possibility of a lighter touch in the inspection and auditing of forces that are performing well. However, I have been quite surprised since I took on this post by the dearth of data in the police service. For years and years, the police service has not had any national framework or national structure. It is crucial that a performance management system is properly embedded in our police service, so that we can drive up performance throughout the country. I genuinely think that, unless we have the
  594
  data and some targets, we will not see reductions similar to those that we have seen since 1997 in the rate of vehicle crime and in burglary. Robberies have gone down by 17 per cent. in the past couple of years—there have been 17,000 fewer victims of robbery because we have helped forces to drive that agenda forward.
  There is always room for debate about where the targets should be set, who should determine them and how we can get more local input, but I am convinced that having a proper performance management framework, as the American police do, which means that forces know what they are doing and where they can target their resources, is crucial to driving up standards. Simply having a free-for-all, where people are allowed to do exactly as they like, does not result in driving up standards in public services.
  For my part, I am convinced that there is a role for Government. How big that role should be I am prepared to debate. I personally want to see a bigger role for local communities in setting priorities. I think it was the deputy commissioner of the Metropolitan police who said to me the other day that probably the biggest issue for people in Tooting was prostitution on Tooting common. He went on to say that he could find little head room in the national policing plan to deal with such an issue, but that if he failed to do so local people would not feel they were being properly policed and supported. I shall bear that genuine point in mind when we look at getting the balance right between devising a national framework and national standards and encouraging as much local devolution as we possibly can, not just at force level but beyond that to basic command unit level and beyond that to neighbourhood level. We want people to feel that they have a real stake in what happens in their community, in their street, in their neighbourhood and in their local park and that they feel that the police are meeting the priorities that they set.
  I am delighted to have had the opportunity to participate in the debate. Hon. Members have raised some important issues. I hope that they are satisfied that we are looking carefully at the funding decisions before the provisional settlement is made, and that we will try to make our decisions on as fair and transparent a basis as possible. It is vital, particularly in relation to funding, that everyone can see how those decisions are reached, and that they are made on rational grounds to try to reflect policing needs in communities, while also taking into account the fact that everyone is entitled to decent policing. People pay their taxes. They are entitled to public services and we shall ensure that they get them.
  Question put and agreed to.
  Adjourned accordingly at twenty-two minutes past Ten o'clock.

SOLICITOR-GENERAL

  Extradition
  Simon Hughes
  To ask the Solicitor-General what the policy of the United Kingdom Government is on requesting extradition of individuals accused of torturing British nationals abroad, in the absence of a pending prosecution in the country where the accused is located. [137834]

  The Solicitor-General
  The courts of England and Wales may have jurisdiction in respect of an offence committed abroad if the offender, or the victim, is a British national. Once such jurisdiction is established then the procedures for investigating and prosecuting the case are the same as for any case prosecuted in the courts of England and Wales. The police are responsible for investigating allegations of criminal offences and for obtaining admissible evidence to prove the alleged offence. The CPS is responsible for the prosecution of all criminal cases resulting from police investigations. The police ask the advice of the CPS before charging any person with a criminal offence.

  In complex and serious cases such as potential offences involving torture, the police will invariably consult with the CPS for advice on the sufficiency of the evidence before a person is charged. The CPS will consider each case that is passed to it by the police. Each case is carefully considered to assess whether it meets the test set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors, issued under section 10 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985. Once the CPS has decided to start a prosecution, if the alleged offender is located abroad the CPS will refer an application for extradition to the Secretary of State for the Home Department who will forward the request through the appropriate diplomatic channels.

CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS

  Compensation Orders
  Mrs. Brooke
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs how many compensation orders were awarded at(a) magistrates' courts and (b) Crown courts in each year since 2000; what the rate of default was in (i) each year and (ii) each court; and if he will make a statement. [138451]

  Mr. Leslie
  Information on compensation orders in Magistrates' Courts has not been historically collected by the Department for Constitutional Affairs. However, the Home Office Criminal Statistics Publication (Table SI, 6(A)) shows that in 2000, 97,073 offenders were ordered to pay compensation (excluding summary motoring offences) and in 2001, 97,134 offenders were ordered to pay compensation (excluding summary 468W
  motoring offences). Information on the rate of default is not currently collected as compensation orders are measured with confiscation orders and other fines and not isolated. Magistrates' Courts Committees (MCCs) have a responsibility for the collection of a range of debts imposed by both the magistrates' courts and the Crown Court. Debt collected includes compensation but also fees, fines, confiscation orders, legal aid contributions and some maintenance orders. It is not yet possible to separate out only compensation orders from the total. There are plans, however, to isolate compensation orders in debt analysis under the Libra Project from around Autumn 2004 onwards. This will involve the use of the Libra Application which is the new IT system being developed for the Magistrates' Courts.

  Figures concerning the number of compensation orders made in the Crown Court for the years 2000–02 are as follows. This information relates to defendants, not cases:

  2000—6,892

  2001—6,732

  2002—7,100

  Unfortunately, I am unable to provide information on the rate of default as the monies are paid into Magistrates Courts and the figures aggregated in the way explained above.

  Appointments Commission
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs how many people were interviewed for the position of chair of the House of Lords Appointments Commission when it was first established. [138519]

  Mr. Leslie
  My Department is not responsible for the present House of Lords Appointments Commission, which is a non-departmental public body sponsored by the Cabinet Office. However, I understand that three people were interviewed for the post of chair when the Commission was first established.

  Bailiffs
  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs how many complaints have been made in each year since 1997 concerning the conduct of bailiffs; how many complaints have been investigated; how many complaints have resulted in a prosecution; how many convictions there were concerning the conduct of bailiffs; and if he will publish a list of banned bailiffs. [136800]

  Mr. Leslie
  [holding answer 6 November 2003]My Department is responsible for county court bailiffs only. Any complaint involving a county court bailiff, unless of a serious nature, is dealt with by the county court that s/he is assigned to. There is no database kept on complaints against individual bailiffs.

  There are Certificated Bailiffs who act in a private capacity. They are given their authority to do so for a period of two years, by their local county court judge, in accordance with the Distress for Rent Rules 1988. A complaint against a Certificated Bailiff is considered by a judge of the county court that granted the certificate.

  469W
  If the certificate is revoked the Department will be informed. The information will be recorded on the Register of Certificated Bailiffs that is kept centrally. The Register is open to public search through a central point of contact. No data is retained longer than three years. In 2001 two certificates were cancelled, in 2002, 13 were cancelled, and in 2003 to date 17 have been cancelled. Any prosecution would be taken by the member of the public affected by the action of a certificated bailiff. There is no data kept by the county court or the Department centrally.

  Bechtel
  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs if he will list the contracts for consultancy and other work carried out by Bechtel in each year since 1997 for the Lord Chancellor's Department, stating in each case(a) the nature of the work, (b) the value of the contract and (c) the duration of the contract; and if he will make a statement.[137738]

  Mr. Lammy
  According to our records, since 1997 the Lord Chancellor's Department has not entered into a contract with Bechtel for consultancy or other work.

  Departmental Costs
  Mr. Flight
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what the cost was to his Department and its predecessor of use for official business of(a) ministerial cars and drivers, (b) taxis, (c) train travel, (d) the use of helicopters, (e) airline tickets and (f) chartered aeroplanes in each year since 1997. [123086]

  Mr. Lammy
  I refer the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs to the answer of the Minister of State for the Cabinet Office (Mr. Alexander) of 13 November 2003,470W
  Official Report, column 397W, which deals with part (a) and (f) on behalf of my Department.

  It is not possible to identify the Department's other travel costs without incurring disproportionate cost. The Department has published rules for official travel in its staff handbook and ministerial travel is governed by the Ministerial Code and Travel by Ministers.

  Divorced Parents
  Sir Nicholas Winterton
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs pursuant to his answer of 22 October 2003,Official Report, column 631, on divorced parents, if he will collect separate figures for the numbers of (a) fathers and (b) mothers granted leave to remove their children from the United Kingdom. [136098]

  Mr. Lammy
  There are no plans to collect the data requested. No children statistics distinguish between orders in favour of mothers and fathers and to collect figures in this area would incur disproportionate cost. Figures are kept of the total number of orders made under section 13 of the Children Act 1989 for removal from the jurisdiction since 2000 (when figures were first collected). Separate figures are not held for mothers and fathers, though 333 such orders were made in 2002.

  Law Commission (Acts)
  Mr. Jim Cunningham
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs on what dates Acts have received Royal Assent enshrining legislative proposals published by the Law Commission since 1990. [138044]

  Mr. Lammy
  The Law Commission Reports published since 1990, together with the titles of the Acts incorporating the Reports' recommendations and the dates on which those Acts received Royal Assent, are set out in the table.

  Report No.

  Title

  Act

  Royal Assent

  1990

  192

  Family Law: The Ground for Divorce (HC 636)

  Family Law Act 1996 (c 27)

  04 July 1996

  193

  Private International Law: Choice of Law in Tort and Delict (Joint Report—Scot Law Com No 1 29)(HC 65)

  Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 (c 42)

  08 November 1995

  1991

  196

  Rights of Suit in Respect of Carriage of Goods by Sea (Joint Report—Scot Law Corn No 130) (HC 250)

  Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1992 (c 50)

  16 July 1992

  199

  Transfer of Land: Implied Covenants for Title (HC 437)

  Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1994 (c 36)

  03 November 1994

  202+

  Criminal Law: Corroboration of Evidence in Criminal Trials (Cm 1620)

  Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (c 33)

  03 November 1994

  1992

  205

  Criminal Law: Rape within Marriage (HC 167)

  Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (c 33)

  03 November 1994

  207

  Family Law: Domestic Violence and Occupation of the Family Home (HC 1)

  Family Law Act 1996 (c 27)

  04 July 1996

  1993

  215

  Sale of Goods Forming Part of a Bulk (Joint Report—Scot Law Com No 145) (HC 807)

  Sale of Goods (Amendment) Act 1995 (c 28)

  19 July 1995

  216

  The Hearsay Rule in Civil Proceedings (Cm 2321)

  Civil Evidence Act 1995 (c 38)

  08 November 1995

  217

  Family Law: The Effect of Divorce on Wills

  Law Reform (Succession) Act 1995 (c 41)

  08 November 1995

  1994

  220

  The Law of Trusts: Delegation by Individual Trustees (HC 110)

  Trustee Delegation Act 1999 (c 15)

  15 July 1999

  471W

  Report No.

  Title

  Act

  Royal Assent

  224

  Structured Settlements and Interim and Provisional

  In part by the Finance Act 1995 (c 4); Civil

  01 May 1995

  Damages (Cm 2646)

  Evidence Act 1995 (c 38); and Damages Act 1996(c 48)

  08 November 1995 24 July 1996

  226

  Administrative Law: Judicial Review and Statutory Appeals (HC 669)

  In part by Housing Act 1996 (c 52)

  24 July 1996

  228

  Criminal Law: Conspiracy to Defraud (HC 11)

  Theft (Amendment) Act 1996 (c 62)

  18 December 1996

  1995

  230

  Legislating the Criminal Code: The Year and a Day Rule in Homicide (HC 183)

  Law Reform (Year and a Day Rule) Act 1996 (c 19)

  17 June 1996

  235

  Transfer of Land: Land Registration (jointly with HM Land Registry) (Cm 2950)

  Land Registration Act 1997 (c2)

  27 February 1997

  1996

  242

  Privity of Contract: Contracts for the Benefit of Third Parties (Cm 3329)

  Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (c 31)

  11 November 1999

  243

  Offences of Dishonesty: Money Transfers (HC 690)

  Theft (Amendment) Act 1996 (c 62)

  18 December 1996

  1999

  260

  Trustees' Powers and Duties (Joint Report—Scot Law Com No 166) (HC 538/SE2)

  Trustee Act 2000 (c 29)

  23 November 2000

  2001

  271

  Land Registration for the Twenty-First Century (Joint Report with HM Land Registry) (HC 114)

  Land Registration Act 2002 (c 9)

  26 February 2002

  Note:

  This table does not contain 41 Consolidation Acts or the 3 Statute Law (Repeal) Acts passed since 1990.

  Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act
  Brian White
  To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what statutory investigatory powers the Department has; which ones will be superseded by use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000; and what plans he has for removing these legacy powers. [136128]

  Mr. Lammy
  My Department has no existing statutory investigatory powers.

CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT

  Community Fund
  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (1) how many grants have been made from the Community Fund to projects in the East Worthing and Shoreham constituency since its inception; [138423]

  Recipient

  Award amount(£)

  Award date

  Worthing Boys Club

  105,616

  11 June 1996

  Adur Furniture Network

  98,000

  11 June 1996

  The Sussex Multiple Sclerosis Treatment Centre Ltd.

  44,000

  17 December 1996

  Counselling For Carers

  130,317

  17 December 1996

  Adur Carers Association

  193,172

  17 December 1996

  Shoreham and District Mental Health Association

  49,140

  18 September 1997

  Adur Special Needs Project

  101,999

  18 September 1997

  1st Durrington Scout Group

  175,000

  18 September 1997

  Alchemist Scrap Store Ltd.

  68,500

  26 March 1998

  Sompting Parish Hall

  31,654

  30 September 1998

  Adur Independent Mediation Service

  3,691

  5 November1998

  Adur Carers Association

  103,000

  4 March 1999

  Adur Community Transport Ltd.

  70,283

  4 March 1999

  6th Shoreham-by-Sea Sea Scouts

  4,950

  11 March 1999

  Fishersgate Community Association

  104,863

  5 August 1999

  The Club

  4,258

  1 September 1999

  Shoreham and District Mental Health Association

  938

  1 September 1999

  Broadwater (Worthing) Community Association

  2,500

  11 November 1999

  Adur Carers Association

  161,020

  30 August 2000

  472W
  (2) what the value is of grants made by the Community Fund to projects in the East Worthing and Shoreham constituency since its inception; and what the average value is of such grants per parliamentary constituency in the United Kingdom; [138424]

  (3) if she will list the projects in the East Worthing and Shoreham constituency which have benefited from Community Fund grants. [138425]

  Estelle Morris
  Since the Lottery's start, the Community Fund has made 32 grants in the East Worthing and Shoreham constituency. The following table lists the recipients of the awards, when they received this and how much it was for.

  The total value of awards received in the constituency of East Worthing and Shoreham from the Community Fund is £2,142,779.

  UK constituencies on average have received £3,913,217 from the Community Fund.
  473W

  Recipient

  Award amount (£)

  Award date

  Hurstfield Residents Association

  735

  20 September 2000

  Lancing and Sompting Citizens Advice Bureau

  146,856

  27 October 2000

  Adur Council For Voluntary Service

  178,019

  27 October 2000

  Shoreham and Southwick U3A

  4,242

  22 November 2000

  Shoreham and District Mental Health Association

  75,941

  20 December 2000

  West Sussex Association for the Disabled

  2,925

  16 May 2001

  Adur (Tenants and Leaseholders) Consultative Forum

  1,006

  18 July 2001

  Broadwater (Worthing) Community Association

  3,201

  26 September 2001

  4th Worthing Scout Group

  5,000

  29 November 2001

  Worthing And District Crossroads Care Attendant Scheme

  3,885

  27 March 2002

  Shoreham and District Mental Health Association

  33,316

  4 December 2002

  St. John Ambulance

  152,701

  22 January 2003

  Lancing and Sompting Citizens Advice Bureau

  82,051

  25 March 2003

  This is derived from the Department's Awards Database and is based on information supplied by the distributing bodies.

  Design
  Mr. Best
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what support her Department is giving to the promotion of design(a) initiatives and (b) education. [136654]

  Ms Hewitt
  I have been asked to reply.

  The more effective use of design throughout the British economy would improve prosperity and productivity. We promote design through the work of the Design Council, which is funded by the DTL.

  For example, the Design Council's "Design Demonstrations" projects with companies provide exemplars of how design can radically improve performance. These projects are with manufacturing and emerging technology companies. The outputs will support awareness campaigns, to be undertaken with Regional Development Agencies and Business Link, to reach a wider business audience.

  In education, the Design Council's "Design in Schools Week" places professionals in schools to inspire design and technology students and teachers. In 2002, 302 designers worked in 295 schools, this year, 372 designers worked in 360 schools.

  Business Link and the Manufacturing Advisory Service provide extensive advice and brokerage services on design.

  Digital Terrestrial Television
  Annabelle Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what percentage of households in Scotland are able to receive digital terrestrial television services. [139025]

  Estelle Morris
  I understand from the BBC that the percentage of households in Scotland, able to receive digital terrestrial television services is 80.5 per cent. Further information can be found on the Freeview website: www.freeview.co.uk.

  National Lottery Ticket Sales
  John Barrett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many National Lottery ticket sales there were in the(a) EH30, (b) EH29,
  474W
  (c) EH28, (d) EH 12, (e) EH4 and (f) EH11 postcode areas in each of the last 10 years; and how much was raised in each case. [138452]

  Estelle Morris
  Information on the number of National Lottery tickets sold is not available by postcode area. Revenue raised through ticket sales is not calculated by postcode on an on-going basis. However, in response to a question from my hon. Friend the Member for Morley and Rothwell (Mr. Challen) on 22 October 2002,Official Report, columns 182–83, my right hon. Friend the Minister for Sport and Tourism placed in the Library a table listing sales by postcode area since the Lottery's launch. I will provide an update of the table to the hon. Member as soon as it is available, and place a copy in the Libraries of both Houses.

  Olympic Sports
  Kate Hoey
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what support will be given to Olympic sports in which UK participants in the Sydney Olympics gained medals. [137464]

  Tessa Jowell
  All Olympic sports that won medals in Sydney have had their funding confirmed to 31 March 2005. The National Governing Bodies of these sports are all preparing draft World Class programme plans for the Beijing Olympiad by March 2004 and refining those plans post Athens, by November 2004. The Sports Councils will review the plans during December and January and decisions on funding effective from April 2005 will be taken in January and February 2005.

  Regional News
  Andrew Mackinlay
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport if she will request the Independent Television Commission to insist that television companies uphold franchise and licensing agreements relating to the broadcasting of regional news from specific county locations during the term of any franchise; and if she will make a statement. [139026]

  Estelle Morris
  This is a matter for the Independent Television Commission.

  Social Inclusion
  Mr. Best
  To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what recent discussions she has had with(a) regional cultural consortia, (b) libraries and (c) museums on measures to promote social inclusion in relation to access to (i) the arts and (ii) sport. [138372]
  475W
  Estelle Morris
  Departmental Ministers have regular discussions about social inclusion and access with representatives of our sectors, including libraries, museums and a wide variety of regional interests. We are pursuing access and inclusion through a range of initiatives that feed into our Public Service Agreement objectives and targets. The Department is also working closely with the Neighbourhood Renewal Unit and the Home Office to promote and support sports and cultural activities as ways of reducing social exclusion, through the building of community cohesion and trust and individual self-esteem and skills.

NORTHERN IRELAND

  Attention Deficit Disorder
  Mrs. Iris Robinson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what plans he has to introduce in Northern Ireland non-drug behavioural therapies used in the United States for the treatment of attention deficit disorder; and if he will make a statement. [138976]

  Angela Smith
  Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder is a very complex disorder with both genetic and environmental components to its aetiology. There is established evidence that medication is an effective mainstay of management and should be used within an overall package of care and support. This package should include advice around management of behaviour for parents, carers and teachers. Considerable local expertise is available through the child and adolescent mental health teams. If specific non-drug behavioural therapies are used this would be at the discretion of the clinicians.

  Benefit Payments
  Mrs. Iris Robinson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much was paid in(a) disability living allowance, (b) unemployment benefit and (c) incapacity benefit in Northern Ireland in the last 12 months for which figures are available. [138992]

  Mr. Spellar:
  The most recent figures available are attached in the following table:

  Benefit

  Expenditure from October 2002-September 2003 (£000)

  Disability living allowance

  493,526

  Jobseekers allowance—income based

  89,249

  Jobseekers allowance—contributory based

  14,719

  Incapacity benefit

  319,061

  Total

  916,555

  Note:

  Unemployment benefit has now been replaced by jobseekers allowance, both income-based and contributory-based.

  Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
  Mrs. Iris Robinson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many deaths from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease there were in Northern Ireland in each of the last five years. [138977]
  476W
  Mr. Pearson
  The following table gives the number of deaths resulting from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, registered in Northern Irel and from 1998 to 2002.

  Number of registered deaths by year in Northern Ireland resulting from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

  Deaths

  1998

  627

  1999

  704

  2000

  610

  2000

  584

  2001

  553

  Mrs. Iris Robinson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what plans he has to reduce the incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Northern Ireland. [138978]

  Angela Smith
  Although there is evidence of some genetic component to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, the majority of cases are associated with smoking, exposure to air pollution, including that caused by environmental tobacco smoke, and lung damage arising from respiratory infections.

  The Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety published a five year Tobacco Action Plan in July 2003. The Plan addresses a number of key issues, including prevention, helping smokers to quit and protecting the public from tobacco smoke. An Implementation Group, under the chairmanship of the Chief Medical Officer, is taking forward the 24 action points identified in the Plan.

  Driving Licences
  Lady Hermon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland which countries are on the list of those whose driving licence is transferable to a Northern Ireland one; what criteria are used in deciding whether a country's driving licence is transferable to Northern Ireland; for what reason South Africa is excluded from this list; and what plans he has to amend the arrangements to include South Africa. [138726]

  Angela Smith
  There are 14 countries and territories currently designated for the purposes of exchangeable licences in Northern Ireland, namely Australia, Austria, Barbados, the Republic of Cyprus, Finland, Gibraltar, Malta, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Sweden and Zimbabwe, and the territories of Hong Kong and the British Virgin Islands.

  In determining the suitability of a country for exchange purposes, the driver testing and licensing systems are assessed, to ensure that the drivers meet standards that are comparable to those in Northern Ireland. This includes an assessment of the driving test, the integrity of licensing system and the nature and format of the licence itself.

  With regard to the Republic of South Africa (RSA), it is accepted that the nature of the driving test and the general driving standards are comparable to those in Northern Ireland. However, further consideration is being given to the integrity of the system for issuing licences. Furthermore, the RSA driving licence does not

  477W
  indicate whether it has been issued in exchange for a licence from a third country. This is important since the standards in that third country may not have been assessed against Northern Ireland standards.

  The Department of the Environment is continuing to assess the suitability of licences from RSA for exchange. The Department is also developing proposals to amend the relevant legislation to enable selective recognition of licences from other countries so that, for example, licences which had been issued in exchange for a licence from a third country, which does not meet Northern Ireland standards, could be excluded from the exchange arrangements. This will bring exchange arrangements in Northern Ireland into line with those in Great Britain. Depending on the availability of legislative opportunities, it is hoped to have the amendment in place before the end of 2005.

  Hare Coursing
  Mr. Pickthall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what assessment he has made of the impact of illegal coursing on the population of the Irish hare; and if he will commission research on the size of the population. [138561]

  Angela Smith
  No assessment has been made of the impact of illegal coursing on the population of the Irish hare in Northern Ireland.

  The Irish Hare Species Action Plan, published by the Department of the Environment in 2000, identifies the need to carry out regular surveys of the Irish hare population in Northern Ireland. The purpose of these surveys is to estimate the size of the population and make deductions about the causes of any movement in the estimated numbers. A baseline survey was completed in 1997; this was followed by "The Northern Ireland Irish Hare Survey 2002", carried out by Professor Montgomery's research team at The Queen's University of Belfast. The Department will carry out regular, similar research into surveys of the Irish hare population to measure progress against the Species Action Plan targets "to maintain the existing range and to demonstrate a population increase by 2005; and to double the present population by 2010 over as much of the range as possible". The next of the surveys will be commissioned in spring 2004.

  Separate research is also under way at Queen's University into the status and population dynamics of the Irish Hare, using DNA techniques, and on the ecology of the Irish hare.

  Copies of the documents referred to above have been placed in the Library.

  National Employment Plans
  Mr. Beggs
  To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what progress has been made to implement and monitor National Employment Plans in Northern Ireland. [132790]
  478W
  Jane Kennedy
  There is no separate Northern Ireland 'National Employment Plan' although our labour market plans are included within my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State's 'Draft Priorities and Budget 2004–07' document and the Department for Employment and Learning's 'Service Delivery Agreement 2003–04'. Copies of these documents are available in the Library. Northern Ireland contributes, as do Scotland and Wales, to the National Employment Action Plan for the UK.

  In Northern Ireland, Government programmes, and projects receiving European funding, address the key European Employment Strategy issues of employability, skills needs, entrepreneurship and equal opportunities in the labour market. Northern Ireland contributes information on the implementation of programmes and projects as part of the monitoring of national progress against the Employment Guidelines issued by the European Commission.

WALES

  Departmental Costs
  Mr. Flight
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what the cost was to his Department for(a) ministerial cars and drivers, (b) taxis, (c) train travel, (d) the use of helicopters, (e) airline tickets and (f) chartered aeroplanes in each year since 1997. [123073]

  Mr. Hain
  The Wales Office was created in July 1999.(a) I refer the hon. member to the reply which he received from Mr. N Matheson of the Government Car and Dispatch Agency (a copy of which can be found in the Libraries of the House of Commons) which addressed this issue.

  (b) Cost to the department of taxis

  £

  1999–20001

  310

  2000–01

  1,266

  2001–02

  2,851

  2002–03

  796

  20032-

  912

  1 From July 1999

  2 To date

  These figures exclude any amounts spent on taxis, black cabs and licensed hackney carriages outside departmental contracts and reclaimed by officials as travel and subsistence expenditure. That information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  (c) Cost to the department of trains

  1999–20001

  35,239

  2000–01

  62,121

  2001–02

  84,423

  2002–03

  124,035

  2003–

  67,895

  1 From July 1999

  2 To date

  (d)and (f) The Wales Office has never used helicopters or chartered planes.
  479W

  (e) Cost to the department of air line tickets

  £

  1999–20001

  105

  2000–01

  6,851

  2001–02

  5,283

  2002–03

  695

  20032-

  95

  1 From July 1999

  2 To date

  Market Research
  Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list each item of market and opinion research commissioned since May 1997 by(a) his Department and (b) agencies and non-departmental public bodies for which his Department is responsible; what the purpose of each item was; and whether the results were published. [137004]

  Mr. Touhig
  The Wales Office was established in 1999. Since then the Wales Office has not commissioned any market or opinion research.

  New Jobs
  Mr. Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) how many new jobs there are in(a) the private sector and (b) the public sector in Wales; [137649]

  (2) how many new jobs there have been in (a) the private sector and (b) the public sector in Wales since 1997. [137648]

  Mr. Touhig
  Comparing the 12 months to August 2003 with 1997, there has been an increase of 49,000 people employed in the public sector and 61,000 employed in the private sector in Wales.

  Source:

  Labour Force Survey

  Performance Monitoring
  Mr. Flight
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what the total cost was of(a) setting, (b) monitoring and (c) measuring the performance targets for his Department in 2002–03; and how many and what grades of civil servants monitor these targets. [137952]

  Mr. Touhig
  The setting, measuring and monitoring of Wales Office's performance targets is an integral part of the job of all managers. It is not possible to disaggregate the cost. The Wales Office Management Board regularly reviews targets. It consists of the eight most senior people in the Department. Their grades are 3 (one person), 6 (four people) and 7 (three people).

  Mr. Flight
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales if he will list the performance targets that(a) his Department and (b) its agencies and non-departmental public bodies are required to meet; and if he will specify for each target (i) who sets it and (ii) who monitors achievement against it. [137967]

  Mr. Touhig
  This information is published in the Wales Office Departmental Report (Cm 5928), copies of which are available in the Library of the House.
  480W
  The targets are set by Ministers on the advice of the Management Board and are monitored by Ministers and the Management Board.

  Work-related Stress
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many cases of work-related stress have been reported in his Department in each of the last three years; how much compensation has been paid to employees; how many work days have been lost due to work-related stress, and at what cost, what procedures have been put in place to reduce work-related stress, and at what cost; and if he will make a statement. [136852]

  Mr. Touhig
  Detailed sick absence statistics are derived from medical and self-certificates, which are completed by staff or their GPs. While certain illnesses, such as "depression", "anxiety", "general debility" and even "stress" may be indicated on certificates, it is not possible to determine levels of "work-related stress". Consequently, we have no details on the number of working days lost due to work-related stress or the cost to the Department.

  The Wales Office staff have available to them the resources of the National Assembly, and since June 2003, of the Department for Constitutional Affairs in tackling stress. These include a range of stress management courses for both line managers and employees, Health, Safety and Welfare intranet site, a stress handbook for line managers, and a fully trained in-house Welfare service.

  The Department offers flexible working patterns, enabling staff to adopt more effective working patterns to better balance their work and home life.

  We have a legal obligation to provide a safe working environment for all our staff and, under the Government's Revitalising Health and Safety initiative, we are committed to meeting targets for reducing the number of working days lost generally to work-related injuries and illnesses.

WORK AND PENSIONS

  Pension Schemes
  Mr. Best
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what measures are in place to protect the(a) values and (b) benefits of pension fund schemes created by the former publicly owned industries. [138651]

  Malcolm Wicks
  Responsibility for the pension fund schemes created by the former publicly owned industries is a matter for the relevant sponsor Departments, or their successors, and the successor companies themselves. More generally, however, we have proposed a range of protection measures which will apply to the pension funds created by the former publicly owned industries in the same way as they will to those of any other privately owned company.

  Through the introduction of the new Pension Protection Fund, we are taking action to make sure that members of defined benefit schemes will still have the secure retirement they were expecting. The Government has also published and consulted on draft regulations

  481W
  that increase the debt due from solvent employers when their salary-related pension scheme is wound up. In addition we are at present consulting on draft Regulations on the proposed new priority order.

  Mr. Best
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will introduce legislation to prevent employers from taking contribution holidays from their employees' pension fund schemes. [137921]

  Malcolm Wicks
  No.

  Since pension provision by employers is voluntary, the levels of contributions are a matter for agreement between pension scheme trustees and sponsoring employers.

  Under the new scheme-specific funding regime which will replace the Minimum Funding Requirement, trustees and sponsoring employers will be required to develop and agree, with the scheme actuary's advice, the funding principles for their scheme—including a determination of whether the level of contributions is sufficient to meet a scheme's long-term pension commitments.

  The new simplified tax regime for approved pension schemes (set out in the document "Simplifying the taxation of pensions: increasing choice and flexibility for all" (December 2002)) would abolish the rules requiring approved occupational pension schemes to run off their surplus funds (for example by agreeing contributions holidays) or lose their full tax exempt status. In addition, the document "Action on Occupational Pensions" announced that pension funds will no longer be able to make payments of surplus to employers from an actuarial surplus only where the scheme was funded above a level sufficient to secure full buy-out of scheme liabilities.

  Pension Credit
  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what plans he has to maximise take-up of pension credit. [138652]

  Malcolm Wicks
  We want every pensioner to take up their entitlement. At the heart of our marketing campaign is a direct mail pack to all pensioner households who have not been converted to pension credit automatically. We will have written to all pensioner households by June 2004. To support this process we are running an advertising campaign on TV, radio and in the press to encourage pensioners to apply.

  The Pension Service Local Service are also playing a key role in take-up of pension credit, particularly in encouraging pensioners who traditionally do not take up their entitlement to apply. Working closely with key partners such as Citizens Advice, Age Concern and local authorities and with local voluntary organisations the local service reach these pensioners at locations that suit their needs. Activities being undertaken include awareness sessions, information surgeries and take-up campaigns. Over this month the Local Service has held or plans to hold over 1,300 events which are expected to reach around 117,000 people.
  482W
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many pensioners he estimates will be in receipt of means-tested benefits as a result of the introduction of the pension credit by 2004–05. [138654]

  Malcolm Wicks
  The Department estimates that in 2004–05 there will be approximately three million pensioner benefit units receiving income related benefits.

  Tom Brake
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will make a statement on the pension credit. [138637]

  Malcolm Wicks
  Pension credit is making a real difference to the lives of millions of pensioners. As the Secretary of State reported on 11 November, at the end of October there were already 1.97 million pensioner households, around 2.3 million individuals, receiving pension credit. And 1.2 million households, around 1.4 million individuals, are now receiving more money than they did before, with the average award being £47.10 per week,Official Report, 11 November 2003, column 18WS.

  Our advertising campaign is continuing and we are working with partner organisations, such as Help The Aged, Age Concern and Citizens Advice, to fulfil our aspiration that every pensioner takes up their entitlement.

  And it is not too late to apply. Anyone who makes an application before October 2004, where entitlement exists, will have their award backdated to October 2003, or to the date entitlement begins if this is later.

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what he estimates that the average(a) single pensioner and (b) pensioner couple will receive each week under the pension credit in (a) the North West region, (b) Merseyside and (c) St. Helens South. [137982]

  Malcolm Wicks
  The information requested is for estimates. The figures set out in the following table are the actual average amounts.

  Weekly average amount in payment (£)

  Area

  All claimants

  Couples

  Singles

  North West and Merseyside (GOR)

  45.92

  58.26

  43.30

  Merseyside Metropolitan County Council

  46.24

  56.66

  43.95

  St. Helens South Parliamentary Constituency

  44.63

  55.37

  42.23

  Notes:

  1. Figures are based on 100 per cent. Generalised Matching Service (GMS) data.

  2. Local authorities, Government Office Regions (GOR), and Parliamentary constituencies are assigned by matching postcodes against the relevant ONS postcode directory.

  Source:

  IAD Information Centre, 100 per cent. sample

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in(a) the north west region, (b) Merseyside and (c) St. Helens South have claimed the pension credit. [137985]

  Malcolm Wicks
  The information is not available in the format requested.
  483W
  As at 17 October 2003 the number of people receiving pension credit in St. Helens South was 3,615, in Merseyside Metropolitan 67,185, and in the north west and Merseyside region 261,250.

  Notes:

  1. Figures have been rounded to the nearest five.

  2. Figures are based on 100 per cent. Generalised Matching Service (CMS) data.

  3. Local authorities, Government Office Regions (GOR), and parliamentary constituencies are assigned by matching postcodes against the relevant ONS postcode directory.

  Source:

  IAD Information Centre, 100 per cent. sample.

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions by how much he estimates the income of the average(a) single pensioner and (b) pensioner couples will change under the pension credit for (i) the north west region, (ii) Merseyside and (iii) St. Helens, South compared with that in 1997. [138014]

  Malcolm Wicks
  The information is not available in the format requested.

  As at 17 October 2003 the average weekly gain for those on Pension Credit is indicated in the table.

  Average weekly gain (£)

  Area

  All claimants

  Couples

  Singles

  North west and Merseyside

  5.31

  7.40

  4.86

  Merseyside Metropolitan County Council

  5.59

  7.98

  5.05

  St. Helens. South Parliamentary Constituency

  6.21

  8.06

  5.78

  Notes:

  1. Figures produced by IAD from 100 per cent Generalised
  Matching Service (GMS) data at 17 October 2003.

  2. Gainer figures have been produced by comparing Pension
  Credit amount at 17 October 2003 with MIG amount immediately
  prior to introduction of Pension Credit.

  3. Local authorities, Government Office Regions (GOR), and
  parliamentary constituencies are assigned by matching postcodes
  against the relevant ONS postcode directory.

  Source:

  IAD Information Centre, 100 per cent sample.

  The Government will be spending around £8 billion extra on pensioners in 2003–04 as a result of the measures introduced since 1997. This includes around –3.75 billion on the poorest third of pensioners—the very people who need help the most. This is almost six times as much as an earnings link to the basic state pension since 1998 would have given them.

  Following the introduction of the Pension Credit, the average pensioner household will be £1,250 per year, or £24 per week, better off due to the Government's personal tax and benefit changes than they would have been under the 1997 system.

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the Government's plans are to ensure maximum take-up in(a) the north west region, (b) Merseyside and (c) St. Helens South of the pension credit. [138015]

  Malcolm Wicks
  I refer my hon. Friend to the written answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Eltham (Clive Efford) on 15 September 2003,Official Report, column 559W. The Pension Service local service continues to work with partner organisations in the
  484W
  north west, Merseyside and St. Helens South, including Age Concern, local authorities and local voluntary organisations, to tell pensioners about pension credit, raise awareness and encourage those eligible to apply. Activities at the local level are particularly aimed at encouraging applications from pensioners who traditionally do not take up their entitlement and include awareness sessions, information surgeries and take-up campaigns.

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in(a) the North West region, (b) Merseyside and (c) St. Helens South are entitled to the pension credit. [138016]

  Malcolm Wicks
  The information is not available in the format requested but we estimate that around 500,000 pensioner households in the North West and Merseyside region are eligible for Pension Credit.

  Unemployment
  Mr. Borrow
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will make a statement on long-term trends in unemployment. [138655]

  Mr. Browne
  Labour market statistics continue to show employment growing and unemployment on a downward trend. In the last month the unemployment figure fell from 3.1 per cent. to 3.0 per cent., the lowest figure in over 25 years.

  These are great achievements. But we know we still have more to do. We are working to ensure that all groups of people, in all parts of the country, have access to job opportunities and are given the support they need to overcome the barriers they face.

  Pensioner Incomes
  Vera Baird
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what recent assessment he has made of the effect of Government policy on the incomes of(a) the poorest pensioners and (b) all pensioners. [138656]

  Malcolm Wicks
  As a result of Government measures already undertaken since 1997, including the introduction of pension credit in October, on average:pensioner households will be £1,250 a year better off in real terms—around £24 extra a week; and
  the poorest third of pensioner households will have gained £1,600 a year in real terms.

  Providing a decent income for the poorest pensioners is key. Since April 2003, no pensioner has to get by on less than £102.10 per week (£155.80 for couples).

  Age Discrimination
  Dr. Palmer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will take steps to bring about the early elimination of age discrimination in employment. [138657]

  Mr. Browne
  We are committed to introducing legislation to outlaw age discrimination in employment in October 2006. Meanwhile we shall continue to promote the employment of those aged 50 and over through our Age Positive Campaign.

  Asbestos Surveyors
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many United Kingdom Accreditation Service asbestos surveyors are registered in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement. [137814]

  Mr. Browne
  The United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) has accredited 50 organisations that carry out inspections for asbestos in buildings. A further 40 organisations have applied for accreditation. The Department holds no information on the numbers of surveyors employed by these organisations.

  Council Tax Benefit
  Mr. Dhanda
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps his Department is taking to encourage people on low incomes to claim council tax benefit. [138653]

  Mr. Pond
  Local authorities have a statutory duty to promote council tax benefit for which they use leaflets, posters and information on websites. Most authorities also include information when issuing council tax bills.

  A specific leaflet on council tax benefit is available from post offices, as well as information included in generic departmental guides.

  Automated Credit Transfer
  David Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people have migrated from over-the-counter post office benefit payments to direct bank transfer since 1 April in(a) Haltemprice and Howden, (b) the East Riding of Yorkshire and (c) England. [116766]

  Mr. Pond
  The information is not available in the precise format requested.

  Information has been compiled from the data available on 22 March 2003 and that available on 6 September 2003, and is shown in the following table.

  Number of customers receiving benefits that have migrated from payments at post offices to those paid into bank, building society or Post Office card accounts, which may also be collectable at post offices, between 22 March 2003 and 6 September 2003

  Number of customers

  Haltemprice and Howden constituency

  1,570

  East Riding of Yorkshire local authority

  6,615

  England

  977,770

  The above figures are payload not caseload figures, therefore a claimant may be counted more than once if they are on several benefits.

  Notes

  Customers who have chosen to be paid into a bank account a Post Office card account will continue to be paid by order book until their present order book runs out, and will not have been included in the numbers above where that order book was still current on 6 September.

  Source

  DWP Information Centre, Information and Analysis Directorate (100 per cent. data).

  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what percentage of recipients in each benefit category do not have a bank account; what 486W
  measures his Department is taking to encourage the take-up of the Post Office card accounts by those without a bank or building society account; and what targets his Department has set for the paying of benefits by automatic credit transfer to those without a bank or building society account. [137745]

  Mr. Pond
  The following table shows the percentage of recipients in each benefit category that do not have a bank account suitable for direct payment. This information has been derived from the data used to compile the Family Resources Survey1 (FRS) 2001–02.

  Benefit

  Per cent. of recipients in each benefit category that do not have a bank account suitable for direct payment

  Working age benefits

  33

  Disability and carer's benefit

  23

  Retirement pension1

  10

  Child benefit

  12

  War pensions

  8

  All benefits

  13

  1 Excluding M1G cases.

  The Department has a published Public Service Agreement target that by 2005, 85 per cent. of customers will have their benefits paid by direct payment. People are being provided with all the information they need on all of their "account options", including which accounts can be used at post office branches. It will be up to the customers themselves to decide which type of account they wish to have their money paid into. Already 87 per cent. of all customers have access to a bank account that can receive direct payment.

  The move to direct payment is progressing well. Key figures on the progress of conversion to direct payment are available in the Library, updated every four weeks.

  1GB household survey of people aged 16 and above and not in full time, non-advanced education.

  Carers Allowance
  John Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the number of people aged over 65 years in(a) Glasgow, Anniesland and (b) the United Kingdom, who have an underlying entitlement to carers allowance but who cannot receive it because they are also in receipt of the state pension. [136943]

  Maria Eagle
  Information for Great Britain is as follows.

  Number of people aged over 65 years who have an underlying entitlement to carers allowance but who do not receive payment due to the receipt of state pension as at 31 May 2003

  Number of people aged 65 and over who are entitled but do not receive payment

  Anniesland Glasgow

  140

  Great Britian

  54,625

  Note

  Figures are rounded to the nearest 5

  source

  IAD Information Centre,100 Per cent. sample
  487W
  It is assumed all people with an overlapping benefit who are over 65 are not receiving Carers Allowance because of State Pension.

  Employment Statistics
  Ms Munn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will make a statement on the number of people(a) in employment now and (b) in employment in 1997, broken down by (i) permanent and (ii) temporary employment. [138636]

  Mr. Browne
  Building on a platform of sound economic management, our welfare-to-work policies have helped increase the number of people in permanent employment by nearly two million since 1997.

  We are now at record levels of employment and this has been achieved against a background of economic stability. As the number of people in employment has risen, the number of people in temporary jobs has actually fallen by over 260,000.

  Hospital Patients (Benefit Cuts)
  Dr. Iddon
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much the abolition of benefit cuts for patients in the first 52 weeks of a hospital stay has cost his Department. [138622]

  Malcolm Wicks
  The estimated cost of increasing the period of time to 52 weeks before relevant benefits are reduced is £65 million per year.

  Notes

  1. Costs are based on 2001–02 administrative data and average amounts. Numbers are rounded to the nearest million and expressed in 2003–04 terms.

  Project Name—2000–03

  What stage the project has reached

  Key achievements to date

  Child support reform (CSR)

  Implement Changes

  Since 3 March 2003, new child support claims have been calculated using the new rules and new IT.

  Customer management system

  Implement changes

  This system currently being rolled out will allow information supplied by customers to be gathered electronically by staff, improving efficiency and customer service. Staff will be able to check information supplied against that already held and issue the customer with a statement reflecting the information supplied.

  Debt management

  Implement changes

  October 2003: Nine out of ten debt centres now set-up.

  Digital office infrastructure (DOI) previously known as early office infrastructure

  Implement changes

  DOI aims to implement a modern IT infrastructure platform across the Department allowing staff access to modern business software. By October 2003 over 128.000 PCs had been installed.

  Modernising the employment service

  Realised benefits

  March 2001: Worktrain website launched.

  February 2001: network of Jobpoint kiosks completed.

  October 2001: Employer Direct service goes national.

  Corporate intranet

  Implement changes

  June 2001: Corporate Intranet redesigned to support creation of DWP.
  December 2002 all DWP staff have access to intranet following completion of DOI and MES desktops roll-outs.

  Jobcentre plus implementation

  Implement changes

  Rollout of integrated offices across the country, replacing the Social Security and Employment Offices (286 to date) currently in place. Jobcentre Plus offices allow customers to access employment opportunities and benefit information in a modern environment.

  New tax credits

  Implement changes

  January 2003: IT Gateway between Inland Revenue and DWP went live.
  April 2003: Payment of new awards of child tax credit and working tax credit start.

  October 2003: 30,000 minimum income guarantee child premium cases successfully completed.

  Payment modernisation programme

  Implement changes

  From April 2003: Direct payment becomes the normal method of payment for new customers. Benefit systems aligned to accommodate direct payments.

  488W
  2. Costs take into account all benefits covered by the change from six to 52 weeks.

  IT Expenditure
  Dr. Pugh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what major IT projects with a value in excess of £10,000 he authorised expenditure on in each of the last three financial years. [125723]

  Mr. Browne
  Expenditure on projects is formally approved by the Department's governance process and authorised through review gates. These reviews ensure that projects are meeting the standards we expect (including business change, technical, financial and commercial criteria) before authority to progress to the next stage of their development is given.

  Major IT projects are those contained within our modernisation programme which is regularly reviewed by the Secretary of State. The following table outlines the major IT projects included in the programme during the period April 2000 to March 2003 and provides supplementary information regarding the stage each project has reached and its key achievements to date. For completeness it includes two major modernisation projects to create new infrastructure for Jobcentre Plus and the Pension Service.

  The key stages in the Department's project lifecycle are defined as follows:

  0. Initial feasibility

  1. Define and initiate

  2. Design changes

  3. Develop changes

  4. Implement changes; realise benefits

  It should be noted that project details may alter as they pass through the project lifecycle.
  489W

  Project Name—2000–03

  What stage the project has reached

  Key achievements to date

  Universal banking programme

  Implement changes

  1 April 2003: Universal banking go live—new banking services available at post offices including Post Office card accounts.

  Pension credit

  Implement changes

  April 2003: Advance application for pension credit invited.

  May 2003: Minimum income guarantee to pension credit—conversion started.

  October 2003: Pension credit payable. 1.97 million pensioner households are now in receipt—of which 82,000 are as a result of new pension credit awards in October. Pension credit application line have taken their millionth call.

  Pensions transformation programme (PTP)

  Design changes

  The project is currently focusing on designing and delivering changes to the Pension Service organisation, business processes, services and IT.

  Implementation of the Pension Service, including project empower

  Realised benefits

  26 pension centres operational, including those part of the Project Empower (Burnley and Swansea)

  Resource management system

  Develop changes

  The project is configuring standard Oracle software and implementing best practice processes to replace the Department's existing resource management systems.

  Pensions forecasting

  Implement changes

  October 2001: Combined pensions forecasting service available.

  Interactive e-services

  Implement changes

  April 2003 customers are able to claim child benefit and provide information about changes of circumstances electronically via the internet.

  ISCS/JSAPS modernisation project

  Define and initiate

  The Department's updated IS/IT strategy has identified new ways of delivering IT improvements at lower risk. The modernisation of our income support and jobseekers allowance systems is now being taken forward in line with updated IS/IT strategy principles for example, a preference for commercially available packages rather than bespoke development and staged incremental improvements rather than "big bang" replacement.

  Modernising appeals programme

  Initial feasibility

  The programme was refocused in October 2003 because of doubts about its cost effectiveness. A new feasibility study has been commissioned to look at lower cost approaches, and to include any business change requirements resulting from the move to the Department of Constitutional Affairs.

  Jobcentre Plus
  Mr. Dismore
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will make a statement on the future of call centres in London for Jobcentre Plus clients. [136830]

  Mr. Browne
  The administration of Jobcentre Plus is a matter for the Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus, David Anderson. He will write to the hon. Member.

  Letter from David Anderson to Andrew Dismore, dated November 2003

  As Jobcentre Plus is an Executive Agency, the Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question about the future of call centres in London for Jobcentre Plus clients. This is something that falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as Chief Executive of the Agency.

  Contact Centres are an essential part of the new Jobcentre Plus process and allow customers to make claims by telephone without the need to attend a Jobcentre Plus office. The range of services offered by contact centres will be increased in time, along with the ability for customers to make claims via the internet.

  The Department for Work and Pensions is currently undertaking a review with all of its operational businesses, including Jobcentre Plus, to determine overall requirements for contact centre capacity for the period up to 2007. This report is likely to be issued towards the end of the year. This will then inform decisions that will be made regarding the future of the three existing London contact centre sites.

  I hope this is helpful.

  Market Research
  Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will list each item of market and opinion research commissioned since May 1997 by(a) his Department and (b) agencies and non-departmental public bodies for which his Department is responsible; what the purpose of each item was; and whether the results were published. [137007]
  490W
  Mr. Browne
  This information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Minimum Income Guarantee
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many pensioners he estimates in(a) the north west region, (b) Merseyside and (c) St. Helens, South are eligible for the Minimum Income Guarantee. [137983]

  Malcolm Wicks
  Minimum Income Guarantee was replaced by Pension Credit in October 2003. Estimates of the national number of pensioners previously eligible for, but not claiming the Minimum Income Guarantee, Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit are included in the publication "Income-Related Benefits—Estimates of Take Up in 2000/2001", copies of which are available in the Library.

  Around 3.8 million pensioner households are eligible for Pension Credit nationally with around 500,000 in the north west and Merseyside region.

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many pensioners in(a) the north west region, (b) Merseyside and (c) St. Helens South are in receipt of the minimum income guarantee. [137984]

  Malcolm Wicks
  As at May 2003, the number of minimum income guarantee recipients in St. Helens south was around 3,400, in Merseyside Metropolitan 61,800, and in the north west and Merseyside region, 248,600. These are the latest figures available.

  Pension credit replaced minimum income guarantee from 6 October 2003.
  491W
  Notes

  1. The MIG figure has been rounded to the nearest hundred.

  2. The MIG figure is based on a 5 per cent. sample, and therefore subject to a degree of sampling variation.

  3. Government office region/parliamentary constituency are assigned by matching postcodes against the relevant ONS postcode directory.

  4. MIG recipients are defined as income support benefit units where the claimant, and/or partner is aged 60 or over.

  Source

  IAD Information Centre, 5 per cent. sample

  New Deal
  Mr. Gibb
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to his answer of 10 November 2003,Official Report, column 148W, on the New Deal, how many 18 to 24-year-olds left the New Deal for Young People with known destinations; and what percentage of these have subsequently found full-time employment. [139235]

  Mr. Browne
  Since the start of the programme, there have been 643,4501 leavers from New Deal for Young People to known destinations, of which 55 per cent. have left to unsubsidised employment.

  1 Includes people who may have left the programme more than once.

  Pensioners (Benefits)
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will estimate the total value of benefits unclaimed by pensioners in each year since 1997. [138693]

  Malcolm Wicks
  The information requested is not available.

  Estimates of take-up of income-related benefits for Great Britain are in the Department's reports titled "Income-Related Benefits—Estimates of Take-Up". Copies of all the reports in the series are in the Library.

  Mr. Willetts
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) what estimate he has made of public expenditure on(a) housing benefit for pensioners, (b) council tax benefit for pensioners and (c) pension credit as a percentage of gross domestic product in (i) 1997–98, (ii) 2002–03, (iii) 2010, (iv) 2020, (v) 2030, (vi) 2040, (vii) 2050 and (viii) for other years for which estimates have been made, assuming that the value of the pension credit increases in line with prices and that (A) pensioners' incomes from other sources rise in line with prices and (B) that pensioners' incomes from other sources rise in line with earnings; [134474]

  (2) what estimate he has made of public expenditure on (a) housing benefit for pensioners, (b)council tax benefit for pensioners and (c) pension credit as a percentage of gross domestic product in (i) 1997–98, (ii) 2002–03, (iii) 2010, (iv) 2020, (v) 2030, (vi) 2040, (vii) 2050 and (viii) for other years for which estimates have been made, assuming that the value of the pension credit increases in line with earnings and that (A) pensioners' incomes from other sources rise in line with prices and (B) that pensioners' incomes from other sources rise in line with earnings. [134475]
  492W
  Malcolm Wicks
  Expenditure on income support/ minimum income guarantee, housing benefit and council tax benefit for pensioners as a proportion of gross domestic product in 1997–98 and 2002–03 is shown in Table 1.

  Table 1: Expenditure on income support/minimum income guarantee, housing benefit for pensioners and council tax benefit for pensioners as a proportion of gross domestic product

  Percentage

  Income support/minimum income guarantee

  Housing benefit

  Council tax benefit

  1997–98

  0.45

  0.45

  0.15

  2002–03

  0.40

  0.45

  0.15

  Note

  Figures rounded to the nearest 0.05 per cent.

  The latest projections of the full cost of pension credit (guarantee credit and savings credit) to 2050 are published on page 148, Annex 3 of the Pensions Green Paper 'Simplicity, security and choice: working and saving for retirement' (cm 5677). Based on a number of assumptions about the future, as set out in Annex 3, this shows that pension credit expenditure could rise to around one and a half per cent. of GDP by 2050.

  One of the assumptions used was that on average, income brought to account in the pension credit would increase in line with average earnings.

  The Pensioners' Incomes Series 2001–02, based on Family Resources Survey and Family Expenditure Survey data, shows that average pensioner incomes between 1979 and 1996–97 rose by 64 per cent. in real terms, compared to average earnings growth in the whole economy of 36 per cent. in real terms. More recent growth estimates are subject to uncertainty, but the growth in average pensioner incomes between 1994–95 and 2001–02 was around 23 per cent. in real terms, higher than average earnings (up 12 per cent. over the same period).

  Robust projections of future spending on pension credit, housing benefit for pensioners and council tax benefit for pensioners, based on alternative assumptions, and in different years, are not available centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However Table 2 provides a broad indication, of the likely relative costs in 2050 under alternative scenarios of pension credit uprating and pensioner income growth.

  Table 2: Expenditure in 2050 on pension credit, housing benefit for pensioners and council tax benefit for pensioners as a proportion of gross domestic product

  Percentage

  Pension credit rises by

  Pensioner incomes rise by

  Pension credit

  Housing benefit

  Council tax benefit

  Earnings

  Prices

  3.80

  0.60

  0.35

  Earnings

  1.60

  0.50

  0.20

  Prices

  Prices

  0.30

  0.55

  0.15

  Earnings

  0.10

  0.25

  0.05

  Note

  Figures rounded to the nearest 0.05 per cent.

  As explained, given the evidence of past penisoner income growth, the likelihood that those eligible for pension credit in the future will have higher state

  493W
  retirement pension income than previous cohorts, and the growth of non-pension income, such as earnings, this assumption is likely to be unrealistic.

  The long-term cost of pension credit, housing benefit and council tax benefit will also depend greatly on the decisions made by future governments in annual uprating statements. This Government are committed to increase the guarantee in line with average earnings for the remainder of this Parliament, ensuring that all pensioners share in rising national prosperity. Following the introduction of pension credit, the Government will be spending an additional £9.2 billion on pensioners in 2004–05 as a result of measures introduced since 1997.

  Pensioners (Council Tax)
  Dr. Jack Cunningham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many pensioners were in receipt of(a) full and (b) partial council tax benefit in Copeland (i) in 1996–97 and (ii) in the last financial year for which figures are available; what percentage of all pensioners in Copeland this represents in each case; and if he will make a statement. [138471]

  Mr. Pond
  The available information is in the table.

  Council tax benefit beneficiaries aged 60 and over in the North West Government Office Region: May 1997 and May 2002

  Partial benefit

  Full benefit

  Total

  Number of beneficiaries

  May 1997

  143,000

  181,000

  324,000

  May 2002

  115,000

  259,000

  374,000

  Beneficiaries as a percentage of people aged 60 and over in the North Wset Government Office Region

  May 1997

  10.1

  12.8

  22.9

  May 2002

  8.1

  18.2

  26.2

  Notes

  1. Figures are based on a 1 per cent sample and are therefore subject to a degree of sampling variation.

  2. Valid figures from a 1 per cent. sample are not available by local authority as they would be subject to a high degree of sampling error.

  3. Caseload figures have been rounded to the nearest thousand.

  4. Percentages have been rounded to one decimal place.

  5. Figures exclude any Second Adult Rebate cases.

  6. Beneficiaries are classed as claimants and/or partners aged 60 or over.

  Sources

  1. Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit Management Information System, I Per cent. sample.

  2. ONS, Population Estimates Unit, Mid-1997 and 2002.

  Pensions
  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what plans he has to amend the FRS17 account measure for company pension schemes; and if he will make a statement. [137121]

  Malcolm Wicks
  Amendment of FRS17 is not a Government responsibility. It set by the independent Accounting Standards Board for the purpose of providing clarity of liabilities in company accounts. Its full implementation has been deferred awaiting the development of a revised International Accounting Standard, being developed by the independent 494W
  International Accounting Standards Board (IASB). It is anticipated that the revised international standard will be agreed by 2004.

  Mr. Webb
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions by which means pensioners who receive their pension by order book and have not replied to his Department's literature about direct payment by April 2005 will receive their payments. [138797]

  Maria Eagle
  90 per cent. of pensioners already have an account suitable to receive Direct Payment.

  Key figures on the progress of conversion to Direct Payment are available in the Library and are updated every four weeks.

  We will be writing to the remaining pensioners over the next year. In addition we will be making further contact with those who have not responded.

  However, we have always recognised that there will be some people who are genuinely unable to operate any type of bank account. For those customers an exceptions method of payment will be available. It is likely that the exceptions method of payment will be a cheque based solution and will be available at Post Office branches.

  Remploy
  Adam Price
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many disabled people were employed by Remploy in each of the last four years. [135285]

  Maria Eagle
  Remploy directly supports disabled people through employment in one of its businesses, through placement with a third party employer, or by providing ongoing support to an employee of a mainstream employer to enable them to retain employment.

  The actual number of disabled people employed by Remploy is different to the number the company supports under WORKSTEP, as it includes a small number of disabled people who are not supported by the programme and excludes a number of people who are supported by Remploy under the WORKSTEP programme, but who are employed by a third party.

  Disabled people employed by Remploy

  1999–2000

  9,613

  2000–01

  9,255

  2001–02

  8,728

  1001–03

  7,191

  Disabled people supported by Remploy through WORKSTEP

  Of which employed by third party

  1999–2000

  10,262

  672

  2000–01

  10,423

  1,196

  2001–02

  10,523

  1,839

  2002–03

  9,543

  2,411

  Winter Fuel Payments
  Mr. Stevenson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) what estimate he has made of the number of people who were newly entitled to the winter fuel payment in 2003–04 in(a) North Staffordshire. (b) Stoke-on-Trent and (c) the Stoke-on-Trent South constituency; [137775]

  (2) how many people newly entitled to the winter fuel payment in 2003–04 claimed in (a) North Staffordshire, (b) Stoke-on-Trent and (c) Stoke-on-Trent South constituency. [137776]

  Malcolm Wicks
  The information is not available in the format requested. However, for the parliamentary constituencies of Stoke-on-Trent South, North and Central 3,911 winter fuel payment claim forms were issued to people who need to claim a payment for this winter. Of those 2,483 have submitted their claim forms.

  We are publicising the availability of winter fuel payments and how to obtain a claim form. Those who need to claim for this winter have until 30 March 2004 to do so.

  Note

  Information to identify those likely to be entitled was extracted from the Departmental Central Index based on postcodes.

  John Barrett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in(a) the City of Edinburgh local authority area, (b) Edinburgh West, (c) Edinburgh Central, (d) Edinburgh North and Leith, (e) Edinburgh South, (f) Edinburgh Pentlands, (g) Edinburgh East and Musselburgh will be eligible for winter fuel payments in 2003–04; and how many of these will receive the payment automatically. [138453]

  Malcolm Wicks
  The information is not available in the format requested. However, such information as is available is set out in the following table:

  Winter fuel payments in Edinburgh 2002–03

  All

  Males

  Females

  Parliamentary constituencies

  Edinburgh Central

  11,815

  4,630

  7,190

  Edinburgh East and Musselburgh

  15,745

  6,570

  9,175

  Edinburgh North and Leith

  12,045

  4,910

  7,135

  Edinburgh Pentlands

  14,560

  6,080

  8,480

  Edinburgh South

  14,325

  5,535

  8,790

  Edinburgh West

  17,760

  7,510

  10,250

  Local authority

  City of Edinburgh

  83,065

  33,975

  49,090

  Notes:

  1. Number are rounded to the nearest five.

  2. Figures taken from the Matching Intelligence Data Analysis Service Winter Fuel Payment 2002–03 exercise.

  Source:

  IAD Information Centre,100 per cent sample.

  The number of people Who Would receive the Winter fuel payment automatically in Winter 2003–04 is expected to be similar to those in the table.

DEFENCE

  Al Yamamah Programme
  Norman Lamb
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department intends to introduce monitoring of sub-contractor performance in the A1 Yamamah programme. [137237]

  Mr. Ingram
  The Department has no contractual relationship with sub-contractors, whose performance is a matter for the A1 Yamamah Programme prime contractor, BAE Systems, and has no plans to introduce monitoring of sub-contractors.

  Asset Valuation
  Mr. Prisk
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has made to the Treasury concerning the valuation of assets in his Department. [137914]

  Mr. Hoon
  Officials have held regular discussions and meetings with HM Treasury regarding the Department's financial position, including on the issue of asset valuations.

  Bechtel
  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the contracts for consultancy and other work carried out by Bechtel for agencies responsible to his Department in each year since 1997, stating in each case(a) the nature of the work, (b) the value of the contract and (c) the duration of the contract; and if he will make a statement. [137879]

  Mr. Ingram
  According to our records no contracts have been placed with Bechtel.

  Chemical Ali
  Harry Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on(a) the claim by UK armed forces to have killed the Iraqi known as Chemical Ali in Basra during the conflict earlier this year and (b) the recent claim by the US Administration to have captured Chemical Ali. [136708]

  Mr. Ingram
  Ali Hassan al-Majeed—"Chemical Ali"—is in US custody.

  On 6 April there were indications that Ali Hassan al-Majeed had been in a building in Basra when it was destroyed by coalition aircraft. We said at the time that we believed that a body found was that of Ali Hassan al-Majeed but that we could not be certain until scientific tests had been performed to positively identify it. The tests subsequently proved that the body was not, in fact, his.

  Chinook Helicopters
  David Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what process the Mark 3 Chinook helicopter has undergone to ascertain its readiness for release to operational service; [137492]

  (2) what the latest estimate is of the cost of the Mark 3 Chinook helicopter procurement project; [137497]
  497W
  (3) when the budget for the Chinook Mark 3 Procurement project was authorised; and what the total cost forecast was at contract stage; [137498]

  (4) what the differences between the Mark 2 Chinook helicopter, the Chinook 47-H and the Mark 3 Chinook helicopter are; [137493]

  (5) what the differences between the Mark 2 Chinook helicopter, the Chinook 47-H and the Mark 3 Chinook helicopter are; [137494]

  (6) how the validation process of the FADEC system fitted to the Mark 3 Chinook helicopter differs from the validation process used to validate the FADEC system fitted to the Mark 2 and Mark 2a Chinook helicopter; [137613]

  (7) how many lines of software cope were written in programming the FADEC system fitted to the Chinook Mark 3 helicopter; [137614]

  (8) what operational requirement the Mark 3 Chinook helicopter was designed to fulfil when the original order was placed in October 1995; [137495]

  (9) what cost-benefit analysis was conducted prior to initiating procurement of the Mark 3 Chinook helicopter; and what the results were; [137496]

  (10) what software language was used in writing the software for the FADEC fitted to the Mark 3 Chinook helicopter; and what sub-contractors have been used to conduct this work; [137615]

  (11) which company was contracted to fit the FADEC system into the Mark 3 Chinook helicopter; [137616]

  (12) what differences there are between the FADEC system fitted to the Mark 3 Chinook and the MH47 Chinook helicopter. [137617]

  Mr. Ingram
  I will write to the hon. Member and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.

  David Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the release to service of the Mark 3 Chinook helicopters. [138386]

  Mr. Ingram
  I will write to the hon. Member and place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.

  Cluster Munitions
  Norman Lamb
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many(a) air-launched and (b) ground-launched cluster munitions his Department purchased from Israeli Military Industries in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement. [135857]

  Mr. Ingram
  No air-launched cluster munitions are purchased from Israel. Ground-launched cluster munitions, which consist of Shell 155mm HE L20A1 Extended Range Bomblet Shell (ERBS), are purchased from Royal Ordnance Defence (ROD) as the prime contractor, who sub contract the manufacture of ERBS shell to Israeli Military Industries (IMI). The fuse is fitted by ROD Glascoed where the entire round is packaged.
  498W
  The following quantities of ERBS have been purchased in the last five years: 6,000 in financial year 2002–03, 20,100 in financial year 2003–04, with a further quantity of 3,009 being provided against an option on the contract.

  Clyde Dockyards
  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for defence pursuant to his answer of 20 October 2003,Official Report, columns 373–4W, on departmental staff, what the total number of civilian personnel working at the Clyde dockyards was at the time of transfer of management to the private sector; what the procedure was (a) leading up to the decision for the transfer to be undertaken and (b) from the time of the decision for the transfer to be undertaken to the handover to the private sector; what companies participated in the process; what commitments in relation to job maintenance in Scotland were (i) sought and (ii) given as part of the transfer; and if he will make a statement. [138570]

  Mr. Caplin
  I will write to the hon. Member and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.

  Defence Budget (Scotland)
  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much of the defence budget was spent in Scotland in the most recent year for which figures are available(a) in actual terms and (b) as a percentage of the total defence budget; and if he will make a statement. [138573]

  Mr. Ingram
  The information is not held centrally in the form requested and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

  HMS Colchester
  Mr. Jenkin
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will take steps to name a Royal Navy fighting ship, HMS Colchester. [139006]

  Mr. Ingram
  The new class of Royal Navy destroyers (the Type 45 or D Class) are to bear names beginning with the letter 'D', so Colchester cannot be a candidate for any of these. The same applies to the new Astute Class of submarine whose names all begin with the letter 'A'.

  The Ships Names and Badges Committee has the task of assessing all the possible names for new ships before making their recommendation through the First Sea Lord and Secretary of State for Defence for final approval by Her Majesty the Queen. I am sure that Colchester, of which there have been six ships previously with the name,whose last Battle Honour was at the Battle of Lowestoft in 1665, will be among the names considered for future suitable vessels.

  Iraq
  Mr. Tynan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many(a) bridges, (b) sewerage pumping stations and (c) power stations have been reconstructed and repaired by United Kingdom forces operating in Iraq. [134597]
  499W
  Mr. Ingram
  Responsibility for the repair of civil infrastructure lies with the Coalition Provisional Administration. Where possible, and within resource constraints, United Kingdom Forces will assist the Iraqi authorities in the reconstruction and repair of Iraqi infrastructure when requested to do so.

  UK Forces have supported Iraqi engineers in the repair of sewerage pumping stations and power stations but we do not hold central records of the numbers involved. We have no record of UK Forces having repaired or reconstructed bridges in Iraq.

  Mr. Tynan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what(a) distance of (i) road and (ii) electricity transmission system has been repaired and (b) length of railway has been returned to service by United Kingdom forces operating in Iraq. [134598]

  Mr. Ingram
  Responsibility for the repair of civil infrastructure lies with the Coalition Provisional Administration (CPA). Where possible, and within resource constraints, United Kingdom forces will assist the provisional Iraqi authorities in the reconstruction and repair of Iraqi infrastructure when requested to do so.

  We have no record of any repairs to the road network. UK forces have repaired approximately 50 kilometres of electricity transmission system. In addition, UK forces have carried out repairs to the rail network in the Um Qasr region of Iraq and supported Iraqi rail maintenance crews on a number of other occasions.

  Mr. Keetch
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether all troops in the Gulf are fully equipped with desert clothing; and if he will make a statement. [122977]

  Mr. Ingram
  [holding answer 3 July 2003]The Ministry of Defence has previously acknowledged the difficulties faced during Operation Telic in determining the in-theatre rate of consumption of, and tracking of, desert clothing. However, I can confirm that sufficient personal equipment, including desert clothing, has been despatched to theatre to equip all deployed UK Servicemen and women.

  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what compensation will be paid to the estates of Iraqi civilians who died as a result of British military action in Iraq. [125109]

  Mr. Ingram
  There are no plans to pay compensation to Iraqi civilians killed during combat operations in Iraq.

  The handling of claims made by Iraqis for losses which do not arise in connection with combat operations are governed by section 6 of the Coalition Provisional Authority Order Number 17. This provides that any such claims shall be submitted to and dealt with by the parent state of the person whose activities are alleged to have caused the loss. The claims will then be dealt with in a manner consistent with the national laws of that parent state.

  Where a claim against British troops arises from activity which would not give rise to a legal liability to pay compensation under English law, there may nevertheless be an ex gratia payment made to the injured
  500W
  person or to the family of the deceased where this would be in accordance with local custom or directed to meet a particular urgent humanitarian need.

  Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the mechanisms in place for the sharing of information between the British and other coalition forces involved in operations in Iraq. [133309]

  Mr. Ingram
  The Ministry of Defence works closely with our partner nations to ensure effective sharing of information and intelligence including through the use of embedded officers within national command structures. Within the Multinational Division (South East), which is led by the United Kingdom, there is a combined Command and Control structure that includes all partner nations.

  Mrs. Anne Campbell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what procedures are followed by UK personnel in Iraq before live ammunition is fired at civilians; and whether protocols have been agreed with US forces on procedures to be followed. [133417]

  Mr. Ingram
  Use of lethal force by United Kingdom armed forces personnel in Iraq is governed by the extant Rules of Engagement for Operation Telic. It is not our practice to comment on Rules of Engagement and I am withholding information regarding their contents under Exemption 1 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.

  We cannot comment on the Rules of Engagement used by other nations.

  Military Colleges
  Mr. Robathan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many students awarded service scholarships, undergraduate bursaries and cadetships, who were due to enter military colleges in the past five years, have withdrawn from the scheme; how many of those who have withdrawn repaid in full funds advanced to them prior to their withdrawal; whether the armed forces continue to pursue those who have not repaid sums received; and how much has been written off in each of the past five years. [133866]

  Mr. Caplin
  Those awarded university cadetships or bursaries are required, as a condition of the offer, to agree to refund the costs of the cadetship or bursary should they fail to complete five years (cadetships) or three years (bursaries) productive service (six years for Medical Cadetships and the RAF Flying Branch). Each case is considered on its merits, but it is the Department's normal practice to seek to recover its appropriate outlay when the specified return of service is not given, through a decision to leave the Service attributable to the individual. Salary payments are not recovered in respect of cadetships. Allowance is not made for time served except in respect of uniform costs. Recovery is not sought from those individuals whose service, or bursary, is terminated through no fault of their own (e.g. on medical grounds) and may be waived in whole or part on compassionate grounds or in other exceptional circumstances.
  501W
  The following table gives details of the number of withdrawals from Army and RAF scholarships, cadetships and bursaries.

  Withdrawal from scholarships, cadetships and bursaries

  RN/RM*

  Army

  RAF

  1999–2000

  11

  57

  Not available

  2000–01

  11

  77

  58

  2001–02

  24

  69

  58

  2002–03

  17

  55

  32

  2003–04

  17

  34

  21

  Total

  80

  292

  169

  The number of recoveries initiated:

  Recoveries initiated

  Army

  RAF

  1999–2000

  46

  58

  2000–01

  63

  39

  2001–02

  68

  48

  2002–03

  55

  27

  2003–04

  34

  18

  Total

  256

  190

  All award holder withdrawals (with the exception of the few who are excused repayment in accordance with the above policy) are pursued for full recovery, although some write-off actions have occurred and these are detailed as follows. The year in which write-off action is taken is not necessarily the year in which withdrawal occurred.

  Number of cases involving write-off action

  Army

  RAF

  1999–2000

  0

  0

  2000–01

  0

  4

  2001–02

  4

  7

  2002–03

  4

  2

  2003–04

  8

  0

  Total

  16

  13

  I will write to the hon. Member once similar figures regarding withdrawals from Royal Marines scholarships, cadetships and bursaries have been collated and place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.

  Operation Southern Focus
  Sue Doughty
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the role of British forces in Operation Southern Focus. [129895]

  Mr. Ingram
  United Kingdom forces were not involved in Operation Southern Focus.

  Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act
  Brian White
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what statutory investigatory powers the Department has; which ones will be superseded by use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000; and what plans he has for removing these legacy powers. [136130]

  Mr. Caplin
  In addition to the powers governed by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, the Ministry of Defence Police have statutory investigatory powers under the MOD Police Act 1987 (as amended by 502W
  the Anti-Terrorism Crime and Security Act 2001) and Service police investigatory powers are specified in the Army and Air Force Acts 1955 and the Naval Discipline Act 1957 (as amended by the various Armed Forces Acts).

  No existing statutory investigatory powers will be superseded by use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act. Existing statutory investigatory powers to compel production of information will not be used to compel disclosure of communications data under Part 1 Chapter 11 of RIPA and there are no plans to repeal those existing powers.

  Reservists (Life Insurance)
  Mr. Frank Field
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to his answer of 27 October 2003,Official Report, columns 6–7W, on life insurance, what provisions were put in place to cover Reservists called up for service in the six months prior to 1 July. [138098]

  Mr. Caplin
  For many years, the Ministry of Defence has provided attributable death and injury benefits for Reservists under the War Pension Scheme and the Reserve Forces (Attributable Benefits Etc) Regulations. Commercial insurance has offered—and still offers—additional cover to those requiring it. The decision whether to take out such cover has always been a matter for the individual; MOD neither endorses nor sponsors commercial insurance schemes.

  Reservists called up for service in the six months prior to 1 July 2003 could, if they wished, have taken out life cover under RPAX, and at that time been covered for war risks on joining the scheme. Information about RPAX was then, and still is, promulgated, periodically, to individual Reservists and units. In addition, Reservists would have been briefed on its availability at their respective mobilisation centres.

  Saudi Arabia
  Norman Lamb
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 3 November 2003,Official Report, column 428–29W, on Saudi Arabia, when his Department's Permanent Secretary raised the allegations against British Aerospace/BAE Systems and Robert Lee International with the Chairman of BAE Systems; how these allegations were raised; what type of claims have to be endorsed by staff of his Department's Director General of the Saudi Armed Forces Project; what the terms of the A1 Yamamah contracts are in respect of the endorsement claims; and if he will make a statement. [137234]

  Mr. Ingram
  The Department's Permanent Secretary raised the matter with the Chairman of BAE Systems in May 2001, in the context of the Government's firm anti-fraud policies.

  The A1 Yamamah contracts provide for a set of accounting processes, jointly agreed between the UK and Saudi Arabian Governments, which cover the endorsement and recording of approved claims. The processes cover claims for goods and services supplied to Saudi Arabia under the A1 Yamamah contracts. Staff of the Directorate General Saudi Armed Forces Project endorse the fact that such goods and services have been supplied to the agreed specification or standard and at

  503W
  the price set out in the A1 Yamamah contracts. Ali claims are made in the name of the Prime Contractor. BAE Systems.

  Ships (Sale and Disposal)
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many(a) submarines and (b) surface ships are decommissioned and awaiting (i) sale and (ii) disposal. [137561]

  Mr. Ingram
  Currently, one conventionally powered (diesel electric) Upholder Class submarine is undergoing refurbishment pending handover to Canada. Twelve nuclear-powered submarines have been decommissioned and will be disposed of in due course. In addition, one decommissioned surface ship (a Fleet Diving Tender) is awaiting sale and one (Fearless Class) is awaiting disposal.

  Territorial Army
  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Territorial Army personnel are on active service; and how many are expected to be on active service over the Christmas period.[138440]

  Mr. Caplin
  As at 1 September 2003, 4,160 members of the Territorial Army (TA) were mobilised, either on operations abroad, or in support of those operations in the United Kingdom.

  It is estimated that 1,600 members of the TA will be on active service over the Christmas period. This figure does not include those individuals who, although still compulsorily mobilised, have returned home from active service but not yet completed their post operational tour leave.

  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the role of the Territorial Army in Iraq. [138441]

  Mr. Caplin
  The Territorial Army (TA) undertake any and every task that is performed by their regular armed forces counterparts and are present throughout British Army units in Iraq. This is entirely in accordance with the Strategic Defence Review which set out a requirement for the TA to become a more integrated, relevant, useable force, better able to support their Regular counterparts on operations overseas.

  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what assessment he has made of the effect of the change in the number of annual training days in the Territorial Army on(a) morale, (b) retention and (c) recruitment; [138443]

  (2) how the change in the number of annual Territorial Army training days will affect the pay of (a) privates and (b) majors in the TA. [138442]

  Mr. Caplin
  It has been assessed that the change in the numbers of annual training days in the Territorial Army being put in place will have no significant effect on morale, retention and recruitment.

  The change will not affect the pay of privates or majors in the Territorial Army, nor will it impact on the ability of members of the Territorial Army to earn their annual bounty payment.

  Unexploded Ordnance
  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment his Department has made of the(a) quantity, (b) spread and (c) location of (i) mines, (ii) unexploded cluster bomb submunitions and (iii) unexploded conventional munitions in Iraq; what efforts are (A) planned and (B) underway to locate, defuse and remove these munitions; and if he will make a statement. [133319]

  Mr. Ingram
  The provision of a safe, secure and risk free environment for the Iraqi people is a key aspect of restoration activity for all members of the International Coalition in Iraq. The United Kingdom takes seriously its obligations as a member of that coalition to deal with unexploded ordnance. Unexploded ordnance in Iraq includes munitions from the Iran-Iraq war, mines laid by Iraqi forces, stores of ammunition and other ordnance left by Iraqi military and paramilitary forces as well as ordnance fired or dropped by both sides during recent hostilities.

  Since the end of major combat operations UK and other Coalition forces have been engaged in clearing sites containing unexploded ordnance. In the UK's area of responsibility an average of about 45 new sites have been discovered each week. Whenever a site is discovered UK forces mark the site and inform those in the vicinity. The munitions are then recovered or destroyed as soon as resources permit. To date around 1,600 sites have been cleared, containing about 619,000 munitions. We do not record individual types of munitions cleared.

  We are not in a position to comment on progress made in other areas of Iraq by our coalition partners.

  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment his Department has made of the(a) quantity, (b) spread and (c) location of (i) mines, (ii) unexploded cluster bomb submunitions and (iii) unexploded conventional munitions in Afghanistan; what efforts are (A) planned and (B) underway to locate, defuse and remove these munitions; what countries are participating in these efforts; and if he will make a statement. [133320]

  Mr. Ingram
  Responsibility for the assessment and clearance of unexploded ordnance (UXO) in Afghanistan rests with that nation's ruling authorities. The majority of the assessment and the clearance of UXO is conducted by Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) and commercial demining companies, in many cases working under the auspices of the United Nations. At the end of 2002, independent assessment showed that some 263 square kilometres of land had been cleared of UXO.

  The Ministry of Defence carries out assessments of the quantity, spread and location of mines and UXO to ensure the force protection of our Service personnel or to counter any immediate threat to civilian life in Afghanistan. Military Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) capability is currently provided by Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden and Croatia as part of the International Stabilisation and Assistance Force (ISAF).

  Wideawake Airport
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the running cost in 2003–04 is of the establishment at Wideawake airport, Ascension Island; and what the estimated budget for the next financial year is. [139101]

  Mr. Caplin
  Wideawake is a United States airfield and is jointly operated by the US Air Force and the RAF. Excluding the value of assets, the Department's net operating cost budget for RAF Ascension Island in Financial Year 2003–04 is £9,547,243. The equivalent figure presently planned for FY 2004–05 is £8,425,000.

PRIME MINISTER

  House of Lords
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Prime Minister if the Secretary of State will require the House of Lords Appointments Commission to publish in its Annual Report statistics relating to the participation of people's peers in votes, questions and debates. [138515]

  The Prime Minister
  No.

  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Prime Minister how many and what proportion of the local and national organisations contracted by the House of Lords Appointments Commission to help identify suitable nominees for a people's peerage responded to the request by furnishing names; and if he will make a statement. [138658]

  The Prime Minister
  The House of Lords Appointments Commission did not collate this information.

  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Prime Minister how many applicants for a people's peerage since April 2001 were self-nominated. [138662]

  The Prime Minister
  The Appointments Commission does not distinguish between nominations and self-nominations and, therefore, does not keep figures on the number of self-nominations received. All nominations are considered against the same criteria, regardless of whether they are nominated or self-nominated, and all nominees complete the same nomination form.

  EU Summits
  Keith Vaz
  To ask the Prime Minister how many EU summits are scheduled for next year; and how many the Prime Minister plans to attend(a) in connection with and (b) unconnected with the Presidency. [139237]

  The Prime Minister
  There are four European Council summits planned next year for Heads of State and Government, which I plan to attend. Two will be under the Irish Presidency and two under the Presidency of the Netherlands.

  Heads of State (Television Footage)
  Norman Baker
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will set controls on the use of recorded footage of Her Majesty The Queen and foreign heads of state to prevent their use for political purposes by foreign heads of state and government. [139282]
  506W
  The Prime Minister
  The media facilities for this State Visit will follow the same pattern as in previous Visits, including the recent State Visit of President Putin in June this year.

  It is not the role of the Government to instruct the media, both British and foreign, in the use of the material they obtain during their coverage of State Visits.

  Iraq
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Prime Minister pursuant to his answer of 27 October 2003,Official Report,column 50W, on Iraq, what steps he took to ascertain the nature of the delivery system to which the time of 45 minutes, mentioned in the Joint Intelligence Committee's assessment of 9 September, referred. [138629]

  The Prime Minister
  This intelligence report did not significantly amend the long standing Joint Intelligence Committee assessment that Iraq had command and control and logistical arrangements in place for the use of weapons of mass destruction. This particular piece of intelligence added precision as to timing which had not previously been available but did not change the overall picture and therefore there was no reason to seek further information.

  As the Intelligence and Security Committee noted in their report on 9 September 2003 there was convincing intelligence that Iraq had active chemical, biological and nuclear programmes, the capability to produce chemical and biological weapons. All of this, irrespective of the means by which such weapons were to be delivered, was in breach of UN Security Council Resolutions.

  Policy Advice
  Norman Baker
  To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the subjects on which he has asked the right hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr. Mandelson) to undertake policy advice to ministers and other Government work since 1 January. [139275]

  The Prime Minister
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 11 September,Official Report, column 367W.

  President Bush (State Visit)
  Norman Baker
  To ask the Prime Minister what analysis of historical precedent was undertaken in deciding to invite President Bush to make a State Visit to the United Kingdom. [139283]

  The Prime Minister
  Each State Visit is considered on an individual basis, underlining the relationship between the UK and the nation of the visiting Head of State. The UK and US have a deep and close relationship across a wide spectrum of issues.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

  Discrimination
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the Government's policy is on extending discrimination law to include the media. [138165]

  Ms Hewitt
  Media organisations are covered by existing discrimination law in the same way as other employers and service providers. There are no plans to extend legislation specifically in relation to the media industry.

  Arms Exports
  Mr. Gardiner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry pursuant to her answer of 6 October 2003,Official Report, column 1069W, for what reason her Department has not provided support to Interpol's international weapons and explosives tracking system. [138613]

  Mr. Timms
  The Department has no responsibility for tracking weapons or explosives.

  British Energy
  Dr. Kumar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what progress has been made in the restructuring of British Energy; and if she will make a statement. [139571]

  Mr. Timms
  I refer the hon. Member to the written statement made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, on 14 October 2003,Official Report, columns 1OWS–12WS about the progress in the restructuring of British Energy. I also refer to the company's further related announcement on 31 October "Update on Proposed Restructuring", a copy of which I have placed in the Libraries of the House.

  Call Centres
  Mr. Andrew Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will encourage large companies to keep their call centre bases in the United Kingdom. [135473]

  Mr. Timms
  Companies in the UK are operating in an increasingly competitive, global marketplace. It is a commercial matter for companies to decide where to locate their operations. In doing so companies will need to consider a number of factors including, inter alia, the strategic importance to the business of their call centre operations and the relative risks and benefits of transferring these overseas, the geographic distribution of their customer base and the need to be close to customers, location of their competitors, relative costs, and the ability to maintain service quality. The United Kingdom has by far the greatest number of call centre operations in Europe reflecting our expertise in call centre management and the wish by many companies to retain call centre bases here.

  A protectionist approach would run the risk of forcing companies to locate completely out of the UK which would not be to our long term economic benefit.
  508W
  We are, however, continuing to create a stable, competitive, economic environment in the UK for all companies to operate in. Our long term economic interest will be based on our ability to innovate to produce high value-added goods and services, supported by a highly skilled workforce, high calibre managers, forward looking unions and knowledgeable consumers.

  Company Regulation (Cold Calling)
  Mr. Drew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what plans she has to regulate companies which cold call customers. [138717]

  Mr. Timms
  I refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Sheerman) on 10 November 2003,Official Report, column 22W.

  Competitiveness Council
  Mr. Hood
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the outcome was of the Competitiveness Council held on 10 and 11 November; what the Government's stance was on the issues discussed, including its voting record; and if she will make a statement. [138785]

  Jacqui Smith
  I represented the UK at the Competitiveness Council, Brussels on 10 November 2003. Andy Kerr MSP was also present.

  There was an initial exchange of views over the proposed Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices.

  The Council reached General Agreement on the Electromagnetic Compatibility Directive. This is designed to guarantee free movement of electrical equipment within the Internal Market, whilst ensuring that such equipment does not create unacceptable levels of electromagnetic disturbance.

  The Council adopted a Resolution on the application of New Approach Directives.

  The Commission presented its new proposal for a Chemicals Regulation, stressing its importance for European industry. There were differing views of the impact on downstream users, and the Commission stated that it would like to discuss this, and the question of impact assessment at a public meeting on 23 November.

  The Presidency said that this was a priority issue in the Competitiveness Council agenda. There will be a policy debate at the next meeting on 26 and 27 November 2003. I asked for environmental and industrial interests to work together, and called for more effective prioritisation and simplification of the registration procedure, with one substance and one registration.

  There was a discussion on Competitiveness Policy. The Commission recognised the need for its proposals to take competitiveness aspects properly into account. The Council and European Parliament would be able to see improvements in the extended impact procedure in the 2004 work programme.
  509W
  I supported the idea of a competitiveness test and called for a better regulation 'expert' working group to be established as soon as possible to help assess the quality of impact assessments.

  The Presidency concluded that the Competitiveness Council needed to work with other Council formations to ensure they took competitiveness into account in their work.

  The Presidency asked for views on the Growth Initiative in the light of the October European Council's conclusions.

  Several of the projects are in the field of Research and Development. Key areas were nanotechnology, space and high speed networks for research bodies. I stated that I wanted to see clear criteria for projects based upon project readiness and EU added value. I also confirmed that UK preferences were close to those of the Commission.

  The Presidency concluded that the Council should agree a new list of priority projects on 27 November, for presentation to the December European Council.

  The Council agreed a Resolution on Researchers' Careers.

  There was a discussion over lunch on the EU candidate site for ITER (International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor).

  Copyright Directive
  Dr. Kumar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what progress has been made with ensuring compliance with the EU Copyright Directive; and if she will make a statement. [137542]

  Ms Hewitt
  The Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003 (SI 2003 No. 2498) bringing UK law into full compliance with the EU Copyright Directive came into force on 31 October 2003.

  Numbers of licences (a) granted and (b) revoked, to (i) debt collectors and (ii)lenders, (A) since 1974 and (B) each year since 1997

  (i)Debt collectors-Category E

  (ii>Lenders-Category A ('Consumer Credit business')

  (a)Licences granted

  (b)MTRevokes issued

  (a)Licences granted covering Category A-i.e 'Consumer Credit Business'

  (b)MTRevokes issued to Finance Companies

  A Cumulatively 1976-May 2003 (breakdown unavailable 1974–1976 and after May 2003)

  102,876

  Not available

  205,352

  Not available

  B Annually since 1997

  1997

  8,176

  20

  10,778

  12

  1998

  11,215

  8

  13,480

  4

  1999

  10,723

  24

  12,644

  9

  2000

  9,247

  10

  11,214

  4

  2001

  8,586

  3

  10,223

  4

  2002

  9,140

  1

  10,962

  8

  2003(to end May)

  3,996

  0

  4,797

  7

  Note;

  A single Licence can cover more than one type of business category

  Debt Collection
  Mr. Gardiner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will take steps to prevent companies from using the same home visiting personnel both to sell loans and collect debts. [138598]

  Mr. Sutcliffe
  The practice of one agent both selling loans, and collecting the payments due, is extensively used in the doorstep lending sector. This practice has not been shown to be inconsistent with either fair dealing or responsible lending and there is some evidence that it is valued by many consumers. I therefore do not intend to take any action in this matter.

  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will place in the Library the responses received to the Office of Fair Trading consultation on debt collection. [138237]

  Mr. Sutcliffe
  [holding answer 13 November 2003]: The responses received to the Office of Fair Trading consultation on debt collection, other than those where the respondent requested confidentiality, are available for viewing at:

  Office of Fair Trading

  Fleetbank House

  2–6 Salisbury Square

  London

  EC4Y 8JX

  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many licences have been(a) granted and (b) revoked by the Office of Fair Trading to (i) debt collectors and (ii) lenders, (A) since the Consumer Credit Act 1974 was introduced and (B) in each year since 1997. [138238]

  Mr. Sutcliffe
  [holding answer 13 November 2003]: The information is not available in the form requested. Information on licence revocations is not broken down by market sector and is not available for the early years. Disaggregated information is available on the issue of Minded to Revoke Notices (MTRs). There is no licence category which precisely corresponds to "lenders". "Consumer Credit Business" is likely to be wider and "Finance Companies" narrower. The available information is set out as follows:
  511W

  Total number of Licences revoked

  1997

  34

  1998

  15

  1999

  25

  2000

  31

  2001

  21

  2002

  26

  To 30 September 2003

  10

  Employers' Liability Insurance
  Brian Cotter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what discussions she has had with the Department for Work and Pensions on the progress of the second stage report of its review of Employers' Liability Compulsory Insurance. [130824]

  Nigel Griffiths
  I have had four meetings with colleagues on the review of Employers' Liability Insurance, and we will continue to meet to ensure good progress on the second stage report.

  A statement was made to the House before Recess, on 22 May 2003, and a first stage report published on 3 June 2003, which is in the Library of the House. The second stage report will be published in the autumn.

  Employment Regulations
  Mr. Key
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when she will lay before Parliament the final draft Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Business Regulations; and if she will make a statement. [137778]

  Mr. Sutcliffe
  I hope to make an announcement on this matter in the near future.

  The new Regulations will take account of the needs of the private recruitment industry and the interests of those using the services provided.

  Exports to Morocco
  Mr. Drew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry for what reason strategic exports of(a) toxic chemical precursors and (b) technology for the production of toxins have been licensed for sale to Morocco. [136727]

  Mr. Timms
  Following careful consideration against the consolidated EU and national arms export licensing criteria, these exports have been licensed for sale to Morocco as they are for the production of pharmaceuticals and toothpaste and will not be used for any strategic purposes.

  Fireworks
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what methods the Government use to monitor the distribution, from ports of entry, of imported fireworks. [138003]

  Mr. Browne
  I have been asked to reply.

  There is no routine monitoring of the distribution of fireworks from the port of entry.
  512W
  The storage of fireworks is regulated by HSE in partnership with local authorities under the Explosives Act 1875. Anyone storing fireworks illegally will be liable to prosecution.

  HSE works with local authorities and Customs and Excise to verify whether firework importers have licensed storage facilities in Great Britain. The evidence from these checks is that the overwhelming majority of fireworks imports declared to Customs and Excise are being imported by firms with licensed storage available to them.

  Industrial Development Act
  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) how many jobs her Department forecast would be created under each scheme in each of the past six years under(a) section 7 and (b) section 8 of the Industrial Development Act 1982, and at what cost per job; how many people are still employed as a direct result of financial assistance in each scheme; and if she will make a statement on her Department's (i) financing and (ii) monitoring of jobs created under the Act; [138775]

  (2) what the value was of (a) applications received and (b) offers accepted for financial assistance in each year since 1997 under (i) section 7 and (ii) section 8 of the Industrial Development Act 1982. [138776]

  Jacqui Smith
  The forecast of jobs expected to be created and safeguarded in England as a result of offers accepted under Section 7 (Regional Selective Assistance) and the average cost per job were:

  Jobs

  Average cost per job (£)

  1997–98

  39,167

  4,287

  1998–99

  27,838

  4,606

  1999–2000

  35,270

  3,152

  2000–01

  32,184

  6,378

  2001–021

  16,714

  4,723

  2002–03

  19,856

  5,426

  Total

  171,029

  4,673

  1The reduction in jobs is the result of a transfer of smaller RSA cases (capital investment less than £500,000) to a separate Enterprise Grant scheme under Section 8, w.e.f. 1 January 2000).

  To date, 117,256 of these jobs have been achieved with approximately 65 per cent. of projects completed. The jobs achieved will increase as further projects are completed.

  It is not policy to continue monitoring firms once the conditions of an offer of grant have been met.

  Schemes under Section 8 are not primarily targeted on job creation and no forecasts have been made.

  Further details on the schemes operating under Sections 7 and 8 can be found in the Industrial Development Act Annual Report, published by The Stationery Office.

  Internet Banking
  Mr. Gardiner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what work her Department is doing with banks to improve the security of internet banking. [136170]
  513W
  Mr. Timms
  Security of Internet Banking services is a matter for the individual banks concerned and falls within the overall regime for the conduct of banking operations which is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Department promotes the security of business processes and transactions generally and is thus in regular contact with individual banks and the Association for Payment and Clearing Services (APACS). The banking sector has been an important contributor to the development of tScheme which is committed to improving trust in electronic commerce. TScheme was created in response to the Electronic Communications Act 2000.

  The financial sector, including internet banking, is one of the business sectors targeted as part of the UK's critical information infrastructure policy which is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. I understand that there are regular contacts between the banking sector and the National Infrastructure Security Co-ordination Centre to develop and implement policy in this area.

  Ministerial Visits
  Mr. Hoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will list the visits made by Ministers in her Department in each of the last five years, broken down by constituency.[136918]

  Ms Hewitt
  These details are not held centrally and to provide the information would be only at disproportionate cost in terms of financial and physical resource.

  Policyholders Protection Act 1975
  Mr. Dismore
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will make a statement on reform of the Policyholders Protection Act 1975 resulting from the case of Aitken v. Financial Services Compensation Scheme Ltd., 30 May, SL7 OH Court of Session. [136826]

  Ruth Kelly
  I have been asked to reply.

  The courts have upheld the Financial Services Compensation Scheme decision in the case of Aitkin v. Financial Services Compensation Scheme. The Government see no reason to depart from our current policy as a result of the ruling.

  Post Office
  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will list the Post Office network income from clients for each year since 1997, broken down by main source. [138773]

  Mr. Timms
  The information requested is an operational matter for the Post Office. I have therefore asked the Chief Executive to reply direct to the hon. Member.

  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry which(a) local authorities and (b) housing associations used the Post Office for the payment of (i) rent and (ii) insurance premiums for home contents policies in each year since 1997. [137704]
  514W
  Mr. Timms
  We do not collect the information requested, which is an operational matter for the Post Office, and I have therefore asked the Chief Executive to reply direct to the hon. Member.

  Post Office Card Account
  Mr. Webb
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry which company operates the systems for the Post Office Card Account; and what safeguards have been put in place to ensure the adequate data protection of personal data of account holders where those data are transmitted outside the UK. [138796]

  Mr. Timms
  These are matters that fall within the day-to-day responsibility of Post Office Ltd. and I have therefore asked the Chief Executive to reply direct to the hon. Member.

  Post Office Subsidy Scheme
  John Thurso
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how much of the Sub-Post Office Start-Up Capital Subsidy scheme has been spent to date, broken down by region. [138897]

  Mr. Timms
  I understand from Post Office Ltd, who administer the Scheme on my Department's behalf, that payments totalling £1,238,722.18 had been made to the end of September 2003, the latest date to which data is available. As at the same date, the total value of grants approved was £1,712,811.62. I also understand that details of grants approved and paid are not recorded by region but are available on a country basis and that payments totalling £151,401.98 had been made to sub post offices in Scotland as at the end of September 2003.

  Post Offices (Closure)
  Mr. Burns
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many urban post offices have been(a) proposed and (b) approved for closure since the inception of the network reinvention scheme in (i) West Chelmsford parliamentary constituency and (ii) mid-Essex. [137154]

  Mr. Timms
  [holding answer 12 November 2003]: Proposals for post office closures and final decisions on them, following public consultation under the Code of Practice, are operational matters for Post Office Ltd. I am advised by Post Office Ltd that data on urban reinvention proposals and closures is not available in the form requested as the company does not require this data for operational reasons. However, I understand that since March 2000 the company has recorded details of post office closures, including those under the urban reinvention programme, which commenced in late 2002, on the basis of Government Region. In the East of England Region as a whole, there have been 43 closures under the urban reinvention programme to the end of September 2003, the latest quarter for which figures are currently available.

  Working Time Directive
  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry pursuant to her oral answer of 6 November, if she will negotiate the maintenance of the UK opt-out of the 48 hour limit under Article 18 of the Working Time Directive before 23 November. [137819]
  515W
  Ms Hewitt
  The European Commission intends to issue an initial Communication on the Working Time opt-out, the definition of Working Time with regard to on-call time and the Working Time reference period, around the end of November. We are not expecting the Communication to contain any firm proposals. There will then follow a consultation period before the Commission produce formal proposals. The Government will fully engage in this process, and will seek to ensure that the outcome safeguards choice for individuals over the hours they work, whilst ensuring their employment rights are protected.

CABINET OFFICE

  Duchy's Benevolent Fund
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office if he will list the organisations located within the boundaries of Pendle Borough Council that have received grants from the Duchy's Benevolent Fund since January 2000. [138104]

  Mr. Alexander
  I am not a Trustee of the Duchy of Lancaster Benevolent Fund. However, the Secretary of the Fund has provided the following information:

  Organisations located within boundaries of Pendle borough council that have received grants from the Duchy's Benevolent Fund since January 2000

  Organisations

  2000

  St Michaels and All Angels Church, Foulridge New Life Christian Centre, Colne Home Start, Pendle Pendle Girls Rugby league Club Nelson Youth and community Centre Nelson Civic Junior Choir

  2001

  Hospice care for Burnley and Pendle Earby Mines Research Trust Burnley, Pendle and Rossendale CVS Pendle and Dist. Ms Group

  2002

  Christ Church, Nelson Earby Coffee stop New Road Comm. Centre, Earby

  2003

  Colourful Voice, Colrie Colne Open Door

  Government Policy
  Mr. Clifton-Brown
  To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what his role is(a) as the interface between the Labour Party and the Government and (b) in providing the Prime Minister with strategic thinking on the general direction of Government policy and the values underpinning it. [137192]
  516W
  Mr. Alexander
  My ministerial responsibilities are set out in the List of Ministerial Responsibilities (LMR), copies of which are available in the Libraries of the House. LMR is also available in electronic form and can be accessed at www.knowledgenetwork.gov.uk/elmr/minister.nsf.

  Knowledge Network Project
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office (1) if he will list, by subject, the statistics that have been collected for the first time at constituency level under the Knowledge Network project, stating in each case the date on which the first in the series was completed; if he will place a copy of the most recent of each set of statistics listed in the Library; and if he will make a statement; [135301]

  (2) which information held on the Knowledge Network computer system will not be available to (a) the public and (b) hon. Members; and if he will make a statement; [135305]

  (3) what the cost has been to date of the new Knowledge Network system; and if he will make a statement. [135306]

  Mr. Alexander
  The Knowledge Network is a government-wide electronic communications tool promoting collaborative working both within and between departments as part of the modernisation and e-government initiatives. The Network does not collect statistics by subject at constituency level.

  Access to the Knowledge Network is restricted to Ministers and civil servants via the Government Secure Intranet. There is currently no access to the Knowledge Network other than for these groups. The UKonline website provides a range of government services and information to the public and is an easy entry point for people who want to search government information and find out about local services.

  Since its inception in 1999, the Knowledge Network project has cost £13.7 million to develop and manage. £10 million of this was from the Capital Modernisation Fund to improve information sharing across Government.

  Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act
  Brian White
  To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office what statutory investigatory powers the Department has; which ones will be superseded by use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000; and what plans he has for removing these legacy powers. [136127]

  Mr. Alexander
  My Department has no investigatory powers.

TREASURY

  Business Costs
  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the cost to business of the statistical inquiries of businesses carried out by the Office for National Statistics in 2002; and if he will make a statement. [136798]

  Ruth Kelly
  [holding answer 6 November 2003]: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.

  Letter from Colin Mowl to Mr. Malcolm Bruce, dated 17 November 2003:

  The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent question concerning the cost to business of the statistical inquiries of businesses carried out by the Office for National Statistics in 2002. I am replying in his absence.(136798)

  The overall compliance costs to business are controlled within limits agreed by Treasury Ministers and the Office for National Statistics (ONS). Each year ONS produces a Compliance Plan to help monitor and control the load on businesses of its statistical surveys. It also includes information on initiatives to minimise the form-filling load, such as the use of efficient and fair sampling procedures.

  Between 1994 and 1997 compliance costs showed a progressive decrease. However from 1998 onwards compliance costs have risen steadily, as a result of the need for high quality statistics to capture changes in the economy, such as the development of E-commerce and the increasingly important service sector.

  The latest compliance plan has calculated the compliance cost to business of ONS surveys in 2002 at £28.9 million at 2002 prices, which was within the agreed limit. The figure is the same as 1995 in real terms.

  Heroin
  Mr. Hepburn
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much heroin, and of what value, has been seized in(a) Tyne and Wear, (b) the North East and (c) the UK in each year since 1997. [138432]

  John Healey
  The Home Office has published data on controlled drugs seized in the UK by Customs and other law enforcement agencies in the annual Home Office Statistical Bulletin on Drugs Seizure and Offender Statistics 2000 and Home Office Findings 2002 (Seizures of drugs in the UK 2001). Figures for seizures in 2002, for the value of drugs seized in 2001, and for seizures in Tyne and Wear are not available. Copies are available in the Library of the House and on the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate's website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hosb402. pdf.

  Business Taxation
  Mr. Prisk
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what assessment he has made of the rate of change in the burden of business taxation in(a) the UK, (b) Japan, (c) the USA and (d) EU member states; [137604]

  (2)what assessment he has made of the burden of business taxation in (a) the UK and (b) the USA. [137605]
  518W
  Dawn Primarolo
  The OECD publishes figures on "taxes on corporate income" and "employers' social security contributions" in its annual Revenue Statistics publication, a copy of which is available in the Library of the House.

  The Government are fully committed to a fair and modern UK tax system that recognises the realities of modern business. Since 1997, the Government have introduced a wide-ranging package of tax measures to make the UK an attractive place for business to locate, boost productivity and help small businesses.

  Cancer Survival Rates
  Mr. Jim Cunningham
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what research he has commissioned on cancer survival rates in the United Kingdom compared with other EU countries. [133894]

  Ruth Kelly
  [holding answer 27 October 2003]: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.

  Letter from Colin Mowl to Mr. Jim Cunningham, dated 17 November 2003:

  The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent question concerning what research the Chancellor of the Exchequer has commissioned on cancer survival rates in the United Kingdom compared with other EU countries. I am replying in his absence. (133894)

  Comparable statistics on cancer survival in the UK and most other EU countries have been produced in three studies funded by the European Commission (the EUROCARE studies). Cancer registries in the UK, including staff from the National Registry at ONS, have been involved in these studies since they began in 1989.

  The results indicated that survival was generally highest in Sweden, the Netherlands, France and Switzerland, and lowest in Estonia, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia. Survival in the UK and Denmark was lower than in other western European countries for common tumours such as those of lung, breast, stomach, large bowel, prostate and kidney. However, international differences in survival were not large for tumours amenable to cytotoxic therapy, such as testicular cancer and Hodgkin's disease.

  Government plans for funding cancer research were published in the NHS Cancer Plan in September 2000; copies of which are available in the Library. The Plan acknowledged that "survival rates for many of the major cancers lag behind the rest of Europe".

  CAT Standard
  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many CAT standard products have been(a) launched and (b) withdrawn in each year since the CAT mark was introduced.[138426]

  Ruth Kelly
  This data is not collected centrally.

  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list the CAT standard endorsed products, broken down by category of product. [138427]
  519W
  Ruth Kelly
  There are CAT standards for equity, insurance and cash ISA products and there is a CAT standard for fixed and variable rate mortgages.

  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many credit card companies have(a) applied for and (b) been granted the CAT standard mark. [138428]

  Ruth Kelly
  The Government have not adopted a CAT standard for credit cards.

  Consumer Debt
  Dr. Kumar
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent assessment he has made of the level of consumer debt; and what estimate he has made of the change in the number of companies offering(a) credit and (b) loans in the last three years. [138832]

  Ruth Kelly
  The Government's forthcoming pre-Budget report will include an assessment of developments in consumer debt. The Office of Fair Trading's Annual Report contains statistics on consumer credit licences granted and the Financial Services Authority's Annual Report contains statistics on lenders regulated by the FSA (available respectively at www.oft.gov.uk/News/ Annual+report and www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/annual).

  Council Tax
  Mr. Webb
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will estimate the average weekly amount of council tax, net of council tax benefit, paid by(a) all pensioner households and (b) pensioner households whose taxable income is below the income tax threshold. [137692]

  Ruth Kelly
  The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.

  Average weekly amount of Council Tax paid by (a) all single and couple pensioner households and (b) all single and couple pensioner households who did not report paying income tax1 for 2001–02: Great Britain

  £Per week

  Single and Couple Pensioner households

  Average net council tax

  Average council tax benefit

  Average gross council tax

  All single and couple pensioner households

  10.90

  2.80

  13.60

  All single and couple pensioner households who did not report paying Income Tax

  5.70

  6.10

  11.80

  1Income Tax is net of tax relief at source on life assurance premiums

  Mr. Edward Davey
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much council tax was paid as a proportion of gross incomes for households in each income quintile group in each English region for the last year for which data are available. [138147]

  Ruth Kelly
  The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.

  Letter from Colin Mowl to Mr. Edward Davey, dated 17 November 2003:

  The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent question asking how much council tax was paid as a proportion of gross incomes for households in each income quintile group in each English region for the latest year for which data is available. I am replying in his absence. (138147)

  Estimates in the following table are produced from the Office for National Statistics' analysis "The effects of taxes and benefits on household income" produced by the ONS and published on the
  520W
  Letter from Len Cook to Mr. Steve Webb, dated 17 November 2003:

  As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your recent question asking for the average weekly amount of council tax and net council tax benefit paid by all pensioners, and pensioners whose taxable income is below the income tax threshold. (137692)

  Estimates for council taxes are based on the analysis "The effects of taxes and benefits on household income 2001–02" produced by the ONS and published on the National Statistics website on October 21st 2003. The analysis can be obtained from the House of Commons Library or from the National Statistics website at http://www.statistics.gov.uk/taxesbenefits. It includes measures of income inequality for the United Kingdom as a whole based on data from the Expenditure and Food Survey. This is a sample survey covering about 7,500 households in the UK and sample sizes for pensioner households are only sufficient to give approximate estimates. The Family Resources Survey would have been an alternative source with a larger sample size, but the taxes and benefits analysis has been used for consistency with answers to other recent parliamentary questions.

  Pensioner households have been defined as those where the Household Reference Person is retired or unoccupied and aged 65 or more and male, or 60 years of age or more and female, and economically inactive.

  Detailed information on the definition of the Household Reference Person can be found in Appendix D of the document at the following address: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/ downloads/theme_social/Family_Spending_2001–02_revised/Family_ Spending_revised.pdf

  Estimates for 2001–02 are shown in the following table for all pensioner households (single and couples) in Great Britain and for those who did not pay income tax (i.e. their reported income tax was zero). Council tax is not paid in Northern Ireland. The survey does not record the income tax threshold of household members so the absence of recorded income tax has been used as the relevant measure. Net council tax is defined as gross council tax less benefits and discounts, where a household reports taking up a council tax benefit entitlement.

  National Statistics website on October 21st 2003. The analysis can be obtained from the House of Commons Library or from the National Statistics website at http://www.statistics.gov.uk/ taxesbenefits. It includes measures of income inequality for the United Kingdom as a whole based on data from the Expenditure and Food Survey. This is a sample survey covering about 7,500 households in the UK and sample sizes for each region are only sufficient to give approximate estimates. The Family Resources Survey would have been an alternative source with a larger sample size, but the taxes and benefits analysis has been used for consistency with answers to other recent parliamentary questions.

  The table shows, for 2001–02, the average net council tax paid for all households in each Government Office Region and for each income quintile group within each region where households are ranked by equivalised disposable income. Equivalisation is a standard methodology that takes into account the size and composition of households and adjusts their incomes to recognise differing demands on resources. The net council tax figures are gross council tax less reported council tax benefits and discounts. The table also shows the boundaries between equivalised disposable income quintiles, which have been calculated

  521W
  separately for households in each Government Office Region. For example, the 1st quintile boundary is the income level below which one fifth of those households are estimated to lie. The results are

  Net council tax paid by households within each Government Office Region by equivalised disposable income quintile, 2001–02: England

  North East

  North West and Merseyside

  Yorkshire and the Humber

  Quintile

  Income boundary1(£)

  Net council tax (£)

  Net council tax as % of gross income

  Income boundary1(£)

  Net council tax (£)

  Net council tax as % of gross income

  Income boundary1(£)

  Net council tax (£)

  Net council tax as % of gross income

  Bottom

  242

  3.1

  397

  4.7

  373

  4.0

  8,838

  9,805

  9,941

  2nd

  419

  3.4

  430

  3.4

  372

  2.9

  12,551

  13,187

  13,353

  3rd

  502

  2.6

  656

  3.3

  525

  2.7

  17,838

  17,667

  17,646

  4th

  707

  2.3

  755

  2.7

  647

  2.4

  25,843

  24,065

  23,660

  Top

  872

  1.5

  938

  1.8

  846

  1.7

  All households in region

  548

  2.2

  635

  2.6

  553

  2.3

  1 Boundary point between equivalised disposable income quintiles

  Source:

  Office for National Statistics, based on the analysis 'The effects of taxes and benefits on household income'.

  Net council tax paid by households within each Government Office Region by equivalised disposable income quintile, 2001–02 (continued): England

  East Midlands

  West Midlands

  Eastern

  Quintile

  Income boundary1(£)

  Net council tax (£)

  Net council tax as %of gross income

  Income boundary1(£)

  Net council tax (£)

  Net council tax as % of gross income

  Income boundary1(£)

  Net council tax (£)

  Net council tax as % of gross income

  Bottom

  482

  5.2

  424

  4.8

  467

  5.3

  10,265

  9,829

  10,977

  2nd

  555

  3.5

  430

  3.4

  530

  3.4

  14,708

  13,721

  16,010

  3rd

  675

  2.8

  604

  2.7

  722

  2.7

  19,597

  17,811

  22,095

  4th

  724

  2.3

  777

  2.3

  779

  2.1

  26,737

  25,179

  30,016

  Top

  785

  1.4

  781

  1.5

  891

  1.4

  All households in region

  644

  2.4

  603

  2.3

  678

  2.2

  1 Boundary point between equivalised disposable income quintiles

  Source:

  Office for National Statistics, based on the analysis 'The effects of taxes and benefits on household income'.

  Net council tax paid by households within each Government Office Region by equivalised disposable income quintile, 2001–02 (continued): England

  London

  South East

  South West

  Quintile

  Income boundary1(£)

  Net council tax (£)

  Net council tax as % of gross income

  Income boundary1(£)

  Net council tax (£)

  Net council tax as % of gross income

  Income boundary1(£)

  Net council tax (£)

  Net council tax as % of gross income

  Bottom

  443

  4.6

  477

  4.8

  474

  5.4

  11,432

  12,550

  10,609

  2nd

  567

  3.1

  637

  3.3

  565

  3.8

  17,512

  18,002

  14,441

  3rd

  746

  2.2

  748

  2.5

  683

  3.0

  25,609

  24,649

  19,341

  4th

  790

  1.7

  826

  1.9

  748

  2.5

  37,913

  35,184

  26,281

  Top

  886

  1.0

  986

  1.3

  890

  1.5

  All households in region

  686

  1.7

  735

  2.0

  672

  2.5

  1 Boundary point between equivalised disposable income quintiles

  Source:

  Office for National Statistics, based on the analysis 'The effects of taxes and benefits on household income'.

  Families (Taxation)
  Mr. Pickles
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the treatment for the purposes of(a) taxation and (b) tax credits of (i) families with two children of different ages and (ii) families with twins. [137461]
  522W
  subject to a high degree of uncertainty due to increased sampling variablity arising from small sample sizes, particularly for some regions.

  Dawn Primarolo
  In any single tax year there are currently no differences in the treatment of families with two children of different ages and of families with twins for the purposes of taxation or tax credits.

  Financial Literacy
  Mr. Drew
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will publish the Treasury's strategy for improving the level of financial literacy. [136757]

  Ruth Kelly
  Raising standards of financial literacy is an important part of the Government's wider strategy to reduce social and financial exclusion, and promote appropriate participation in the financial services industry, while tackling overindebtedness, and promote saving. Financially literate, confident, and independent consumers also spur firms to offer high quality, value for money products and services, and promotes effective competition.

  A number of departments and agencies are active in achieving our ambitions. For example, we are the first Government to introduce a framework for Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE) that provides for personal finance education to be taught throughout Key Stages 1 to 4 of the school curriculum.

  We also work closely with the Financial Services Authority.

  In his 2002 Review of Medium and Long Term Saving Ron Sandier suggested that the FSA should lead and coordinate further work in this area. Partly in response to those proposals, the FSA announced on 20 October 2003 the membership of their Financial Capability Steering Group. This group will bring together government, consumer representatives, the industry, the media, and the regulator to develop and implement a national strategy for financial capability.

  The FSA has already delivered a great deal to help consumers and has fostered initiatives on financial literacy, working closely, for example, with the Personal Finance Education Group, which has undertaken valuable work on good practice I delivering personal finance teaching in schools. But the steering group announcement recognised that more needs to be done, to engage with and learn from the widest range of organisation.

  Financial Services Authority
  Mr. Martlew
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has to make the equity release market subject to Financial Services Authority regulation. [138959]

  Ruth Kelly
  Mortgage based equity release schemes will be regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) with effect from 31 October 2004. On 11 November 2003, I published a consultation document seeking views on whether home reversion plans should come within the scope of FSA regulation. Copies of this consultation document are available in the Library.

  Flooding
  Mr. Kidney
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the scope for the application of economic instruments in promoting the development of flood defences. [138933]
  524W
  Ruth Kelly
  The 2001 Flood and Coastal Defence Funding Review recommended that the Government should consider the application of economic instruments as part of alternative funding streams for flood defence. We agree with the review's analysis and have therefore asked Defra to work up proposals as part of their Spending Review 2002 commitments. They have since consulted on a range of options, including a Floodplain Development Connection Charge to be levied on new developments in the floodplain. The work on this is still at a very early stage. and will be taken forward as part of Defra's new flood management strategy.

  Graduate Income
  Mr. Hepburn
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the average wage for a new graduate was in each year since 1997 in(a) the North East and (b) the UK. [137458]

  Ruth Kelly
  The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.

  Letter from Colin Mowl to Mr. Stephen Hepburn, dated 17 November 2003:

  The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the average wage for new graduates in the North East and the UK. I am replying in his absence. (137458)

  Table 1 overleaf gives estimates of the average gross weekly earnings of all working age graduates resident in the UK and the North East region who are full-time employees.

  Table 2 gives estimates of the average gross weekly earnings of graduates aged 25 and under resident in the UK who are full-time employees. Similar estimates for graduates aged 25 and under resident in the North East region are not reliable because the survey sample sizes available are too small.

  These estimates are from the Labour Force Survey (LFS) for the twelve month period ending August of each year from 1998 to 2003. Estimates for all new graduates, irrespective of age, cannot be produced as the LFS does not include a question about how long ago respondents graduated.

  Table 1 Average gross weekly earnings of working age1, graduates2 who are full-time3 employees

  £

  September to August

  UK

  North East

  1997–8

  513

  453

  1998–9

  539

  488

  1999–2000

  555

  484

  2000–1

  582

  497

  2001–2

  605

  534

  2002–3

  625

  552

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

  2 People whose highest qualification is degree level or above

  3 The definition of full-time is based on respondents' self assessment

  Note:

  These Labour Force Survey (LFS) estimates have not been interim-adjusted to take account of the recent Census 2001 results.

  Source:

  ONS—Labour Force Survey
  525W

  Table 2 Average gross weekly earnings of graduates1 aged 25 and under resident in the UK who are full-time2 employees

  September to August

  £

  1997–8

  285

  1998–9

  314

  1999–0

  319

  2000–1

  341

  2001–2

  356

  2002–3

  350

  1People whose highest qualification is degree level or above

  2 The definition of full-time is based on respondents' self assessment

  Note:

  These Labour Force Survey (LFS) estimates have not been interim-adjusted to take account of the Census 2001 results

  Source:

  ONS Labour Force Survey.

  International Monetary Fund
  John Barrett
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he is taking to reform the workings of the International Monetary Fund in favour of lower income countries. [138389]

  John Healey
  The UK Government believe that International Monetary Fund (IMF) support to low-income countries should work within its areas of competence to help these countries achieve the macroeconomic stability and supporting policy measures crucial to poverty reduction and delivery of the Millennium Development Goals. The IMF's chief form of support to low-income countries is through the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility, which was created in 1999. This facility is designed to support country-led poverty reduction strategies, and the UK has been at the forefront of efforts to ensure that the IMF's work is based on these strategies.

  Discussions were held at the annual meetings of the IMF and World Bank in Dubai in September where my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer chaired the International Monetary and Finance Committee meetings. The Committee noted that faster growth will be needed in low-income countries in order to reduce poverty, and that this would require stronger policies and institutions, better governance and increased and more effective aid.

  The Committee observed that the IMF should remain engaged with these countries in the long-term, encouraging it to undertake further initiatives to support higher sustained growth and poverty reduction, improved governance, and reduced vulnerability to shocks. The IMF will prepare a number of Board papers on these issues, and the Committee looks forward to a review of progress at its next meeting.

  The Committee also noted the need for increased and more effective aid, and for enhanced market access. The Committee urged the IMF to work with the World Bank on aid effectiveness, aid absorption, results-based measurement systems and financing mechanisms, including the International Finance Facility. Developing and emerging market countries are being consulted on this, and France will host an international conference in spring next year.
  526W
  In respect of representation of developing countries on the Boards of the IMF and World Bank, the Development Committee, meeting in Dubai, agreed to continue efforts to build the necessary political consensus on this issue, with a roadmap to be produced for the spring meetings. The International Monetary and Financial Committee welcomed measures under way and asked the IMF to examine these issues further.

  Parliamentary Questions
  Mr. Stephen O'Brien
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will make a statement on Her Majesty's Treasury's policy regarding the content and extent of answers to written parliamentary questions. with particular reference to the Treasury's policy on the provision of lists, where lists are requested by a written parliamentary question; [137644]

  (2) pursuant to the Financial Secretary to the Treasury's Answer of 30 October 2003, Official Report, column 310W, on the euro, if he will list (a) the meetings attended by ministers to campaign for a pro-European consensus, the ministers at these meetings and the dates of these events and (b) the events planned at which ministers will campaign for a pro-European consensus, the ministers who will attend these events, and the dates of these events. [137694]

  Ruth Kelly
  I refer the hon. Gentlemen to the answer I gave him on 30 October.

  Treasury Ministers seek to give accurate information to Parliament in reply to written questions, taking account of such factors as the level of detail sought by questioners and the availability of information.

  Pension Incomes
  Mr. Gardiner
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the impact of an increase in the use of property to generate pension incomes on(a) the British economy, (b) Government expenditure and (c) the housing market. [138616]

  Ruth Kelly
  Box A3 in Annex A of PBR 2002 discusses the impact on the housing market and the wider economy of diversification out of equities into property.

  Pensions and Financial Ombudsmen
  Mr. Clifton-Brown
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many(a) Pensions Ombudsman and (b) Financial Ombudsman cases were considered in the last year for which figures are available; how many cases were (i) upheld and (ii) rejected; what the average time taken to consider a case was; and what the average cost per case was. [137333]

  Ruth Kelly
  The Pensions Ombudsman operates a two stage process. Stage 1 involves identifying which applications are to be accepted for investigation and redirecting those where the decision is not to investigate. Stage 2 involves an in-depth investigation.

  The Pensions Ombudsman's Office tell me that for the year ended 31 March 2003, they dealt with a total of 4363 cases. The table below shows a breakdown of all cases resolved during the period:
  527W

  Outcome of cases

  Year ended 31 March 2003

  Stage 1

  3,684 of which 98 per cent. of decisions were taken within four weeks.

  Stage 2

  679 decisions made in the course of the year.

  So far as the Pensions Ombudsman's formal determinations are concerned 23 per cent. resulted in a finding of the complaint being upheld; 34 per cent. of the complaint being not upheld and 43 per cent. of the investigations which were closed.

  The unit cost per case is divided by the expenditure of the office by the 679 Stage 2 completed investigations, the average cost per case is £2,160; and for Stage 1 completion the cost is £336. There is however an element of double counting involved in the last calculation: a case which went through Stage 1 at the beginning of the year and where the Stage 2 completion was before the end of the year will be counted as two cases in the calculation which produces the 336 figure.

  It is not possible to answer the query about average time taken to consider a case without incurring additional costs. However, the times taken to complete Stage 2 cases were:
  Cases taking in excess of 12 months 240 (35 per cent.)
  Cases taking between 6 and 12 months 255 (38 per cent.)
  Cases taking less than 6 months 184(27 per cent.)
  The Financial Ombudsman Service tell me that for the financial year ending 31 March 2003, the Financial Ombudsman Service received a total of 62,170 cases.

  The following table shows a breakdown of the outcome of all cases resolved during the period.

  Outcome of cases

  Year ended 31 March 2003

  Percentage

  Resolved by mediation or conciliation

  40

  Resolved after investigation by an adjudicator

  49

  of which:

  13 mixed outcome (partial win/lose for both sides)

  18 in favour of the consumer

  69 in favour of the firm

  Resolved by final decision of an ombudsman

  11

  of which:

  15 mixed outcome (partial win/lose for both sides)

  35 in favour of the consumer

  50 in favour of the firm

  The average time taken to resolve cases in the year ending 31 March 2003 was 135.8 days.

  The unit cost per case (calculated by dividing the total expenditure—less financing costs—by the number of cases closed) for the year ending 31 March 2003 was £518.

  Quarterly Financial Reporting
  Mr. Prisk
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what discussions he has had with representatives of(a) the European Union, (b) the Institute of Chartered Accountants and (c) business concerning the European Union's proposals for quarterly financial reporting; and if he will make a statement. [137608]

  Ruth Kelly
  Officials from HM Treasury, together with colleagues from the FSA and the UK Permanent Representation to the European Union, have been 528W
  involved in intensive discussions on the Transparency Directive with representatives from the European Institutions. Efforts have focused on achieving agreement on a final text that balances the objective of increasing market transparency with the need to reduce the burden and costs for businesses, in particular concerning the European Commission's proposal to introduce quarterly reporting for companies with shares on regulated EU markets.

  Officials have also been consulting on this Directive with businesses and their representatives and advisers since November 2002. These consultations have included regular roundtable meetings, which give participants an opportunity to make their concerns known, to get feedback on the process in Brussels, and to quiz officials involved in the process. Officials have also been holding smaller meetings with business representatives, including the Institute of Chartered Accountants, to provide an additional forum for consultation.

  Tax and Benefit Reforms
  Mr. Andrew Mitchell
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to his answer of 10 July 2003,Official Report, column 928W, if he will provide a breakdown of the impact of his tax and benefit reforms on households with annual income of (a) £30,000, (b) £50,000, (c) £75,000 and (d) over £75,000. [127058]

  Dawn Primarolo
  The following table shows the average change in net household incomes as a result of all personal tax and benefit measures introduced since 1997, for households with annual gross incomes in the ranges specified in the question.

  Household gross income

  Average change 2003–04 compared to 1997–98 £

  Up to £30,000

  1,100

  Up to £50,000

  950

  Up to £75,000

  875

  All households

  775

  Tax Credits
  John Barrett
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to his answer of 6 November 2003,Official Report, column 804W, on tax credits, (1) when he expects the Family Resources Survey 2003–04 will be available; and if he will place take-up estimates of (i) child tax credit and (ii) working tax credit, broken down by (A) parliamentary constituency and (B) local authority area, in the Library when the survey is available; [138393]

  (2) whether it is possible to make estimates of take-up of (a) child tax credit and (b) working tax credit by (i) parliamentary constituency and (ii) local authority area using 2002–03 figures. [138394]

  Dawn Primarolo
  In line with previous years, the Family Resources Survey (FRS) for 2003–04 is expected to be available by late 2004. The FRS sample size is not sufficient to allow the estimation of take-up rates for either child tax credit or working tax credit at the level of parliamentary constituency or local authority area.
  529W
  Official estimates of take-up of income related benefits or tax credits require data which identifies individuals who are entitled to the particular credit or benefit but who are observed as not taking up that entitlement. Such data for the child tax credit or the working tax credit will not be available from sources for 2002–03 as the tax credits were not introduced until April 2003.

  Taxes (London)
  Simon Hughes
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent estimate he has made of taxes paid by(a) people and (b) organisations in London; and if he will make a statement. [135161]

  Ruth Kelly
  The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.

  Letter from Len Cook to Mr. Simon Hughes, dated 17 November 2003:

  As National Statistician I have been asked to reply to your recent question on taxes paid by people and organisations in London. (135161)

  The table below shows estimates of taxes on income, taxes on products, taxes on production and other taxes paid by individuals and businesses in London and in the UK in 1998. The London figures were produced by ONS for the estimation of sub-national government accounts on an experimental basis and were published in a news release on 31 October 2002. They were produced as part of a pilot study funded by the European Commission and there are no current plans to update this analysis. Separate information on taxes paid by individuals and businesses is not available.

  Estimate of taxes paid by individuals and businesses in 19981

  £ million

  Taxes on income

  Taxes on Products

  Taxes on Production

  Other current taxes

  Total taxes paid

  London

  22,204

  12,303

  4,138

  1,731

  40,376

  United Kingdom

  124,060

  99,108

  17,287

  14,993

  255,448

  1Consistent with National Accounts Blue Book 2001.

  Value Added Tax
  Mrs. Brooke
  To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what discussions he has had with the European Commission on a new reduced rate category of VAT for protective and safety equipment; and what the outcome was. [138774]

  John Healey
  The Directive covering reduced rates of VAT is currently under discussion by European Ministers, following a proposal from the Commission earlier this year. This proposal challenges a number of the UK's zero rates including those for children's clothing and several reliefs targeted at charities and disabled people. We have made clear in the negotiations that we will not agree to the removal of any of our zero or reduced rate VAT derogations.

  The Commission's approach to this review has significantly narrowed the scope to consider the introduction of new reduced rates. However, as well as defending our zero rates, the Government continue to press for our long standing commitments for reduced
  530W
  rates for repairs to listed places of worship and the purchase of energy-saving materials for do-it-yourself installation, and also for energy-efficient products.

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

  Bechtel
  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list the contracts for consultancy and other work carried out by Bechtel in each year since 1997 by his Department's predecessors in areas relating to regional government, stating in each case(a) the nature of the work, (b) the value of the contract and (c) the duration of the contract; and if he will make a statement. [1377361]

  Yvette Cooper
  There have been no contracts awarded to Bechtel since 1997 by the predecessor Departments of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

  Billboards
  Mr. Drew
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the regulations that apply to the display of billboards(a) in the open countryside and (b) on telegraph poles on public or private land without planning permission. [138682]

  Keith Hill
  The display of outdoor advertisements including billboards in the open countryside and on telegraph poles on public and private land is controlled by the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) Regulations 1992. The express consent of the local planning authority is required before these advertisements may be lawfully displayed. The local planning authority must consider amenity and public safety issues. The consent of the owner of the land is also required. Local planning authorities have enforcement powers under sections 224 and 225 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 which they may use to remove, or require the removal of, advertisements displayed in contravention of the Regulations.

  Business Planning Zones
  Dr. Kumar
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what guidance he offers to local authorities on the establishment of(a) business planning zones and (b) business improvement districts, with particular reference to (i) Sunderland and (ii) Redcar and Cleveland. [139425]

  Mr. Raynsford
  The information is as follows:

  Business Planning Zones

  Guidance for local planning authorities will be published for public consultation next year. Broad policy will be set out in draft PPS4: Planning for Economic Development, and more detailed guidance on how local planning authorities should establish such zones will be produced in due course.

  Business Improvement Districts

  Draft guidance on Business Improvement Districts is available on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website (www.odpm.gov.uk) Consultation on this guidance has recently completed and the final version will be published when the regulations relating to BIDs legislation are laid before the House in spring 2004.
  531W
  The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is not aware of any specific issues in Sunderland or Redcar and Cleveland which would require more specific guidance on Business Planning Zones or Business Improvement Districts.

  Cash Incentive Scheme Grants
  Ms Oona King
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many Cash Incentive Scheme grants were made by each local authority in London in 2002–03; and what the total value of these grants was for each local authority. [139271]

  Mr. Raynsford
  The number of Cash Incentive Scheme grants made by those London borough's running schemes in 2002–03 and the total value of grants made are shown in the table.

  Total number of grants

  Total expenditure (£000)

  Barnet

  36

  917

  Brent

  31

  305

  Camden

  20

  466

  Croydon

  48

  980

  Enfield

  31

  760

  Haringey

  21

  496

  Havering

  9

  6

  Hiilingdon

  19

  382

  Islington

  9

  255

  Kingston-upon-Thames

  17

  343

  Lewisham

  27

  521

  Merton

  9

  205

  Tower Hamlets

  56

  755

  Waltham Forest

  6

  148

  Wandsworth

  32

  638

  Westminster

  15

  357

  Central Government Funding (Havering)
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how much money was allocated from central Government to the London Borough of Havering in(a) 1997, (b) 1999, (c) 2001 and (d) 2002. [138465]

  Mr. Raynsford
  Tabled are the figures for Government grants paid to the London Borough of Havering in each financial year from 1996–97. Figures are not available for calendar years.

  Government grants paid to the London Borough of Havering1

  £million

  Revenue support grant

  Redistributed non-domestic rates

  Ring-fenced grants inside AEF2

  1996–97

  62.032

  53.914

  6.256

  1997–98

  64.408

  50.432

  5.823

  1998–99

  69.215

  52.563

  7.261

  1999–2000

  70.247

  56.793

  10.280

  2000–01

  68.687

  63.386

  16.021

  2001–02

  77.482

  62.600

  20.503

  2002–03

  74.583

  68.394

  23.828

  2003–04

  88.628

  65.791

  322.686

  1Figures are not directly comparable between years due to changes in function.

  2Aggregate External Finance.

  3Budgeted figure.

  Council Tax
  Andrew George
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the cost was of operating the local government council tax system in each of the last five years for which records are available, broken down by(a) administration, (b) valuation, (c) appeals, (d) council tax benefit administration and (e) other costs. [139157]

  Mr. Raynsford
  Local authorities in England reported council tax collection costs and council tax benefit administration costs in the last five years are tabled below. Administration, valuation and appeals costs are not reported separately.

  £ million

  Council tax collection costs

  Council tax benefit administration costs

  1999–2000

  309.6

  216.7

  2000–01

  301.5

  194.8

  2001–02

  301.1

  218.7

  2002–031

  319.1

  204.5

  2003–041

  2337.0

  235.7

  1 Budgeted figures.

  2In 2003–04, council tax collection costs may include a small amount of NDR, rate (domestic and non-domestic) and community charge collection costs.

  Source:

  1999–2000 to 2001–02 Revenue Summary Returns. 2002–03 to 2003–04 Budget Estimate Returns.

  Credit Unions
  Mr. Gardiner
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what role credit unions play in alleviating poverty in communities; and what role they(a) have and (b) will have in the future as part of New Deal for Communities. [136289]

  Yvette Cooper
  Credit unions have an important role to play in tackling financial exclusion. By bridging the gap between mainstream financial services and those of limited means, credit unions make a real difference to the individuals and communities they serve.

  New Deal for Communities (NDC) Partnerships have a broad remit to tackle issues of crime, worklessness, education, health and housing in the physical environment in some of our most deprived neighbourhoods. A number of NDC Partnerships have already done work to develop credit unions or are covered by credit unions that already exist in their area–such as East Manchester NDC and Knowsley NDC– and Partnerships will continue to do this in future where it is relevant to the needs of the neighbourhood. For example, in the Brent area there are currently on-going discussions between Camden Credit Union and South Kilburn NDC on the subject of Camden Credit Union extending their common bond to the NDC area.

  Disabled Facilities Grant
  Sandra Gidley
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the average time has been between applying for a disabled facilities grant and(a) assessment of needs, (b) provision of finance and (c) the completion of buildings work, broken down by each local authority. [138162]
  533W
  Keith Hill
  Local authorities are required by statute to respond to a completed application for disabled facilities grant within six months. The Government do not collect information on the average waiting times for these grants.

  The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, jointly with the Department of Health, has issued draft guidance to local authorities setting out best practice in delivering a first class housing adaptations service for disabled people. This includes target times for the complete delivery process including needs assessment, processing of the application and the completion of building works. These target times will depend on the complexity of, and priority attached to, individual cases but the guidance suggests that the maximum target time for the entire process should in any event be no more than 260 working days and only 80 working days in high priority cases. We are currently considering responses to this consultation and hope to issue final guidance to local housing and social service authorities early next year.

  Elected Regional Assemblies
  Mr. Hammond
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of whether the proposed referendums on elected regional assemblies give people living in the regions affected an opportunity for their regions to have similar powers to those of(a) the Scottish Parliament and (b) the Welsh Assembly. [139126]

  Mr. Raynsford
  Elected assemblies will be given powers over key regional issues, such as jobs, planning, housing, transport, culture and economic development. The Regional Governance White Paper, "Your Region, Your Choice: Revitalising the English Regions", sets out the Government's proposals and takes into account the functions that are best dealt with at a national, regional or local level. As the proposals relate to the English regions, the powers of the Greater London Authority are also a relevant consideration.

  There are no plans to revisit the package as a matter of course, but there may be changes in the way some central Government functions are delivered. In developing policies, the Government will consider the opportunities offered by the creation of elected assemblies. For example, the Fire White Paper, "Our Fire and Rescue Service", announced that regional fire and rescue authorities will be established in those regions that choose to have elected assemblies.

  Expenses and Allowances
  Mr. Flook
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the advice given by the inland revenue on tax and national insurance issues in the guidance to local councils on the expenses and allowances payable to mayors and district councils. [138830]

  Mr. Raynsford
  Guidance relating to local authority members' allowances was issued to all local authorities in July 2003. This contains guidance on the tax and national insurance treatment of expenses and allowances for all members of local authorities, including mayors.

  Graffiti
  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the extent of the 534W
  problem of graffiti; and how much he estimates was (a) lost by businesses through dealing with the problem of graffiti and (b) spent by local authorities in dealing with graffiti in 2002–03. [138286]

  Yvette Cooper
  Local authorities budgeted to spend £456 million on street cleaning and litter in 2002–03. The detailed information requested is not held centrally, and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  The Local Environmental Quality Survey for England, prepared by Environmental Campaigns (ENCAMS) on behalf of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), indicates graffiti is not a major problem over the whole of the country, but those areas where it is a problem suffer particularly badly.

  Homeless People
  Mr. Hepburn
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what funding has been allocated to reduce the number of homeless people in the UK since 1997. [128713]

  Yvette Cooper
  A variety of investment streams contribute to tackling and resolving homelessness but these have wider housing and social objectives too, and it is not possible to identify specific homelessness elements within all of them.

  In March 2002, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister published "More than a Roof", a report into tackling homelessness, which identified the problems and the steps that were needed in order to tackle homelessness in England. The Homelessness Directorate was established in the previous Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions (DTLR) in March 2002 and brought together the Rough Sleepers Unit, the Bed and Breakfast Unit and a new team to ensure effective implementation of new homelessness legislation and to assist local authorities (and voluntary agencies working with them) in the development of their strategies to tackle homelessness.

  The Homelessness Directorate invested £114.5 million in 2002–03 and has a £260 million budget over 2003–04 to 2005–06.

  Local authorities also receive funding for their homelessness responsibilities through the local government finance settlement. The funding is paid as general grant and it is for local authorities to decide on their spending priorities taking into account their statutory responsibilities and the wishes of their electorate.

  Between 1997–98 and 2001–02, the following net current expenditure on homelessness incurred within the General Fund Revenue Account:

  £ million

  1997–98

  123

  1998–99

  150

  1999–2000

  171

  2000–01

  203

  2001–02

  186

  Much of this expenditure is on the provision of temporary accommodation for homeless households for which authorities claim housing benefit subsidy In relation to general capital investment for housing, the

  535W
  total budget for housing capital investment in 1997–98 was £1.7 billion and £4.3 billion for 2003–04. These budgets provide new affordable housing and improvements to existing housing, both of which can help to prevent and resolve homelessness.

  Future funding will complement increases in investment in affordable housing and the funding available from 1 April 2003 for services to help homeless people under the Supporting People programme. Provision for support relating to homelessness within the Supporting People budget totalled over £353 million this year—a fifth of the £1.8 billion grant for the 2003–04 programme. This expenditure would have previously come from a variety of programmes including housing benefit and Supported Housing Management Grant, but was not identified separately for homeless client groups within these programmes.

  Housing
  Mr. Gardiner
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will amend total cost indicators in the grant system for housing associations so that it is more profitable for them to build homes with three and four bedrooms. [138589]

  Keith Hill
  I refer my hon. Friend to the answer given on 6 November 2003,Official Report, column 796W. The Housing Corporation's Total Cost Indictor (TCI) framework is designed to be cost neutral across all types of homes irrespective of size.

  Mr. Gardiner
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment his Department has made of how to increase the construction by housing associations of(a) two, (b) three and (c) four bedroom homes in an economically viable way while meeting his Department's targets to increase the density of new housing developments. [138590]

  Keith Hill
  The Housing Corporation has recently announced its bidding round for social housing grant for 2004–05 and 2005–06. It has identified a number of ways of achieving better value for money through, for example, partnering arrangements. The detailed programme will reflect priorities identified in Regional Housing Strategies and the funding recommendations made by Regional Housing Boards. Bids from registered social landlords should reflect the local needs that they are aiming to meet.

  The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister believes that it is possible to achieve net development densities of up to 50 dwellings per hectare with a mix of different types and sizes of housing. Registered social landlords are already providing homes at an average of about 48 dwellings per hectare.

  Housing Stock
  Mr. Byers
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what action he proposes to take to ensure that regional government offices monitor the activities of local authorities to ensure that they comply with the requirements laid down by the Government in relation to the disposal of council housing stock. [138893]
  536W
  Keith Hill
  The Government Office for the Regions already work with all local authorities on housing matters, including where the authority is considering a housing transfer. In addition the Office's Community Housing Task Force work with authorities to help them deliver housing transfers within the framework set out by Government.

  The Government Offices will continue to work with an authority post transfer on its strategic and statutory housing roles.

  London Boroughs (Council Tax)
  Simon Hughes
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to his answer of 29 October 2003,Official Report, columns 302–04W, on London boroughs (council tax), how much and what proportion of council tax was collected in the London boroughs in each year from April 1993 to April 1996. [139216]

  Mr. Raynsford
  The following table shows the amount of council tax collected in each London borough and the City of London, irrespective of the financial year to which they relate, in each year from 1993–94 to 1996–97.

  Amounts of council tax collected1

  1993–94

  1994–94

  1995–96

  1996–97

  Inner London

  City of London

  0.960

  1.255

  1.331

  1.417

  Camden

  36.770

  38.940

  37.056

  43.630

  Greenwich

  29.507

  27.851

  29.234

  36.751

  Hackney

  18.279

  18.444

  20.781

  23.071

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  24.866

  26.463

  30.740

  35.882

  Islington

  23.214

  24.288

  26.040

  31.335

  Kensigton and Chelsea

  27.995

  33.732

  34.281

  37.334

  Lambeth

  26.532

  34.831

  31.512

  31.924

  Lewisham

  26.490

  30.637

  30.418

  32.537

  Southwark

  22.624

  26.374

  26.694

  34.584

  Tower Hamlets

  13.870

  15.588

  15.380

  18.419

  Wandsworth

  13.269

  13.777

  27.209

  35.719

  Westminster

  16.255

  19.703

  22.708

  25.260

  Total Inner London

  280.631

  311.883

  333.384

  387.863

  Outer London

  Barking and Dagenham

  15.750

  18.044

  17.906

  19.475

  Barnet

  53.655

  60.553

  62.897

  68.042

  Bexley

  34.491

  36.091

  38.328

  40.037

  Brent

  34.785

  30.199

  27.083

  27.051

  Bromley

  51.307

  52.726

  55.687

  60.924

  Croydon

  47.509

  52.063

  56.216

  57.745

  Ealing

  43.256

  40.727

  42.784

  45.009

  Enfield

  42.630

  46.643

  44.005

  46.958

  Haringey

  30.843

  32.875

  33.226

  35.330

  Harrow

  35.137

  37.151

  2—

  39.659

  Havering

  36.414

  36.550

  39.055

  42.674

  Hillingdon

  37.479

  41.379

  41.846

  43.968

  Kingston upon Thames

  24.433

  27.118

  28.585

  30.454

  Merton

  26.018

  28.624

  34.447

  37.134

  Newham

  20.025

  21.304

  19.112

  20.040

  Redbride

  34.742

  34.778

  37.513

  39.582

  Richmond upon Thames

  32.595

  41.291

  47.754

  51.112

  Sutton

  29.333

  31.906

  33.569

  35.534

  Waltham Forest

  27.583

  29.897

  32.313

  36.215

  Total Outer London

  692.104

  734.971

  2—

  816.105

  1 Amount of council tax due received by the end of the financial year as a percentage of the net collectable debit for the year

  2n/a

  The following table shows the in-year council tax collection rates for each London borough and the City of London for each year from 1993–94 to 1996–97. The collection of council tax continues after the end of the

  537W
  financial year to which it relates. This means that the percentage of council tax ultimately collected for any financial year is greater than that shown in the table.

  In-year council tax collection rates1

  1993–94

  1994–95

  1995–96

  1996–97

  Inner London

  City of London

  97.7

  96.3

  99.0

  98.1

  Camden

  81.4

  82.0

  83.7

  87.7

  Greenwich

  84.3

  86.9

  89.4

  91.4

  Hackney

  67.5

  75.5

  78.8

  79.4

  Hammersmith and Fulham

  86.1

  85.7

  87.4

  87.6

  Islington

  69.3

  81.2

  80.8

  83.0

  Kensington and Chelsea

  87.6

  89.2

  93.2

  94.9

  Lambeth

  48.4

  56.4

  71.8

  78.6

  Lewisham

  82.5

  81.2

  81.5

  84.8

  Southwark

  73.1

  79.9

  83.7

  84.7

  Tower Hamlets

  84.3

  84.6

  87.3

  87.2

  Wandsworth

  88.0

  89.3

  88.6

  87.9

  Westminster

  84.6

  91.3

  93.6

  92.6

  Average Inner London

  75.6

  80.0

  84.4

  86.7

  Outer London

  Barking and Dagenham

  93.1

  94.6

  95.4

  94.9

  Barnet

  92.7

  93.5

  94.4

  94.7

  Bexley

  95.4

  95.7

  96.4

  96.2

  Brent

  84.4

  85.8

  87.0

  87.6

  Bromley

  97.0

  96.9

  97.4

  97.2

  Croydon

  94.3

  92.8

  93.4

  92.1

  Ealing

  86.9

  90.4

  92.9

  94.3

  Enfield

  86.2

  88.5

  90.8

  91.8

  Haringey

  74.0

  81.9

  81.4

  84.7

  Harrow

  94.4

  2—

  2—

  96.4

  Havering

  95.0

  95.8

  96.5

  96.7

  Hallingdon

  92.9

  93.8

  93.9

  94.3

  Hounslow

  91.1

  90.1

  88.8

  92.7

  Kingston upon Thames

  97.5

  98.2

  97.3

  97.1

  Merton

  91.6

  92.9

  96.9

  94.4

  Newham

  73.4

  72.8

  76.9

  81.0

  Redbridge

  94.1

  94.6

  94.7

  95.6

  Richmond upon Thames

  95.2

  95.4

  96.4

  97.0

  Sutton

  97.5

  97.9

  98.3

  98.0

  Waltham Forest

  82.2

  86.2

  88.9

  91.5

  Average Outer London

  90.4

  91.8

  92.9

  93.8

  Average Greater London

  85.6

  88.0

  90.1

  91.4

  1 Amount of council tax due received by the end of the financial year as a percentage of the net collectable debit for the year

  2 n/a

  Regional Assemblies
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will include with the postal ballot for the proposed English regional assemblies explanatory memoranda setting out the expected costs and savings of the new structure. [137559]

  Mr. Raynsford
  The Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 prohibits publication of any material relating to a referendum during the 28 days prior to the poll by any Minister of the Crown, Government Department or local authority. Therefore, the postal ballot for the proposed English regional assemblies will not include any such material. However, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has launched an information campaign to ensure that relevant information about the role and composition of Elected Regional Assemblies is made easily available in each of the three northern regions where referendums may be held. This includes an estimate of the costs of running elected assemblies and the savings to other public bodies whose staff transfer to the assembly.

  Regional Co-ordination Unit
  Mr. Pickles
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister when the Regional Co-ordination Unit was established. [138131]

  Yvette Cooper
  The Regional Co-ordination Unit was set up in the summer of 2000 following the publication of the Performance and Innovation Unit Report, "Reaching Out—The Role Of Central Government At Regional And Local Level".

  Mr. Pickles
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many research projects the Regional Co-ordination Unit(a) plans to commission in 2003–04 and (b) commissioned in 2002–03; and what the rationale for each project was. [138134]

  Yvette Cooper
  The Regional Co-ordination Unit (RCU) currently has no plans to commission any research in 2003–04.

  In 2002–03, the following research was commissioned:
  a study of staff appraisal to see if there are any subjective differences in the way appraisals are carried out on staff of different gender, ethnicity or disability; and
  a report into "Incorporating Regional Perspectives into Policy Making". This was commissioned jointly by the RCU and the Cabinet Office Strategy Unit to investigate ways in which central Departments and the Government Offices could better work together to develop policy.

  Ward Boundaries (Devon)
  Nick Harvey
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister when he plans to introduce orders giving effect to the Boundary Committee's recommendations for Devon County Council's ward boundaries. [138903]

  Mr. Raynsford
  These are now matters for the independent Electoral Commission, to which the periodic electoral reviews functions of the former Local Government Commission for England and my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister were transferred by the Local Government Commission for England (Transfer of Functions) Order 2001 (S.I 2001/3962).

  Wiltshire Fire Authority
  Mr. Key
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list the members of the Wiltshire Fire Authority indicating(a) by whom each was nominated, (b) by whom each was appointed and (c) the political affiliation of each member. [137455]

  Mr. Raynsford
  This information is not held centrally.

  Work-related Stress
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many cases of work-related stress have been reported in his Department in each of the last three years; how much compensation has been paid to employees; how many work days have been lost due to work-related stress, and at what cost; what procedures have been put in place to reduce work-related stress, and at what cost; and if he will make a statement. [136842]

  Yvette Cooper
  The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister was established following machinery of government changes in May 2002.
  539W
  For the period 2002–03, there have been eight cases of alleged work-related stress in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, amounting to 126 days absence. There have been no compensation claims for work-related stress.

  The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has a Stress at Work policy in place, which is supported by practical guidance issued to staff on dealing with the issue. In addition, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has access to a counselling and support facility. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is committed to meeting the targets for reducing the number of days lost due to work-related injuries and ill health arising from the Government's Revitalising Health and Safety initiative. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has been in recent discussions with the Health and Safety Executive about the development of a new proactive stress prevention programme.

EDUCATION AND SKILLS

  Paternal Contact
  Mr. Jenkins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what encouragement departments and agencies give to fathers in keeping in contact with their children after separation. [136442]

  Margaret Hodge
  The Government's approach to the issue of child contact is based on the principle in the Children Act 1989, that in all decisions and arrangements about child contact, the child's best interests must be paramount. Figures from recent studies and surveys indicate as follows:60 per cent. of non-resident parents agreed contact with the resident parent.
  77 per cent. of non-resident parents saw their children every day, or at least once a week, or at least once a month. (Office for National Statistics survey).
  47 per cent. of all non-resident fathers were having at least weekly contact, 68 per cent. at least monthly contact and only 3 per cent. had no contact at all, with their children. (Bradshaw, Stimson, Skinner and Williams—"Absent Fathers?" 1999).
  69 per cent. of formerly married parents reported on-going contact. Only 5 per cent. reported that there had never been any contact and 27 per cent. said contact had been interrupted or had ended. (McLean and Eekelaar—"The Parental Obligation: a study of parenthood across households" 1997).

  The Government believe that children generally benefit from the continued involvement of both parents in their lives following divorce or separation, with the interests of the child always being paramount. I am currently considering our response to the Report of the Children Act Sub-committee of the Advisory Board on Family Law "Making Contact Work" to see what further practical steps we can take to facilitate and support contact between children and their parents.

  Meanwhile, the Government have already taken the following initiatives:
  have published the Parenting Plan, designed to help parents make practical arrangements for their children following divorce or separation, and age-related information leaflets for children concerned;
  are supporting a publicity campaign to emphasise the benefits of safe contact for children and to encourage parents to resolve disputes constructively;
  540W
  have made available public funding for family mediation for the resolution of disputes over children. 250 services now have contracts to provide family mediation and in 2001/02 are expanding the provision of child contact facilities.

  Special Educational Needs and Disability Act
  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what assessment he has made of(a) the effect of provisions of the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 and (b) progressing schools in fulfilling their duty to draw up accessibility plans. [137910]

  Mr. Charles Clarke
  Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Schools will be reporting on these matters during 2004.

  Child Protection Database
  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what representations he has received about the impact of data protection laws on his plans to introduce a database for child protection. [138422]

  Margaret Hodge
  My right hon. Friend has not received any direct representations about the impact of data protection laws on our plans to introduce a database for child protection.

  The Green Paper "Every Child Matters" sets out our proposals to protect children at risk within a framework of universal services, including the collection and sharing of information on children. The consultation period ends on 1 December.

  Education Act
  Mr. Andrew Turner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills (1) with which schools and local authorities he has discussed proposals to take advantage of the flexibility provisions of the Education Act 2002; [137087]

  (2) how many inquiries he has received about use of the flexibility provisions of the Education Act 2002. [137088]

  Mr. Miliband
  [holding answer 10 November 2003]I refer the hon. Member to the answers given to the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough (Mr. Willis) on 12 May 2003,Official Report, column 52W; the hon. Member for Ashford (Mr. Green) on 6 October 2003, Official Report, column 1131W; the hon. Member for Altrincham and Sale, West (Mr. Brady) on 27 October 2003, Official Report, column 72W and the noble Baroness Sharp of Guildford, Official Report, House of Lords, 6 October 2003, c. WA3.

  A-Levels
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what proportion of pupils from secondary school went on to take A-levels in(a) the North West region, (b) Merseyside, (c) St. Helens and (d) England in each year since 1997. [137997]

  Mr. Miliband
  The precise information requested is not available. As the National Pupil Database is developed further, this type of analysis will be possible. As a proxy, the following tables show (i) the number of 17-year-old students who took at least one A level in
  541W
  (a) the North West region, (b) Merseyside, (c) St. Helens LEA and (d) England in schools and colleges for the years 1997–2003 and (ii) the number of 15-year-old

  (i)

  1997

  1998

  1999

  2000

  2001

  2002

  2003

  a

  North West

  22,309

  23,403

  22,854

  22,755

  24,095

  27,084

  28,077

  b

  Merseyside

  4,699

  4,916

  4,742

  4,712

  5,145

  5,604

  5,927

  c

  St. Helens LEA

  759

  823

  777

  803

  867

  882

  1,022

  d

  England

  192,418

  198,225

  196,743

  193,913

  203,121

  219,455

  228,454

  Note:

  Figures for 2003 are provisional

  (ii)

  1995

  1996

  1997

  1998

  1999

  2000

  2001

  a

  North West

  78,452

  80,647

  79,799

  79,339

  80,875

  80,350

  83,894

  b

  Merseyside

  16,735

  16,959

  16,920

  17,001

  17,282

  16,817

  17,810

  c

  St. Helens LEA

  2,210

  2,193

  2,200

  2,256

  2,195

  2,088

  2,237

  d

  England

  578,197

  594,035

  586,766

  575,210

  580,972

  580,393

  603,318

  Although the exact information required is not currently available, a rough approximation can be obtained by dividing the number of 17-year-old A level students by the number of 15-year-old pupils two years before. It should be noted however that this is not based on data which tracks the same pupils over time.

  The following figures approximately show the percentage of 15-year-old pupils who went on to take A levels at 17 in the North West region and in England.

  1995

  1996

  1997

  1998

  1999

  2000

  2001

  North West

  28

  29

  29

  29

  30

  34

  33

  England

  33

  33

  34

  34

  35

  38

  38

  Similar figures for the Merseyside area and St. Helen's LEA are less accurate due to where students choose to pursue their further education studies.

  Advertising/Marketing
  Mr. Damian Green
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much money his Department spent on advertising and marketing in each month since 1997. [137571]

  Mr. Charles Clarke
  Information for expenditure per month for the period and areas specified could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

  Expenditure from the Department's central advertising and publicity budget is as follows:

  £000

  1997–98

  10,879

  1998–99

  13,426

  1999–2000

  9,902

  2000–01

  14,595

  2001–02

  11,688

  2002–03

  14,089

  2003–04 (to date)

  2,937

  542W
  pupils in secondary schools in (a) the North West region, (b) Merseyside, (c) St. Helens LEA and (d) England, two years before each of the years shown in (i).

  In addition to expenditure from this central budget, expenditure from budgets allocated to individual programmes will also include spend on publicity and marketing related activity. It is not possible, except at disproportionate cost, to separately identify all such expenditure. However, it is possible to identify separately expenditure on advertising, and this is as follows:

  £000

  1997–98

  9,992

  1998–99

  15,673

  1999–2000

  11,900

  2000–01

  29,066

  2001–02

  20,489

  2002–03

  11,261

  2003–04 (to date)

  11,210

  Information on expenditure by agencies and non-departmental public bodies is not held centrally.

  Domestic Violence
  Ms Shipley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what plans he has to increase support for the non-abusive parent in cases of domestic violence where children are involved. [134909]

  Margaret Hodge
  The Government have proposed a number of measures which will improve the support and protection available to the children and non-abusive partner of a violent parent. These were set out in our consultation paper "Safety and Justice: The Government's Proposals on Domestic Violence" and include:making sure that child contact arrangements in domestic violence cases guarantee the safety of all parties. We will be expanding the provision of supervised child contact centres and services. Where domestic violence (or other safety issues) features in contact cases it is vital that the families are referred to services that are able to meet their needs, especially on safety. Baroness Ashton of Upholland and I plan to announce successful applicants for funding from a joint Children's Fund/

  543W
  Sure Start Investment Stream of £2.9 million for new supervised contact services. We expect new services to commence from the New Year;
  improving the support available to children and young people affected by domestic violence, both for the benefit of the children and young people themselves and to relieve pressures on their parents;
  providing help for victims of domestic violence as early as possible, and making sure that the civil and criminal law offer the maximum protection to all victims, children and adults, to prevent the violence recurring;
  providing advice and information to victims on how to get access to support services and legal protection;
  ensuring an effective police response when victims report domestic violence and ensuring that victims are not deterred by the way they will be treated at any stage of the judicial process;
  improving the sharing of information so that child and adult victims are better protected and supported;
  increasing the full range of accommodation options, including supporting people to stay in their own home. Children can particularly suffer by moving away from their friends, school, pets and other familiar surroundings;
  helping victims who have ended or left a violent relationship to rebuild their lives; and
  raising awareness about domestic violence among the general public and key professionals;

  The Government are currently considering the responses to these proposals.Our Green Paper Every Child Matters recognises that supporting parents and carers is a significant factor in our general strategy to improve children's lives. It sets out the Government's vision of better integrated services for all children that are focused around the needs of the child, to ensure no child falls through the net and all children get the support they need to fulfil their potential:
  integrating services for children and families within Children's Trusts. This will particularly benefit the families in which children are affected by domestic violence as they may have a range of physical, emotional and psychological needs and may often be in temporary accommodation or moving around;
  providing access to specialist services. Being a victim of, or witnessing, domestic violence can have a long-term negative impact on children's behaviour, health and educational outcomes. The Green Paper sets out how the Government will seek to ensure specialist provision is available so that all children achieve and are in good physical and mental health;
  strengthening child protection arrangements. The Green Paper sets out proposals for changes to arrangements for safeguarding children, which we hope will lead to a better response to the needs of vulnerable children including those affected by domestic violence;
  improving information sharing will ensure that difficulties are picked up earlier and acted upon in a coherent way. We are consulting on the best way to use information about families and parents in such cases to build a complete picture of the risks to the child;
  improving both universal and targeted support for parents. Such support will be appropriate and non-stigmatising. It will help parents in supporting their children and the universal support in particular will be a gateway to more specialist services, for example, support for families affected by domestic violence; and
  improving maternity services. 30 per cent. of domestic violence cases start during pregnancy and existing violence often escalates during it. Through the National Service Framework for Children, Young People and Maternity Services the Government are piloting routine antenatal questioning for domestic violence by midwives.

  Education Spending (North-west)
  Mr. Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much was spent on(a) primary education, (b) secondary education, (c) tertiary education and (d) further education in the north west in each year since 1992. [134904]

  Mr. Miliband
  The information requested is contained in the following tables.

  Primary, secondary and further education expenditure in the north west since 1992

  pre-Primary

  Primary

  pre-Primary & Primary

  Secondary

  1992–93

  n/a

  n/a

  1,44,841

  1,153,066

  1993–94

  n/a

  n/a

  1,158,010

  1,049,978

  1994–95

  n/a

  n/a

  1,202,426

  1,089,653

  1995–96

  n/a

  n/a

  1,185,076

  1,000,413

  1996–97

  n/a

  n/a

  1,213,943

  1,018,336

  1997–98

  n/a

  n/a

  1,221,486

  1,027,733

  1998–99

  n/a

  n/a

  1,321,152

  1,089,898

  1999–2000

  46,199

  1,394,850

  1,441,049

  1,286,311

  2000–01

  67,355

  1,522,508

  1,589,863

  1,407,303

  2001–02

  91,379

  1,676,685

  1,768,064

  1,588,239

  Notes:

  1. North West includes the following LEAs:

  Knowsley, Liverpool, St. Helens, Sefton, Wirral, Bolton, Bury,
  Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, Tameside,
  Trafford, Wigan, Cheshire, Halton, Warrington, Lancashire,
  Blackburn with Darwen, Blackpool and Cumbria.

  2. Net Current Expenditure includes expenditure within schools
  and also that incurred centrally by the LEA's.

  3. Cash term figures are rounded to the nearest £1,000.

  4. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the Section 52 outturn statement in 1999–2000.

  5. Data is as reported by LEAs.

  6. Data is drawn from the DfES Section 52 outturn statements
  from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously.

  Further education funding allocations to institutions in the north west since 1992

  Further education

  1992–93

  341,320,591

  1993–94

  360,421,769

  1994–95

  379,275,174

  1995–96

  421,366,768

  1996–97

  449,925,071

  1997–98

  458,258,684

  1998–99

  464,615,551

  1999–2000

  475,546,775

  2000–01

  500,439,180

  2001–02

  530,460,995

  2002–03

  552,474,473

  2003–04

  568,368,735

  Notes:

  1. Tertiary Education funding is not reported separately from Further Education funding.

  2. 1992/93 funding allocation was from LEAs.

  3. 1993/94 was a 16 month allocation from 1 April 1993 to July 1994 (first year of funding from the FEFC).

  4. From 1 August 1994 funding was allocated from 1 August—31 July.

  5.Cash terms data reported.

  Fair Trade (Universities)
  John Barrett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what action his Department has taken to promote fair trade accreditation at UK universities. [138388]
  545W
  Alan Johnson
  The Government are committed to encouraging responsible trade and encourages all organisations to consider whether their purchasing policies can be adjusted to benefit the poor in developing countries. Through the Department for International Development, the Government have provided £0.5million to support UK development awareness and education campaigns centred around Fairtrade over the past two years. Higher education institutions are however independent, autonomous bodies, entirely responsible for their own trading arrangements, and we cannot directly influence their trading choices.

  Falling Rolls
  Mr. Willis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many(a) primary and (b) secondary schools in England have falling rolls; and if he will make a statement. [136792]

  Mr. Miliband
  In January 2003, out of a total of 17,861 maintained primary schools, there were 10,100 schools that showed a decrease in pupil numbers of at least one pupil compared to January 2002.

  Also in January 2003, out of a total of 3,436 maintained secondary schools, there were 1,017 schools that showed a decrease in pupil numbers of at least one pupil compared to January 2002.

  Funding
  Matthew Green
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many bodies receive some or all their funding from his Department; what funding was received by each body in each year since 1997; and who the chief executive is of each body. [133677]

  Mr. Stephen Twigg
  The information on funding of executive non departmental public bodies is published annually in the Departmental Report. Information on the chief executives is contained in the individual annual reports issued by each of the executive non departmental public bodies. Information on other bodies is not available, except at disproportionate cost.

  Gifted Pupils
  David Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what differences there are in the amounts that rural and urban areas received for gifted pupils; and what the reasons are for the differences. [138385]

  Mr. Miliband
  The majority of dedicated funding for gifted and talented education is made available through Excellence in Cities, including Excellence Clusters and Aim Higher. These programmes are targeted at areas of greatest deprivation which are concentrated in urban areas although not exclusively so. Each area receives only a notional allocation for work on gifted and talented education. It is for the local partnership or cluster to decide how much to spend on this, relative to other dimensions of their programme.

  Local education authorities and schools can also use funding from other sources for gifted and talented education, and choose whether or not to take up a range of national resources available to them. These decisions are influenced by a variety of local priorities and needs.

  GNVQs
  Mr. Gibb
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills pursuant to his answer of 27 October 2003,Official Report, columns 73–6W, on GNVQs, what the total percentage was of pupils achieving 5 A*-C grades at GCSE/GNVQ level was in each year since 1996; and if he will make a statement. [136715]

  Mr. Miliband
  The percentage of pupils achieving 5+ A*-C grades at GCSE/GNVQ are as follows:

  Percentage

  1995/96

  44.5

  1996/97

  45.1

  1997/98

  46.3

  1998/99

  47.9

  1999/2000

  49.2

  2000/01

  50.0

  2001/02

  51.6

  2002/03 (Provisional)

  52.6

  This information can be found in Statistical First Releases and Statistical Volumes on the Department's Research and Statistics website, at http://www. dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway

  Graduate Tax
  Paul Farrelly
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what discussions he had with colleagues from other departments on variants of a graduate tax as alternatives to fund higher education. [138549]

  Alan Johnson
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has had a number of discussions with colleagues across Government on all aspects of the proposals set out in the recent in the White Paper "The future of higher education" (Cm 5735).

  Paul Farrelly
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills pursuant to his letter of 11 April, on student funding, for what reasons it was stated that a graduate tax arrangement could not run alongside the existing student loan repayment scheme. [138562]

  Alan Johnson
  The circular referred to is a party political document. I will write to my hon. Friend separately.

  Higher Education
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what proportion of students from(a) the North West Region, (b) Merseyside, (c) St. Helens and (d) England in higher education received (i) a grant and (ii) a student loan in each year since 1997. [138000]

  Alan Johnson
  The support arrangements under the mandatory awards scheme for eligible undergraduate students domiciled in England and Wales on courses which began before 1 September 1998 consisted of payment, usually in full, of their tuition fees, a grant towards their maintenance, depending on income, and a non-income assessed loan. New students in academic year 1998/99, with a few exceptions, were expected to contribute up to £1,000 a year towards the cost of their tuition depending on family income. In 1998/99,
  547W
  income-assessed grants on average only formed about a quarter of the support available and all students were entitled to a non income-assessed loan which comprised the remaining three-quarters of support available and which will be repayable on an income contingent basis. New entrants to higher education from 1999/2000, together with those who started in 1998/99, received support for living costs solely through loans which are partly income-assessed. Grants for living costs are no longer available except for some limited allowances, e.g. for students with dependants; students who require assistance with travel, books and equipment; lone parent students; students leaving care; students with dependant children who are eligible for school meals grants; and disabled students.

  National level data are published annually in the Department's Statistical First Releases (SFRs) (SFR 11/ 2003 for 2001/02). Data on grants are collected from the local education authorities (LEAs) to produce national estimates and the data collection exercise does not allow for the production of firm figures below this level, and therefore data by region and local education authority are not available. The percentage of English domiciled students receiving a grant is shown in the table.

  Academic years 1997/98 to 2001/02, England1

  Percentage of students receiving a full or partial maintenance grant

  1997/98

  Student Support Scheme2

  Not applicable

  Mandatory awards3

  72

  All students

  72

  1998/99

  Student Support Scheme2,4

  71

  Mandatory awards3

  69

  All students

  70

  1999/2000

  Student Support Scheme2,5

  5

  Mandatory awards3

  69

  All students

  30

  2000/01

  Student Support Scheme2,5

  7

  Mandatory awards3

  65

  All students

  14

  2001/02

  Student Support Scheme2,5

  7

  Mandatory Awards3

  64

  All students

  9

  1 Awards made by local education authorities in England to students normally domiciled in their area.

  2 Students who entered higher education from 1998/99.

  3 Students who entered higher education up to 1997/98 and those who entered in 1998/99 to whom the existing arrangements still applied. These students are eligible for income assessed maintenance grants and non means tested loans repayable on a mortgage style, fixed term, basis.

  4 Student Support Scheme students in 1998/99 received support for maintenance through income-assessed grants (comprising about a quarter of the support available) and non income assessed student loans (comprising about three-quarters of the support available) repayable on an income contingent basis.

  5 Data on maintenance expenditure for student support scheme students from 1999/2000 relate to additional allowances/grants available to eligible students for extra help depending on their circumstances, e.g. students with disabilities, students with dependents, single parent students, those incurring certain travel
  548W
  costs, and those who have recently left care. Includes students who are eligible for allowances/grants but who may not receive the means tested grants following income assessment.

  Source

  Form F503G survey of local education authorities on student support school meals grants; and disabled students.

  The percentage of students taking out a student loan is shown in the table.

  Academic years 1997/98 to 2001/02

  Percentage of students receiving a loan1

  Income contingent loans (Student Support Scheme students) 2

  Mortgage style loans (mandatory awards)3

  1997/984

  UK

  Not applicable

  64

  1998/994

  UK

  69

  68

  1999/2000

  England5

  75

  65

  North West5

  82

  Not available

  Merseysides5,6

  81

  Not available

  2000/01

  England5

  80

  67

  North West5,6

  85

  Not available

  Merseyside5,7

  88

  Not available

  2001/02

  England5

  82

  72

  North West5,6

  84

  Not available

  Merseyside5,7

  88

  Not available

  1 New student support arrangements were introduced from academic year 1998/99. New students in 1998/99 (apart from certain specified exceptions) received support for maintenance expenditure through means-tested grants (comprising about a quarter of the support available) and non income-assessed student loans (comprising about three-quarters of the support available). From 1999/2000, students who entered higher education after 1998/99 received support for maintenance expenditure through loans, of which approximately three-quarters of the value was non income-assessed. Loans made under these arrangements are repayable on an income contingent basis.

  2 Excludes the fixed rate loans (£500) for eligible part-time students, introduced in September 2000.

  3 Data on mandatory awards are available only at England level.

  4 Data up to an including 1998/99 are not available below United Kingdom level.

  5Data at a level below England have been taken from available data and may include a small number of loans which have been authorised for payment but not paid: England data include only those loans actually paid.

  6 The North West Government Office Region.

  7 Merseyside includes Knowsley, Liverpool, Sefton, St. Helens and Wirral local education authorities.

  Source

  Student Loans Company.

  Information on the region or local education authority of domicile of applicants for student loans is not available prior to academic year 1999/2000; data on the domicile of students taking out fixed rate mortgage style loans (normally those who entered higher education before 1998/99) is not available because applications are made through their education institution. The number of students estimated to be eligible for loans is compiled from data provided by the Higher Education Statistics Agency (covering HEIs)

  549W
  and from separate surveys covering higher education students in further education colleges. These estimates do not allow for robust disaggregation to LEA level.

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many students from(a) the North West Region, (b) Merseyside, (c) St. Helens and (d) England in higher education paid up-front fees in each year since 1997. [138001]

  Alan Johnson
  The student support arrangements up to, and including, academic year 1997/98 included the payment of tuition fees in full from public funds on behalf of eligible students domiciled in England and Wales. New student support arrangements came into effect at the start of academic year 1998/99 when new entrants to higher education were expected to contribute towards the cost of their tuition. The amount of the contribution depends on family income.

  The number of students in England in academic years 1998/99 to 2001/02 (latest year for which data are available) who have been assessed to make a partial or full contribution towards the cost of their tuition is shown in the table.

  Student Support Scheme Student number (thousand)1,2

  Academic year

  Full or partial contribution towards the cost of tuition from student/parents/spouse/partner3

  1998/99

  125

  1999/2000

  244

  2000/01

  375

  2001/02

  402

  1Contributions towards the cost of tuition are assessed by local education authorities in England for students normally domiciled in their area and studying in the UK.

  2 Data for academic year 1998/99 comprise the cohort of students who entered higher education in that year; data for 1999/2000 comprise the 1998/99 and 1999/2000 cohorts; data for 2000/01 comprise those who entered in 1998/99, 1999/2000 and 2000/01; and data for 2001/02 comprise those students still in study from 1998/99 onwards and new entrants from 2001/02.

  3 Includes students who withdrew from their course before the fee due date (and therefore no fee payment was made by the local education authority). In 1998/99, includes estimation for students who, because they did not expect to receive a contribution towards the cost of their tuition from public funds, did not make an application to their local authority.

  Source

  F503G survey of local education authorities.

  National level data are published annually in the Department's Statistical First Releases (SFRs) (SFR 11/ 2003 for 2001/02).

  Data are collected from the local education authorities (LEAs) to produce national estimates and the data collection exercise does not allow for the production of firm figures below this level, and therefore data by region and local education authority are not available.

  Key Stage 2
  Mr. Flook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what proportion of children in(a) Wiltshire, (b) Dorset,(c) Devon and (d) Somerset gained level 4 and above at Key Stage 2 in (i) English and (ii) mathematics in each year since 1997. [138962]
  550W
  Mr. Miliband
  The percentage of 11-year-olds in(a) Wiltshire, (b) Dorset, (c) Devon and (d) Somerset who gained level 4 and above at Key Stage 2 in (i) English and (ii) mathematics in each year since 1997 are as follows:

  LEA

  2003

  2002

  2001

  2000

  1999

  1998

  1997

  English

  Wiltshire

  75

  74

  73

  75

  73

  67

  67

  Dorset

  76

  78

  77

  79

  74

  68

  68

  Devon1

  74

  74

  76

  75

  72

  66

  62

  Somerset

  74

  74

  74

  75

  73

  67

  67

  England

  75

  75

  75

  75

  71

  65

  63

  Mathematics

  Wiltshire

  73

  73

  70

  71

  69

  62

  67

  Dorset

  73

  72

  70

  73

  71

  60

  67

  Devon

  74

  73

  71

  72

  70

  60

  62

  Somerset

  72

  72

  69

  70

  70

  58

  63

  England

  73

  73

  71

  72

  69

  59

  62

  1For 1997, Devon LEA included schools in Torbay and Plymouth. Following the local Government reorganisation in 1998, Torbay and Plymouth schools are excluded from the Devon figures.

  Note:

  The 2003 information is based on provisional data.

  Literacy
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the literacy level is in(a) the constituency of Romford and (b) other population centres in Essex. [136476]

  Mr. Miliband
  The constituency of Romford falls within the London borough of Havering education authority. The Key Stage 2 English results for Havering are above average with 80 per cent. of pupils achieving the expected level for their age (level 4+) in 2003, an 11 percentage points increase since 1998, when the National Literacy Strategy was introduced. Nationally, 75 per cent. of pupils achieved level 4+ in English at Key Stage 2 in 2003, a rise of 10 percentage points since 1998.

  The 2003 Key Stage 2 results for Havering, compared with those for the London boroughs of Redbridge and Barking and Dagenham, and with the unitary authorities of Southend-on-Sea and Thurrock, and with Essex local education authority are set out in the table. The table shows the percentage of pupils who achieved the expected level for their age (level 4+) in the Key Stage 2 English tests since 1998 in these areas:

  1998

  1999

  2000

  2001

  2002

  20031

  Havering

  71

  78

  78

  79

  80

  80

  Redbridge

  70

  72

  77

  77

  78

  77

  Barking and

  60

  65

  72

  72

  69

  70

  Dagenham

  Essex

  65

  71

  76

  75

  76

  77

  Southend-on-Sea

  63

  69

  72

  73

  75

  74

  Thurrock

  55

  60

  65

  68

  68

  66

  1 Provisional

  Local Education Authorities
  Mr. Chaytor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills when he expects the 2002–03 contextual value added indicators to be distributed to local education authorities; and if he will place a copy in the Library. [136817]
  551W
  Mr. Miliband
  The Department will share contextual value added information for secondary schools with individual LEAs before the end of this term. The analysis will be based on provisional data for 2003 results at Key Stage 3 and Key Stage 4, and therefore subject to slight revision. The information is provided on a confidential basis in order to help authorities to review and evaluate the performance of their schools, and to challenge any underperformance.

  We have no plans to publish this analysis.

  London Universities
  Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the drop-out rate for universities in London was by(a) percentage and (b) number in each year since 1997. [138665]

  Alan Johnson
  The available information on non continuation rates is contained in "Performance Indicators in Higher Education", published by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). The figures cover full-time first degree courses only, and show, for each individual HE institution in the UK, the numbers and proportion of entrants who failed to complete their course. Copies of the HEFCE publication are available for students starting courses in 1996–97, 1997–98, 1998–99 and 1999–00 in the House Library. The next edition, covering students starting courses in 2000–01, is scheduled for publication in autumn 2003.

  NVQs
  Rob Marris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many NVQs were completed in further education colleges in(a) 2001–02 and (b) 2002–03. [136977]

  Alan Johnson
  The National Information System for Vocational Qualifications (NISVQ) showed that 146,000 NVQs/SVQs of a total 315,000 NVQ/SVQs were achieved1 in further education colleges/tertiary colleges in England in 2001/02. The equivalent figure for 2002/03 is not yet available.

  1NISVQ collects information on full NVQ/SVQs awarded. It does not collect information on those qualifications which were completed but not achieved.

  Rob Marris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what proportion of NVQs were completed in further education colleges in(a) 2001–02 and (b) 2002–03. [136978]

  Alan Johnson
  The National Information System for Vocational Qualifications (NISVQ) showed that 46.4 per cent. of a total 315,000 NVQ/SVQs were achieved1 in further education colleges/tertiary colleges in England in 2001/02. The equivalent figure for 2002/03 is not yet available.

  1NISVQ collects information on full NVQ/SVQs awarded. It does not collect information on those qualifications which were completed but not achieved.

  Performance and Assessment Reports
  Mr. Chaytor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills when he expects the 2002–03 Ofsted PANDA information to be distributed to schools; and if he will place a copy in the Library. [136818]
  552W
  Mr. Miliband
  This is a matter for Ofsted. HM Chief Inspector, David Bell, will write to my hon. friend and place a copy of his letter in the Library.

  Performance-related Pay
  Mr. Jack
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills whether the costs for every local education authority's performance-related pay expenditure for 2004–05 will be funded in full by government grant, including the on-going costs arising from performance awards in earlier years. [136889]

  Mr. Miliband
  The threshold performance payments made by schools are refunded in full by the Department, including for on-costs. In 2003–04 we are also contributing a further £205 million towards other performance-related payments to teachers, principally to help meet the costs of the upper pay scale. This will be sufficient to meet all schools' continuing commitments arising from the performance-related pay grant provided in 2002–03 and will support the costs of similar progress along the Upper Pay Scale for those teachers becoming eligible for performance points in September 2003.

  For 2004–05, the £205 million we have allocated this year will be uprated at least in line with the headline pay settlement. And if proper arrangements for point 3 of the upper pay scale can be settled with the stakeholders, additional resources will be allocated from September 2004.

  Pupil Funding
  Mr. Damian Green
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the standard deviation from the mean per pupil funding is across(a) primary and (b) secondary schools in 2003–04. [137200]

  Mr. Miliband
  The information requested is contained in the following table:

  Per pupil funding for primary and secondary schools for the 2003–04 session

  £

  Per pupil funding

  Mean

  Standard deviation

  Primary schools

  2,660

  642

  Secondary schools

  3,269

  556

  Notes

  1. LEA funding to schools as reported by LEAs.

  2. The data are taken from the 2003–04 Section 52 Budget table 2.

  3. Per pupil funding includes schools budget share, devolved standards fund and school standards grant.

  School Funding
  Mr. Brady
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the average per pupil funding for(a) primary schools, (b) secondary schools and (c) special schools was in each local education authority area for (i) 2002–03 and (ii) 2003–04. [133603]

  Mr. Miliband
  The information requested has been placed in the Libraries.

  School Meals
  Dr. Kumar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many(a) primary and (b) secondary school students are eligible for free school meals in each English local education authority area. [137546]

  Mr. Miliband
  The information requested has been placed in the House of Commons Library.

  School Workforce Agreement
  Mr. Jack
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much he has included in his 2004–05 Schools budget for the full implementation of the School Workforce Agreement. [136887]

  Mr. Miliband
  On 29 October we announced a package of measures to deliver greater stability in school budgets for 2004–05. These measures provide headroom over the average cost pressures that schools face to help schools implement the National Agreement on workforce reform.

  Maintained secondary schools: appeals lodged by parents against non-admission of their children 1996/97 to 2001/02

  Somerset local education authority

  Appeals heard

  Appeals decided in parent's favour

  Number of admissions

  Number of appeals

  Number

  Percentage1

  Number

  Percentage2

  1996/97

  6,163

  115

  88

  76.5

  43

  48.9

  1997/98

  6,333

  186

  157

  84.4

  90

  57.3

  1998/99

  6,466

  160

  122

  76.3

  60

  49.2

  1999/2000

  6,869

  141

  83

  58.9

  47

  56.6

  2000/01

  6,787

  321

  190

  59.2

  127

  66.8

  2001/02

  37,700

  361

  236

  65.4

  153

  64.8

  1Number of appeals heard expressed as a percentage of number of appeals lodged.

  2 Number of appeals decided in parent's favour expressed as a percentage of number of appeals heard.

  3 Due to changes in the underlying data collection the number of admissions shown here is not directly comparable with those for earlier years. In previous years the number of admissions reflected the total number of pupils of the school's basic entry age who started school at the start of the academic year. In 2001/02 the coverage is extended to all new admissions to schools regardless of pupils' age. Rounded to nearest 100.

  Source

  Annual Schools' Census and Admission Appeals Survey

  Secondary School Places
  Mr. Challen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many pupils entered secondary education in the Leeds Local Education Authority over the last five years; and how many

  Maintained secondary schools: appeals lodged by parents against non-admission of their children, 1997/98 to 2001/02

  Leeds Local Education Authority

  Appeals heard

  Appeals decided in parent's favour

  Number of admissions

  Number of appeals lodged

  Number

  Percentage1

  Number

  Percentage2

  1997/98

  8,375

  1,186

  664

  56.0

  337

  50.8

  1998/99

  8,375

  1,707

  996

  58.3

  457

  45.9

  1999/2000

  8,360

  1,149

  879

  76.5

  407

  46.3

  2000/01

  8,637

  1,646

  1,095

  66.5

  386

  35.3

  2001/02

  9,1003

  1,585

  981

  61.9

  394

  40.2

  1 Number of appeals heard expressed as a percentage of number of appeals lodged.

  2 Number of appeals decided in parent's favour expressed as a percentage of number of appeals heard.

  3 Due to changes in the underlying data collection, the number of admissions shown here is not directly comparable with those for earlier years. In previous years, the number of admissions reflected the total number of pupils of the school's basic entry age who started school at the start of the academic year. In 2001/02, the coverage is extended to all new admissions to schools regardless of pupils' age. Rounded to nearest 100.

  Source

  Annual Schools' Census and Admission Appeals Survey.
  554W
  In addition, much progress can also be made from schools managing their total resources—people and resources—in different ways. For example, in September 2004, a limit of 38 hours will be introduced on the amount of cover an individual teacher can be required to undertake. Although the majority of teachers will not be affected by this initial limit, it provides an opportunity for schools to examine the use of supply teachers for providing short-term cover, and developing the use of cover supervision by trained support staff.

  Secondary Education (Somerset)
  Mr. Flook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many pupils entered secondary education in Somerset in each of the last six years; and how many secondary school admission appeals there were in the Somerset local education authority in the same periods, broken down by(a) successful and (b) unsuccessful appeals. [137382]

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

  secondary school admission appeals there were in Leeds LEA over the same period, broken down between (a) successful and (b) unsuccessful appeals. [136786]

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

  Student Finance
  Mr. Clappison
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what assessment has been made of the average indebtedness of students upon graduation in each of the last 10 years. [137475]

  Alan Johnson
  The table shows the average student loan debt at the point at which they entered repayment status for borrowers who became liable to repay their loans in financial years 1999–2000 to 2002–03. Data for earlier years are not available.

  Average student loan debt on entering year entered repayment status1

  £

  Financial year entered repayment status2

  Mortgage style loans3

  Income contingent loans4

  Part-time loans5

  1999–2000

  3,530

  6—

  6—

  2000–01

  4.090

  2,300

  6—

  2001–02

  4,490

  3,410

  450

  2002–03

  5,150

  5,980

  520

  1 Data rounded to nearest £10. Includes interest accrued up to the point of entering repayment status. Excludes any early voluntary repayments which may have been made before borrowers enter repayment status. Debt of borrowers with more than one loan type has been split between types.

  2 Borrowers enter repayment status in the April following their graduation or otherwise leaving their course. Borrowers may have accounts in more than one cohort year of entering repayment.

  3 Loans made to students who entered higher education up to 1997–98 or who entered in 1998–99 under existing arrangements. Includes loans repayable to the private sector following the sale of two trenches of student loans.

  4 Loans, repayable on an income contingent basis, available to students who entered higher education from academic year 1998–99. These loans were subject to a repayment holiday until April 2000. Includes hardship loans.

  5 Fixed-rate loans made to eligible part-time students, introduced in September 2000.

  6 Not applicable.

  Source

  Student Loans Company

  The first cohort of students on a three-year degree course who entered higher education under the new student support arrangements became liable for repayment in April 2002. That, and earlier, cohorts includes a disproportionate number of students on shorter courses as well as those who have left higher education before completing their courses. Therefore the average level of debt will not be representative of the average debt experienced by those who complete their courses.

  Borrowers are liable to repay their loans from the April following graduation or otherwise leaving their course. Students who started their course from the 1998–99 academic year will repay income contingent loans. Loans for those who started their course before 1998–99 are repayable on a mortgage style basis.

  The Department does not have annual data for HE students' total debt on graduation (including bank loans, overdrafts, credit cards, and informal debts to family and friends). The Student income and Expenditure Survey (SIES), which collects this information is undertaken every three to four years. Findings from the last survey in 1998–99 showed that the average total anticipated debt of all full-time
  556W
  students graduating in 1998–99 was £3,462. The Department has conducted a SIES for the 2002–03 academic year which will be published shortly.

  Student Loans
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the average student loan for a student from(a) the North West region, (b) Merseyside, (c) St. Helens and (d) England was in each year since 1997. [137996]

  Alan Johnson
  Information on the region or Local Education Authority of domicile of applicants for student loans is not available prior to academic year 1999/2000; data on the domicile of students taking out fixed rate mortgage style loans (normally those who entered higher education before 1998/99) is not available because applications are made through their education institution.

  The available information on students taking out income contingent loans is shown in the table:

  Average income-contingent loan1 taken out by domicile of student–academic years 1999/2000, 2000/01 and 2001/02

  Average income contingent student loan1 taken out, 2,3 (£)

  Academic year

  Domicile4

  1999/2000

  2000/01

  2001/02

  North West5,6

  3,130

  3,090

  3,130

  Merseyside6,7

  3,110

  3,060

  3,100

  St. Helens6

  3,030

  3,000

  3,040

  England

  3,180

  3,160

  3,190

  1 New student support arrangements were introduced from academic year 1998/99. From 1999/2000 students who entered higher education after 1998/99 received support for maintenance expenditure through loans, of which approximately three quarters of the value was non income-assessed. Loans made under these arrangements are repayable on an income contingent basis. The ratio of support for mandatory award holders, i.e. those who entered higher education up to 1997/98, was roughly 50 per cent. means-tested grant and 50 per cent. non means-tested loan repayable on a mortgage style basis.

  2 Figures have been rounded to the nearest £10.

  3 Excludes the fixed rate loan (£500) for eligible part-time students, introduced in September 2000.

  4 From academic year 1999/2000, student support students apply to their Local Education Authority for assessment of their eligibility for student support, including student loans, irrespective of their place of study. Mandatory award holders, i.e. those eligible for mortgage style loans, continue to make applications for student loans through their education institution.

  5 The North West Government Office Region.

  6 Data at a level below England have been taken from available data and may include a small number of loans which have been authorised for payment but not paid: England data are only those loans actually paid.

  7Merseyside includes Knowsley, Liverpool, Sefton, St. Helens and Wirral Local Education Authorities.

  Source

  Student Loans Company

  Average mortgage style loan1 taken out(£)2

  Academic year

  Domicile3

  1999/2000

  2000/01

  2001/02

  England

  1,470

  1,460

  1,520

  1 New student support arrangements were introduced from academic year 1998/99. From 1999/2000 students who entered higher education after 1998/99 received support for maintenance
  expenditure through loans, of which approximately three quarters

  557W
  of the value was non income-assessed. Loans made under these arrangements are repayable on an income contingent basis. The ratio of support for mandatory award holders, i.e. those who entered higher education up to 1997/98, was roughly 50 per cent. means-tested grant and 50 per cent. non means-tested loan repayable on a mortgage style basis.

  2Figures have been rounded to the nearest £10

  3 From academic year 1999/2000, student support students apply to their Local Education Authority for assessment of their eligibility for student support, including student loans, irrespective of their place of study. Mandatory award holders, i.e. those eligible for mortgage style loans, continue to make applications for student loans through their education institution.

  Source

  Student Loans Company

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the average size of(a) grants, (b) student loans and (c) the debt acquired to enable students to finance higher education has been in each year since 1997. [138043]

  Alan Johnson
  The support arrangements under the mandatory awards scheme for eligible undergraduate students domiciled in England and Wales on courses which began before 1 September 1998 consisted of payment, usually in full, of their tuition fees, a grant towards their maintenance, depending on income, and a non-income assessed loan. New students in academic year 1998/99, with a few exceptions, were expected to contribute up to £1,000 a year towards the cost of their tuition depending on family income. In 1998/99, income-assessed grants on average only formed about a quarter of the support available and all students were entitled to a non income-assessed loan which comprised the remaining three quarters of support available and which will be repayable on an income contingent basis. New entrants to higher education from 1999/2000, together with those who started in 1998/99, received support for living costs solely through loans which are partly income-assessed. Grants for living costs are no longer available except for some limited allowances, e.g. for students with dependants; students who require assistance with travel, books and equipment; lone parent students; students leaving care; students with dependant children who are eligible for school meals grants; and disabled students.

  The overall maintenance grant and student loan is shown in the table.

  Academic years 1997/98 to 2001/02

  England and Wales

  Average maintenance per award holder (£) England and Wales1

  Average loan (£)1.2

  1997/98

  Student Support Scheme3

  n/a

  n/a

  Mandatory Awards4

  1,210

  1,5308

  All Students

  1,210

  1,5308

  1998/99

  Students Support Scheme3.5

  690

  2,5808

  Mandatory Awards4

  1,190

  1,5208

  All Students

  1,030

  1,8708

  1999/2000

  Students Support Scheme3.6.7

  120

  3,180

  Mandatory Awards4

  1,150

  1,470

  All Students

  510

  2,590

  558W

  Academic years 1997/98 to 2001/02

  England and Wales

  Average maintenance per award holder (£) England and Wales1

  Average loan (£)1.2

  2000/01

  Student Support Scheme3,6,7

  140

  3,160

  Mandatory Awards4

  1,130

  1,460

  All students

  270

  2,960

  2001/02

  Student Support Scheme3,6,7

  170

  3,190

  Mandatory Awards4

  1,250

  1,520

  All students

  200

  3,150

  1 Rounded to the nearest £10.

  2 Averages relate to the amount of loan taken out in that academic year; excludes hardship loans and the fixed rate (£500) loans for part-time students.

  3 Students who entered higher education from 1998/99. These students are eligible for student loans repayable on an income contingent basis.

  4 Students who entered higher education up to those who entered in 1998/99 to whom the existing arrangements still 1997/98 and applied. These students are eligible for non means-tested loans repayable on a mortgage style, fixed term, basis.

  5 New students in 1998/99 received support for maintenance through income-assessed grants(comprising about a quarter of the support available) and non income-assessed student loans (comprising about three quarters of the support available).

  6 From 1999/2000, students who entered higher education from 1998/99 onwards received support for maintenance through loans, of which approximately three quarters of the value was non income-assessed.

  7 Data on maintenance expenditure for student support scheme students from 1999/2000 relates to additional allowances/grants available to eligible students for extra help depending on their circumstances, e.g. students with disabilities, students with dependents, single parent students, those incurring certain travel costs, and those who have recently left care.

  8 Data are for UK.

  n/a = not applicable

  Source

  Form F503G survey of local education authorities on student support and Student Loans Company

  The Department does not collect annual data for HE students' total debt on graduation (including bank loans, overdrafts, credit cards, and informal debts to family and friends). The Student Income and Expenditure Survey (SIES), which collects this information is undertaken every three to four years. Findings from the last survey in 1998/99 showed that the average total anticipated debt of all full-time students graduating in 1998/99 was £3,462. The Department has conducted a SIES for the 2002/03 academic year which will be published shortly.

  Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what targets(a) his Department and (b) the Student Loans Company have for delivering loan payments; and what assessment he has made of whether these targets have been met. [138669]

  Alan Johnson
  We set performance targets for the Student Loans Company each year. The latest figures on performance against targets are for 2001–02. The 2001–02 targets for delivering mortgage style and income contingent loan payments to students were that the Company should pay 100 per cent. of loan payments within 17 days of receiving an actionable application form. For mortgage style loans, 99 per cent. payments were made within that timescale; for income contingent
  559W
  loans, 98.5 per cent. payments were made within the timescale. Figures showing performance against targets for 2002–03 will be available shortly.

  Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many(a) new students and (b) continuing students received their loans within (i) two weeks, (ii) one to two months, (iii) two to three months and (iv) four to five months of sending their applications for academic year 2003–04. [138670]

  Alan Johnson
  The information is not available in the requested format. All students who applied by the published deadlines with the correct information have now been paid.

  Ann Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what provisions are in place to support students awaiting loan payments. [138671]

  Alan Johnson
  The Hardship/Access to Learning Fund is made available to institutions with HE students to provide discretionary financial help for both full and part-time undergraduate and postgraduate students. Students can receive an emergency short-term loan from the Fund, where their first loan payment has been delayed beyond the start of term.

  Sure Start
  John Mann
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what plans he has to extend Sure Start's Business Success for Childcare programme to more areas of England, with particular reference to Bassetlaw. [138213]

  Margaret Hodge
  The Business Success for Childcare Programme delivers free business support training to childcare providers through a series of workshops supported by workbooks.

  There are no workshops currently scheduled in the Bassetlaw area. However, 16 workshops have taken place or are due to take place nearby in Mansfield and Nottingham. In addition, the training materials developed for the Programme can be easily accessed via our website www.surestart.gov.uk/support4business.

  Sustainable Development
  Ms Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what steps he is taking to ensure that the Department's bid to the forthcoming Government Spending Round contributes toward the UK's objectives on sustainable development. [138689]

  Mr. Charles Clarke
  The Department for Education and Skills has direct responsibility for one of Government's key sustainable development priorities, and influences seven others, set out in the UK Strategy for Sustainable Development. I launched the Sustainable Development Action Plan for Education and Skills on 23 September 2003. This plan commits this department to work with our partner organisations and other Government departments to ensure that sustainable development is an integral part of education and skills development of this country and its economy. We are working with HM Treasury in the context of the 2004 Spending Review to ensure that sustainable development remains at the heart of the development and renewal of the strategic priorities for this department. We are 560W
  working closely with colleagues in Defra to ensure the impact of our policies can be measured through the new sustainable development indicators currently being developed as part of the review of the UK Sustainable Development Strategy.

  Teacher Recruitment
  Mr. Willis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much was spent on the fast track teacher recruitment scheme in each year since the scheme's inception, broken down by category of activity. [138534]

  Mr. Miliband
  I refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 8 September 2003,Official Report, column 144W.

  Mr. Willis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much his Department spent on measures to aid teacher recruitment in each year since 1997–98, broken down by programme. [138535]

  Mr. Miliband
  Many of the Government's policies in education and other areas have contributed to the 25,000 more teachers employed in England since 1997 and the record numbers of trainees now beginning courses of initial teacher training.

  Most dedicated programmes intended to increase the numbers of new recruits to teaching in England are administered on the Government's behalf by the Teacher Training Agency. Details of expenditure on these for years up to and including 2002–03 are contained in the Agency's audited accounts, which have been placed in the Library.

  Teachers (Qualifications)
  Mr. Willis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what subject qualifications a teacher requires to teach(a) mathematics, (b) English and (c) science at (i) Key Stage I, (ii) Key Stage II, (iii) Key Stage III, (iv) Key Stage IV and (v) AS/A2 level. [138533]

  Mr. Miliband
  The deployment of teachers and other school staff is a matter for the professional judgment of headteachers.

  Mr. Willis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many lessons in(a) mathematics, (b) science and (c) English were identified in the 2003 Curriculum and Staffing Survey as being taught by teachers without a subject-specific qualification in the subject being taught. [138536]

  Mr. Miliband
  In the November 2002 Secondary School Curriculum and Staffing Survey, 13 per cent. of mathematics; 8 per cent. of combined/general science; and 11 per cent. of English periods were taught to year groups 7 to 13 by full time teachers without a post A-level qualification in the subject being taught. The data underpinning these percentages are still undergoing thorough validation. Estimates of the total number of periods taught by full time teachers to year groups 7 to 13 by subject will be published in the statistical volume "School Workforce in England (2003 edition)".
  561W
  Mr. Willis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what steps he has taken to ensure that teachers without formal qualifications in(a) mathematics, (b) science and (c) English receive professional development to teach these subjects. [138537]

  Mr. Miliband
  Through the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies, the Government are already offering comprehensive support and training for the teaching of English and maths in primary schools. The Key Stage 3 Strategy provides similar support for subject knowledge and professional development for teachers teaching English, maths and science in secondary schools.

  Mr. Willis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what estimate he has made of the number of additional(a) mathematics, (b) science and (c) English teachers that would need to be recruited if all lessons at Key Stage III and Key Stage IV were to be taught by teachers with a formal qualification in the appropriate subject.[138538]

  Mr. Miliband
  My right hon. Friend has made no such estimate. However, the financial incentives and new routes to Qualified Teacher Status that the Government has created are bringing specialists in these subjects into teaching in record numbers. Figures published by the Teacher Training Agency on 10 November showed that, in the last five years, the number of recruits to conventional undergraduate and postgraduate courses of initial teacher training and the employment-based Graduate Teacher Programme has risen in mathematics by 91 per cent, in English by 33 per cent, and in science by 40 per cent. In these subjects alone, there have been almost 2,700 more recruits to training so far this year than in 1998–99.

  In addition to these huge gains, the widely welcomed remodelling of the school workforce that the Government and its partners are tak'ng forward will enable all subject specialists to use their knowledge to the maximum benefit of learners in the classroom.

  Mr. Willis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many newly qualified teachers who registered on the database of teacher records in each of the last three years for which figures are available had degrees in psychology. [138539]

  Mr. Miliband
  The table shows the number of teachers who qualified in England in each of the calendar years shown with psychology as a subject of their first degree.

  Calendar year

  Psychology as a subject of first degree1

  2000

  720

  2001

  850

  20022

  870

  1Includes those with psychology as either a first or second subject of first degree, excluding those whose first degree is their initial teacher training degree.

  2 Data for 2002 are provisional. The number of completers in this year may be undercounted.

  Source

  Database of Teacher Records

  Top-up Fees
  Paul Farrelly
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what action he(a) has taken and
  562W
  (b) proposes to take to meet concerns expressed by hon. Members about the proposed implementation of variable top-up fees. [137555]

  Alan Johnson
  We published our response to the Education and Skills Select Committee's report on the Higher Education White Paper on 28 July. We also published on that date our response to the consultation on the Higher Education White Paper. In addition, I have had a number of meetings with hon. Members about our higher education policy, and will continue to do so.

  Mr. Boswell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what arrangements will apply if top-up fees are introduced for the allocation of resources for student bursaries in situations where two or more higher education institutions make joint arrangements to facilitate access to their courses. [137878]

  Alan Johnson
  Universities will be able to make joint arrangements for bursaries–we already encourage collaboration between institutions in order to widen participation through programmes such as Aimhigher.

  Tuition Fees
  Paul Farrelly
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what research he has collated on the impact of variable fees on social access to university medical places in(a) the United States, (b) Canada and (c) Australia. [137213]

  Alan Johnson
  We are aware of research on the impact of variable fees on social access to a range of university courses in Australia and Canada. I have placed copies of a number of pieces of research in the House Library.

  With regard to access to medical places in this country under the proposed variable fees system, we do not anticipate that there will be any significant effect on applications to medical courses. Applications to medical schools in the UK have gone up since 1988, as have the total number of students studying medical courses. However, Department of Health Ministers have made it clear that they will, if necessary, take measures to ensure that any increase in the level of tuition fees will not have an adverse impact on the supply, retention, diversity or quality of students undertaking medical training.

  Paul Farrelly
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what estimates his Department has made of the demand for places on medical courses if students are charged the maximum tuition fee per year. [137215]

  Alan Johnson
  We do not anticipate any significant impact on demand for medical courses after the introduction of variable fees. The Department of Health will, however, be monitoring demand for, and take-up of, medical courses. Department of Health Ministers have made it clear that they will, if necessary, take measures to ensure that any increase in the level of tuition fees will not have an adverse impact on the supply, retention, diversity or quality of students on health professional courses, including medicine.

  Since the introduction of tuition fees in 1998, demand for places on medical courses has continued to outstrip significantly the number of places, despite an increase in

  563W
  the number of places available. Between 1999 and 2001, plans for some 2,250 more medical school places in the UK were announced. As a result of the extra investment, the number of students entering medical school will increase to over 7,300 in 2005. The number of UK applicants to study medicine at UK universities is also at its highest since 1986 (the earliest year for which data are available).

  As I said on 6 November in response to an earlier question from my hon. Friend, I have placed in the House Library copies of a number of pieces of international research on the impact on social access to a range of university courses.

  Paul Farrelly
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many of the responses to the Higher Education White Paper(a) were supportive (b) had reservations about and (c) were opposed to variable fees. [137299]

  Alan Johnson
  I refer my hon. Friend to the Government's response to the consultation on the Higher Education White Paper that was placed on the website of the Department for Education and Skills on 28 July 2003. An electronic copy of all the responses was also placed in the House Library.

  Paul Farrelly
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if he will place in the Library copies of the evidence collated from overseas on the impact of variable tuition fees on social access to medical courses. [137570]

  Alan Johnson
  I have placed in the House Library copies of a number of documents containing evidence from Canada and Australia on the impact of variable fees on social access to a range of university courses.

  I will also place in the House Library a copy of a piece of research from New Zealand which also contains evidence on this matter.

  Mr. Willis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what estimate his Department has made of the cost to a student of financing up-front payment of a £3,000 student tuition fee over the anticipated period of repayment. [138532]

  Alan Johnson
  The Government has proposed that students who choose to defer payment of their tuition fees until after they have graduated will repay their fee loans at zero real rate of interest. A graduate will, therefore, repay the same amount, in real terms, as he or she borrowed initially.

  Mr. Keith Bradley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what percentage of tuition fees he intends that each university should pay out in bursaries to students from low-income families; and what definition of a low-income family he will use for this purpose. [138716]

  Alan Johnson
  We are considering and discussing the contents of access agreements and the duties of the Office for Fair Access, and will make a statement in due course.

  Paul Farrelly
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills pursuant to his answer of 12 November 2003,Official Report, columns 354–5W, on tuition fees, if he will give the column reference and
  564W
  name of the honourable Member who put the question he answered on 6 November in respect of international research on social access and higher education. [139408]

  Alan Johnson
  The answer to question 137214 was intended to refer to question number 137213, tabled by the hon. Member himself for answer on 6 November. Due to an administrative error PQ 137213 had not been answered by the time the reply to 137214 was tabled. The information referred to has been placed in the Libraries.

  University Applicants
  Mr. Jim Cunningham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills (1) what options he has examined for assessing(a) the standard of university applicants and (b) their suitability for different types of university courses; [137676]

  (2) if he will make a statement on the use of psychometric testing in the university admissions procedure. [137677]

  Alan Johnson
  Admissions are a matter for universities. Professor Steven Schwartz, Vice Chancellor of Brunel University is currently leading an independent review of the options which English institutions should consider in assessing the merits of applicants for their courses. His review will help universities to draw on best practice and the latest research. We expect that the review will provide a statement of high level principles that we hope all universities will adopt.

  University Courses (Vacancies)
  Mr. Clappison
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills (1) how many places on courses offered by universities were not filled in each academic year since 1997, broken down by course; [133069]

  (2) when he will reply to the question of 15 October from the hon. Member for Hertsmere, ref 133069. [136717]

  Alan Johnson
  Information on the number of unfilled places on courses offered by universities is not collected centrally.

  University Entrants
  Mr. Boswell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills (1) expressed as a percentage of the total student body in(a) 1992, (b) 1997 and (c) 2001, what percentage of (i) student entrants and (ii) student drop-outs came from each socio-economic class; [135781]

  (2) what percentage of new student entrants to Russell Group universities came from each socio-economic class in (a) 1992, (b) 1997 and (c) 2001; and what the figures were of all universities in those years. [135782]

  Alan Johnson
  Information for years prior to 1994 is not available centrally. The available information covers UK domiciled accepted applicant numbers to full time and sandwich first degrees through the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) to Russell Group institutions and all UK institutions. Figures are shown in the table.
  565W
  The available information on non-completion rates by institution is contained in the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) publication "Performance indicators in higher education in the UK", a copy of which is in the House Library. The figures cover full-time first degree courses only, and show, for each individual HE institution in the UK, the proportion of entrants who failed to complete their course, but these data are not disaggregated by social class.

  Percentage1 of UK domiciled accepted applicants through UCAS to full time and sandwich first degree and HND courses

  Russell Group

  All UK institutions

  Social class

  1994

  1997

  2001

  1994

  1997

  2001

  I—Professional

  24.7

  24.9

  24.2

  16.2

  14.8

  14.4

  II—Intermediate

  46.7

  47.9

  47.7

  43.6

  43.7

  43.7

  IIIn—Skilled non-manual

  10.8

  10.8

  11.1

  12.8

  13.9

  14.0

  IIIm—Skilled manual

  11.5

  10.3

  11.2

  17.4

  16.7

  17.5

  IV—Partly skilled

  5.2

  5.2

  4.8

  8.0

  8.8

  8.4

  V—Unskilled

  1.1

  0.9

  1.0

  2.0

  2.1

  2.0

  Total

  100.0

  100.0

  100.0

  100.0

  100.0

  100.0

  1Of those of known social class.

  Mr. Damian Green
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what estimate he has made of the cost of reaching the target of 50 per cent. of 18 to 30-year-olds entering university by 2010. [137204]

  Alan Johnson
  The funding for higher education up to 2005–06 was set out in the White Paper 'The Future of higher education' (Cmd 5735), and in the annual grant letter to the Higher Education Funding Council for England. Assessments of the costs for increasing and widening participation beyond 2005–06 will be made as part of the 2004 Spending Review.

  Vocational Education
  Dr. Kumar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if he will make a statement on the importance placed on the promotion of vocational education within the schools system.[137545]

  Mr. Miliband
  We attach great importance to vocational education in schools and are taking many steps to promote it as a first class option for all pupils. Not only have we made available eight GCSEs in vocational subjects, and backed them up with the £120 million 'Increased Flexibility for 14–16 Year Olds' programme, but we are also developing more GCSEs in vocational subjects and work-related learning will become a statutory requirement for all in 2004.

  In the longer term, we will be considering the recommendations of the 14–19 Working Group as to how we can strengthen vocational programmes for young people.

  Work-related Stress
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many cases of work-related stress have been reported in his Department in each of the last three years; how much compensation has been paid to employees; how many work days have been lost due to work-related stress, and at what cost; what procedures have been put in place to reduce work-related stress, and at what cost; and if he will make a statement. [136845]
  566W
  Mr. Charles Clarke
  The information requested is not held by my Department in the form requested and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  My Department is committed to providing its employees with a safe and healthy working environment. It is also committed to meeting the targets for reducing work related injuries and illnesses arising from the Government's Revitalising Health and Safety initiative. This includes ensuring that work practices are safe and that effective occupational health policies and good health management practices are developed.

  My Department has procedures in place to reduce stress related absences which include:
  Training events on stress management available to all staff;
  An interactive on-line package to help with recognition and prevention of stress;
  An employee assistance service which includes an advice and counselling service; and
  An occupational health service that provides practical advice on occupational health issues.

  No compensation has been paid to employees specifically for work related stress in any of the last three years.

  Youth Workers
  Paddy Tipping
  To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many youth workers were employed in(a) 2002–03 and (b) 2003–04, broken down by local education authority. [136967]

  Mr. Miliband
  [holding answer 6 November 2003]This information is not yet available, although the figures for 2002–03 should be available within the next two months. I will of course write to my hon. Friend setting out the figures for both 2002–03 and 2003–04 as soon as I have them and I will place a copy in the House Library.

HEALTH

  Disabled People (Sexual Relationships)
  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what programmes(a) there are and (b) he intends to introduce to enable more disabled people to have fulfilled sexual relationships. [137909]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  Primary care trusts (PCTs) have been given the flexibility to provide services to best meet local needs, and we would expect this to include appropriate sexual health services for disabled people where such a need exists. To support PCTs in this role, the Department has published best practice information on commissioning sexual health services, which emphasises the need to provide services which are accessible and equitable, including advice on sexual health promotion for disabled people. The Department is also supporting, through a Section 64 grant, the Family Planning Association's project to provide training, advice and support in sexual health to people working with, and caring for, adults with learning disabilities.

  Genetically Modified Food
  Alan Simpson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what techniques are available for identifying unintended changes in GM foods at the molecular level; and what research he has published on this subject; [136235]

  (2) how unintended changes in GM foods approved in Europe are evaluated; and what research he has commissioned on this subject. [136238]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  Each genetically modified (GM) food approved to date in Europe has been assessed on a case by case basis. A comparison is made between the GM food and its non-GM counterpart and the assessment focuses on any differences between the two. This includes a detailed analysis of the inserted gene and the protein produced, and any differences observed in the overall composition of the food.

  There are a number of techniques, which could potentially be used for identifying unintended effects in GM foods at the molecular level. These include two-dimensional protein gel electrophoresis, protein microarrays, nuclear magnetic resonance and gas and liquid chromatography mass spectrometry.

  The Food Standards Agency funds two research programmes, which underpin the safety assessment of GM foods. One of the programmes is exploring the potential use of the above techniques for detecting unintended changes at the molecular level. The programme started in September 2001 and will finish in 2004.

  NHS Dentistry
  Mr. Etherington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many individuals resident in the City of Sunderland were registered with an NHS dental practitioner in each year since 2000; and how many NHS dental practitioners were practising in the Sunderland PCT area in each year. [136518]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  Table 1 shows the number of registrations in the general dental service (CDS) for dentists located in the Sunderland area between 2000 and 2003, at 31 August each year.

  Thousand1

  Registrations1

  Adults

  Children

  Total

  2000

  105.0

  43.7

  148.7

  2001

  106.9

  42.6

  149.4

  2002

  110.0

  42.3

  152.3

  20032

  110.9

  41.6

  152.6

  1Some of these registrations will include patients resident in other areas. Patients resident in the Sunderland area who attend dentists outside the area are excluded from the figures.

  2Number of registrations for Sunderland Teaching Primary Care Trust, following the move from Health Authority to PCT in October 2002.

  Source

  Dental Practice Board

  Table 2 shows the number of CDS dentists working in the Sunderland area between 2000 and 2003, at 30 June each year.
  568W

  GDS Dentists

  Principals

  Assistants

  Vocational dental practitioners

  Total dentists

  20002

  74

  1

  7

  82

  20012

  77

  1

  7

  85

  20022

  85

  2

  7

  94

  20031.2

  84

  3

  9

  96

  1Number of CDS dentists for Sunderland Teaching PCT,following the move from Health Authority to PCT in October 2002.

  2These figures cover dentists whose main work is in the area and will include some dentists whose main work is elsewhere.

  Source

  Dental Practice Board

  Accident and Emergency Services
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average waiting time was for patients in accident and emergency departments in each of the hospitals in(a) the Havering, Barking and Redbridge national health service trust and (b) Romford in the last year for which figures are available. [137319]

  Mr. Hutton
  Information on the total time patients spend in accident and emergency departments from arrival to admission, transfer or discharge is collected each quarter from national health service trusts and is routinely published on the Department's website at http://www.doh.gov.uk/hospitalactivity.

  Copies of the information for England and for each national health service trust and strategic health authority for the last year have been placed in the Library.

  Chris Grayling
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average waiting time in accident and emergency departments has been in each of the past 12 months, broken down by strategic health authority. [135417]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  Information is not collected on the average waiting time in accident and emergency departments. Information on the total time patients spend in accident and emergency departments from arrival to admission, transfer or discharge is collected each quarter from national health service trusts and is routinely published on the Department of Health website at http://www.doh.gov.uk/hospitalactivity/. Copies of the information for England and for each national health service trust and strategic health authority have been placed in the Library.

  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients admitted to accident and emergency in Worthing hospital in(a) 2001, (b) 2002 and (c) 2003 waited for more than (i) 12 and (ii) four hours before being treated or transferred to a ward.[134776]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  Information on accident and emergency is not collected centrally at individual hospital level, or on the time patients wait for treatment. However, the table shows the number of patients who waited more than four hours for a bed in a ward following a decision to admit at Worthing and Southlands Hospitals National Health Service Trust. Information for patients waiting more than 12 hours is not available.
  569W

  Admission from accident and emergency departments, Worthing and Southlands Hospitals NHS Trust

  Year/Quarter

  Number of patients admitted through A&E

  Patients not placed in bed in a ward within four hours of a decision to admit

  2001–02

  1

  2,431

  122

  2

  2,432

  584

  3

  2,549

  204

  4

  2,828

  198

  2002–03

  1

  2,809

  140

  2

  2,854

  228

  3

  3,196

  256

  4

  3,052

  275

  2003–04

  1

  2,737

  137

  Source

  Department of Health dataset QMAE/QMNG.

  Alcohol
  Mr. Stevenson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will require health warnings to be displayed on alcoholic drinks; and if he will make a statement. [137771]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  This issue will be examined as part of the work on the development of the Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy for England, which is currently being undertaken by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit. The strategy is due to implemented from 2004, in line with the commitment given in the NHS Plan.

  Alcohol-related Violence
  Mr. Denham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the cost to the NHS of treating the victims of alcohol-related violence in town and city centres. [136360]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The most recent estimates of costs to the national health service arising from alcohol-related illness and disease was undertaken by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit and published in their Interim Analytical Report on 19 September 2003. This document reported the annual cost of alcohol-related attendances at accident and emergency (A and E) units and alcohol-related ambulance journeys in England at around £0.5 billion per year. This estimate covers all alcohol-related attendances at A and E and ambulance journeys, and does not break the costs down by reason for attendance. However a proportion of these costs will be attributable to alcohol-related violence in town centres.

  Alternative Medicine
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list the NHS trusts which provide(a) alternative and (b) complementary medicine. [138105]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  Details of which national health service organisations provide access to complementary or alternative medicines are not recorded centrally.
  570W
  However, a survey of general practices in England, conducted in 2001 for the Department by the Medical Care Research Unit, University of Sheffield, found that almost half the practices offered patients some access to complementary or alternative medicines. The therapies most frequently provided were acupuncture and homeopathy.

  Source

  Family Practice, Vol. 20, No. 5, Oxford University Press 2003.

  Ambulance Control Centre (Merseyside)
  Mr. Benton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the change in the number of emergency calls received by Merseyside Ambulance Control Centre was in each year since 1993; what the change in staffing levels at Merseyside Ambulance Control Centre was in each such year; and if he will make a statement. [137845]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  [holding answer 12 November 2003]The information is not available in the requested format. The Merseyside Ambulance Control Centre has updated its call routing system in October this year. As a result, only data from 1993 and 2003 is available. The figures for 1993 are available because the control centre documented data in 1993 in order to carry out a ten year comparison in 2003. In 1993–94, the control centre received 368,800 emergency calls. In 2002–03, the figure was 468,700.

  The staffing levels at the Merseyside Ambulance Control Centre are shown in the table.

  Percentage of staff

  1998–99

  57.78

  1999–2000

  57.78

  2000–01

  57.78

  2001–02

  66.79

  2002–03

  66.79

  Currently

  68.79

  Ambulances
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average response time of ambulances to 999 calls in the London borough of Havering was in the last year for which figures are available. [137321]

  Mr. Hutton
  Information on response times is collected on a national health service trust basis. A copy is available in the Library and at http:// www.doh.gov.uk/public/sb0313.pdf.

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average time an ambulance took to reach hospital was for the last 12 months that figures are available in(a) England, (b) the north west region, (c) Merseyside and (d) St. Helens. [138004]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The information requested is not collected centrally.

  Details of ambulance performance are contained in the Department of Health Statistical Bulletin, "Ambulance Services, England 2002–03". A copy of the bulletin is available in the Library and on the Department's website at www.doh.gov.uk/public/ sb0313.htm.
  571W
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many ambulance call-outs were made in the last 12 months for which figures are available in(a) the St. Helens trust area, (b) Merseyside and (c) England. [138005]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  Information about the number of emergency calls received by national health service ambulance trusts, including Mersey Regional Ambulance Service, is contained in the Department of Health Statistical Bulletin, "Ambulance Services, England 2002–03". A copy of the bulletin is available in the Library and on the Department's website at www.doh.gov.uk/public/sb0313.htm.

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of ambulance call outs in the most recent 12 months for which figures are available have taken more than(a) 15, (b) 30 and (c) 50 minutes to respond to category A emergency calls in (i) the St. Helens and Knowsley Trust area, (ii) Merseyside and (iii) England. [138008]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The information requested is not collected centrally.

  Details of ambulance performance are contained in the Department of Health Statistical Bulletin, "Ambulance Services, England 2002–03". A copy of the bulletin is available in the Library and on the Department's website at www.doh.gov.uk/public/ sb0313.htm.

  Chris Grayling
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what action is being taken by his Department to respond to the concerns of the Commission for Health Improvement in relation to(a) ambulance response times being manipulated, (b) wide variations in the categorisation of calls, (c) poor management practice in ambulance trusts and (d) the need for appropriate outcome measures for the ambulance service. [138059]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The Department of Health and the ambulance service recognise that response times can sometimes be recorded inconsistently. We are determined to resolve this and have already begun to hold constructive discussions with the service and other key stakeholders about how to tighten up and standardise procedures.

  We will not tolerate any deliberate mis-reporting of data and have made it very clear that serious consequences will follow any individual or trusts that seek to manipulate their performance data.

  Response time will always be an important measure of the service to patients and there is no immediate prospect of moving away from the eight minute standard. The standard has clinical origins—it is based on the optimum time limit for intervention in heart attack cases. But there are other signifiers of progress and other measures of success, and we intend to explore the possibilities of supplementing response times with other standards, including those directly related to clinical outcomes.

  We are working closely with the Modernisation Agency and key stakeholders concerning management practices raised within this report.

  Appliance Contractors
  Chris Grayling
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what steps he will take to protect patient access to a full range of products after the deregulation of the appliance contractor market; [137358]

  (2) what arrangements he is putting in place for the production of bespoke products after the deregulation of the appliance contractor market; [137359]

  (3) what estimate he has made of the savings that the national health service will make under the deregulation of the appliance contractor market; [137360]

  (4) if he will make a statement about his proposals to deregulate the appliance agency market.[137362]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  We are currently consulting on a range of measures to modernise the regulatory system which governs whether or not a community pharmacy or appliance contractor can dispense national health service prescriptions, known as the "control of entry" test. As well as maintaining and improving access to pharmaceutical services, including the supply of appliances, in all our communities and continuing to raise standards for patients, the aim is to make the system more business friendly, to provide more certainty and reliability for the companies who depend on it and to make the process less time-consuming.

  The measures include a proposal to exempt from that test applications from contractors who intend to provide a wholly mail order or internet based service by implementing the provisions of Section 43 of the Health and Social Care Act 2001 relating to the remote provision of NHS pharmaceutical services. This exemption would be subject to the range of services such contractors are to provide being agreed within the proposed new national contractual framework.

  Full details are given in Chapter 4 of the consultation document, "Proposals to reform and modernise the NHS (Pharmaceutical Services) Regulations 1992", published on 29 August 2003 and available on the Department's website at www.doh.gov.uk./pharmacy regulationconsultation. It also includes at Annex C a draft regulatory impact assessment and competition assessment setting out further details of the possible costs and benefits of the proposals.

  Comments can be sent, by 21 November 2003, to Peter Dunlevy, Pharmacy and Prescriptions Branch, Department of Health, Room 155 Richmond House, 79 Whitehall, London SW1A 2NS or e-mail to peter.dunlevy@doh.gsi.gov.uk

  We have also set up a multi-disciplinary advisory group to advise on the details of implementation of the reform proposals. We have asked the group to report by December this year.

  Asbestos-related Diseases
  Chris McCafferty
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether his Department is able to trace the sources of(a) mesothelioma and (b) other asbestos-related diseases through its records. [137383]

  Mr. Browne
  I have been asked to reply.
  573W
  The information held by the Department and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) on mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases is not sufficiently detailed to trace accurately the specific sources of such diseases.

  HSE maintains mesothelioma and asbestosis registers based on information from death certificates but then give only the last known occupation. They also hold information on the medical examinations of asbestos removal workers to assess if in the longer term they are more likely to contract an asbestos-related disease than other occupational groups.

  Claimants for mesothelioma under the Department's Industrial Injuries Benefit scheme provide details of employers where they claim they were exposed to asbestos. But this is a no-fault scheme that does not attribute the cause to a specific employer.

  Asperger's Syndrome
  Mr. Lidington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the adequacy of health provision for people with Asperger's syndrome. [136954]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  [holding answer 6 November 2003]No assessment has been made of the adequacy of health provision for people with Asperger's syndrome. 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. People with Asperger's syndrome have the same right of access to health services as everyone else. Adults with Asperger's syndrome are covered by the mental health national service framework in respect of any mental health problems that they may have. We have also issued guidance to the national health service, which states that:"adults with Asperger's syndrome are not precluded from using learning disability services, where appropriate, and may require an assessment of their social functioning and communications skills in order to determine their level of need".

  Mr. Lidington
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether(a) his Department and (b) the National Institute for Clinical Excellence has issued guidance to trusts and doctors on whether Asperger's syndrome should be considered a mental disorder in relation to the Mental Health Act 1995; and if he will make a statement. [138833]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  Asperger's syndrome is a developmental disorder on the autistic spectrum and as such comes under the definition of mental disorder in the Mental Health Act 1983. Although the Mental Health (Patients in the Community) Act 1995 amended the 1983 Act, it did not change the definition of mental disorder. Guidance on the operation of the Mental Health Act 1983 (the Code of Practice ISBN 0–11–322111–8) was produced by my Department and the then Welsh Office and published by the Stationery Office in 1999. It does not make specific mention of Asperger's syndrome.

  Audiology
  Bob Russell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to improve the(a) pay structure and (b) employment package for qualified audiologists; and if he will make a statement. [137854]

  Mr. Hutton
  "Agenda for Change", the new pay system for national health service employees, including healthcare scientists working in the discipline of audiology, has been negotiated over the past four years by NHS staff and NHS employer representatives working in partnership. From 2003–04 to 2005–06 the package will give a 10 per cent. pay increase to all staff, plus an estimated 5.9 per cent. on average from the reform package in the longer run.

  "Agenda for Change" is being tested in 12 'early implementer' sites with a view to implementing the new system nationally from October 2004.

  Bob Russell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many audiologists qualified in each of the last five years for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement; [137857]

  (2) how many people are being trained as audiologists. [137859]

  Dr. Ladyman
  The information requested is not available centrally.

  The Health Professions Council (HPC) holds information on the numbers of clinical scientists in audiology on its register, a prerequisite for employment in the United Kingdom. This information can be found on the HPC website at http://www.hpc-uk.org/about us/ facts figures cpsm registrants.htm.

  Bob Russell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how long it takes for an audiologist to become qualified. [137858]

  Mr. Hutton
  The length of time it takes to become a qualified audiologist depends upon an individual's entry qualifications and experience. The major education and training route into audiology, and associated with a defined scope of practice, will be the new four year BSc (Hons) vocational degree in audiology. Within this programme, there will be an opportunity for some non-audiology graduates to undertake a fast track two year education and training route leading to a graduate diploma.

  Good honours graduates in relevant science subjects can still enter into the national health service as clinical scientist audiology trainees. They spend a period of up to four years in postgraduate education and training (incorporating an MSc degree and clinical training) before becoming registered with the Health Professions Council (HPC) as a clinical scientist in the modality of audiology.

  Vera Baird
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he expects digital hearing aids to be available to patients on the NHS in the borough of Redcar and Cleveland. [136464]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The James Cook University hospital, Middlesbrough, will be fitting digital hearing aids routinely as a part of a modernised hearing aid service by March 2004.

  Breast Feeding
  Mrs. Brooke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what action he is taking to encourage more hospitals in England to seek baby-friendly accreditation from UNICEF by promoting increased uptake of breast feeding. [135034]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  [holding answer 29 October 2003]The Department works closely with the UK Baby Friendly Initiative to help further the mutual aim of promoting increased uptake of breast feeding. It is for local national health service trusts to decide whether to seek baby-friendly accreditation from UNICEF.

  Mrs. Brooke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what action he is taking to ensure that student(a) midwives and (b) health visitors receive adequate education on breast feeding as part of their preregistration training. [135043]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  [holding answer 29 October 2003]The regulatory Council for Nursing and Midwifery sets the standards and outline requirements for pre-registration nurse and midwifery education. Additional content may be included to reflect the employment needs of the local service providers. National health service trusts, as local service providers, will wish to ensure that their staff receive adequate education on breast feeding to enable them to deliver the targets in the Priorities and Planning Framework to increase breast feeding initiation rates. In the NHS Plan, the Government have made a commitment to provide increased support for breast feeding.

  Cancer
  Mrs. Calton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will amend the Cancer Patient Information Strategy to ensure that information on(a) diagnosis and (b) treatment is available for all people affected by (i) breast cancer and (ii) cancer in general who want it. [137454]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The provision of a range of high quality, accurate, culturally sensitive and timely information materials about cancer and cancer services for patients and carers throughout the course of their illness is one of the key recommendations in the NHS Cancer Plan (September 2000). It is also in the draft National Institute for Clinical Excellence's supportive and palliative care guidance, due to be published in February 2004. These build on the Cancer Information Strategy, published in June 2000,

  Work to address this need is being taken forward by the coalition for cancer information (CCI). The CCI, which was formed in June 2002, brings together

  Headquarters

  East Midlands

  Eastern

  London

  North East

  North West

  Number of Inspectors on Establishment (wte)

  0.00

  113.25

  122.61

  133.76

  74.91

  204.01

  Headcount of Inspectors in Post

  0

  110

  128

  146

  75

  199

  Number of Inspectors in Post (wte)

  0.00

  103.31

  122.30

  136.46

  72.41

  191.10

  Vacancies

  0.00

  9.94

  0.31

  -2.70

  2.50

  12.91

  Percentage of Inspectors in post

  0.00

  91.22

  99.75

  102.02

  96.66

  93.67

  576W
  producers and consumers of cancer information, including Breast Cancer Care, CancerBACUP and Macmillan Cancer Relief. The role of the CCI is to oversee the development of high quality information materials for those affected by cancer. It is presently taking forward work on quality assurance and accreditation and it will also address issues concerning the development of information, dissemination and delivery to patients.

  Cannabis
  Paul Flynn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will take steps to accelerate the process to allow the prescription of medicinal cannabis. [138354]

  Dr. Ladyman
  A marketing authorisation has not yet been issued for cannabis for pain relief use. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency will consider any application for a medicinal product containing cannabinoids for the treatment of spasticity and other symptoms related to multiple sclerosis.

  Like any other medicinal product, however, cannabis-based medicines can only be granted a marketing authorisation for medical purposes when supporting data have been submitted to demonstrate that the quality, safety and efficacy of the product are satisfactory for the intended use.

  Care Home Beds
  Mr. Andrew Turner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what information he has received from the National Care Standards Commission on the number of care home beds in(a) 2002 and (b) 2003. [138892]

  Dr. Ladyman
  The National Care Standards Commission (NCSC) noted in their annual report, published in September 2003, that there were 426,600 care places in homes registered in England at 31 March 2003. This figure excludes some local authority homes which had not been registered and therefore is not comparable with data for previous years published by the Department of Health.

  Due to operational and technical problems with the NCSC database they have been unable to produce information for 2002.

  Care Home Inspection
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many care home inspectors are employed; how many vacancies there are in each region for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement. [136868]

  Dr. Ladyman
  The information requested is shown in the table.
  577W

  South East

  South West

  West Midlands

  Yorkshire/Humberside

  PVH

  National

  Number of Inspectors on Establishment (wte)

  256.13

  195.99

  144.26

  132.86

  61.35

  1,439.1

  Headcount of Inspectors in Post

  261

  205

  150

  135

  66

  1,475

  Number of Inspectors in Post (wte)

  246.79

  189.39

  139.29

  129.41

  59.73

  1,390.1

  Vacancies

  9.34

  6.60

  4.97

  3.45

  1.62

  48.94

  Percentage of inspectors in post

  96.35

  96.63

  96.55

  97.40

  97.36

  96.60

  wte—whole-time equivalent

  British Lung Foundation
  Mr. Stevenson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent discussions he has held with the British Lung Foundation; and if he will make a statement. [137773]

  Dr. Ladyman
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, will be meeting representatives of the British Lung Foundation in the near future.

  Care Homes
  Mr. Collins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will estimate the cost of converting residential rooms operated by the Leonard Cheshire Organisation at the Holehird home for the disabled in Windermere to comply with new national care standards. [137922]

  Dr. Ladyman
  The national minimum standards for care homes for adults 18 to 65 and those for care homes for older people were introduced in April 2002. It is not possible to estimate the cost for individual care homes of meeting the standards as this will vary from home to home depending on the individual circumstances of the home, including the type of resident cared for and the extent to which it already meets the necessary standards. It is for the National Care Standards Commission to inspect care homes to ensure they meet the assessed needs of their residents.

  Mr. Collins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the proposed closure of the Holehird Leonard Cheshire home for the disabled in Windermere. [137924]

  Dr. Ladyman
  The decision to close Holehird is an operational one for the Leonard Cheshire Foundation. It is not generally appropriate for central government to intervene when a home closes.

  We appreciate how traumatic it can be for vulnerable people who have to be moved from residential care homes which have become their true homes. It is, therefore, important that any decision to close a home is taken as sensitively and appropriately as possible.

  Local councils have a responsibility for making satisfactory alternative arrangements for anyone that they place in a home which subsequently closes. There should be adequate time for the safe and satisfactory transfer of all residents to other suitable homes. This should be done in a way that takes into account the views of residents and their relatives and creates the minimum possible discomfort to all concerned.

  Cervical Cancer
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people participated in the limited implementation human papilloma virus pilot scheme in 578W
  (a) Newcastle, (b) North Bristol and (c) Norfolk and Norwich; and if he will make a statement on the scheme. [136880]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  A pilot study of liquid based cytology (LBC) and human papilloma viruses (HPV) testing as triage within the national health service cervical screening programme began in April 2001 at three sites. The independent evaluation report on the LBC arm of the pilot was sent to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in April 2003. On 22 October 2003, NICE published its appraisal of LBC and recommended that this new technology be introduced across the NHS. The independent evaluation of the HPV arm of pilot is due to report in spring 2004.

  Details of the number of people who participated in the pilot are shown in the table.

  Number of people participating

  Pilot site

  HPV

  LBC

  Norfolk and Norwich

  3,220

  61,684

  Bristol

  3,858

  81,155

  Newcastle

  5,109

  80,116

  Chiropody
  Mr. Baron
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients recorded as first contacts for chiropody services during 2002–03(a) had a foot condition that was cured and (b) did not go on to receive foot care. [131565]

  Dr. Ladyman
  [holding answer 14 October 2003]This information is not collected centrally.

  Mr. Baron
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what studies he has commissioned on access and eligibility criteria used by primary care trusts for NHS chiropody provision; and what the results were; [131566]

  (2) what steps are being taken to harmonise access and eligibility criteria for chiropody services across (a) primary care trusts and (b) regions; [131567]

  (3) what extent access and eligibility criteria for chiropody services operated by primary care trusts are based on (a) patient need and (b) funding requirement. [131568]

  Dr. Ladyman
  [holding answer 14 October 2003]We have not commissioned any such studies. Eligibility criteria are broadly the same everywhere and are essentially clinical though there may be detail differences from place to place. Access in individual cases may depend on a variety of factors including funding but predominantly acuteness of problem,
  579W
  medical risk or clinical need. It is for primary care trusts to determine the level of resources to devote to the treatment of different conditions in their localities.

  Continence Services
  Sandra Gidley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many primary care trusts include the development of an integrated continence service in their health improvement programme. [137936]

  Dr. Ladyman
  We do not collect this information centrally. Health improvement programmes have now been replaced by local delivery plans (LDPs). Each national health service trust is now responsible for creating its own business plan, which shows how it will deploy its resources to deliver on both national and local priorities and fit within the plans of its primary care trust (PCT) commissioners. These local plans will not be analysed centrally.

  Strategic health authorities (SHAs) will bring together those PCT plans into a comprehensive LDP for their area. In general, the SHA-level local delivery plan will be the only plan the Department will formally sign-off. The LDP that is submitted to the Department addresses the Priorities in the Planning and Performance Framework (Improvement, expansion and reform: The next three years' priorities and planning framework, 2003–06). Formal monitoring only covers those priorities and will not provide detail of individual service provision like continence services.

  The national service framework for older people includes a milestone that, by April 2004, all local health and social care systems should have established an integrated continence service.

  CT Scans
  Mrs. Calton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average time was between diagnosis of a suspected haemorrhagic stroke and the administration of a CT scan in 2002–03. [137347]

  Dr. Ladyman
  This information is not collected centrally. The target in this area is to achieve a computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging scan in less than 48 hours. The summary report of the 2001–02 National Sentinel Stroke Audit reported that more patients than ever had brain imaging, with at least 83 per cent., meeting that target.

  Dentistry
  Mr. Viggers
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the availability to new patients of NHS dentistry in the Gosport constituency; and what the prescribed minimum level of availability is in England. [1355951

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  [holding answer 4 November 2003]The Government are committed to ensure that national health service dentistry is available to all those who need and seek it. Those wishing to see a NHS dentist can do so by contacting NHS Direct for information on dentists offering NHS dental services in their areas. It is recognised that not all dentists on general dental service lists of primary care trusts (PCTs) are accepting new NHS registrations. We have set up a580W
  NHS Support Team to work with PCTs on dental access. We have also announced new funds totalling £44 million for 2003–04 and 2004–05 to support dental access, choice and quality.

  Subject to Parliament, the Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Bill will give new duties for PCTs to secure primary dental services. With these new responsibilities will go the £1.2 billion financial resources currently held centrally.

  On 1 August 2003, as part of the new arrangements for NHS dentistry, we set up the new special health authority in shadow form to support PCTs. A team from the special health authority and the NHS dentistry support team met with NHS officials for Hampshire and the Isle of Wight at the end of October to discuss the development of a dentistry action plan and the support team will be working closely with the NHS locally to take this forward.

  In the meantime, the Fareham and Gosport primary care trust is putting in place a range of measures to improve access to dental services in the area. This includes a dental access centre in Fareham designed to provide unregistered patients with access to NHS dentistry. This is supported by an incentive scheme which offers additional access to NHS dental care based in existing dental surgeries.

  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many dentists in north east Lincolnshire provide NHS dentistry for adults; and how many will take new NHS clients onto their rolls; [137695]

  (2) what proposals he has for improving access to NHS dentistry in north east Lincolnshire. [137696]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  44 general dental service (GDS) dentists were working in the North East Lincolnshire Primary Care Trust (PCT) area on 30 June 2003, all of whom provided national health service dentistry for adults.

  The www.nhs.uk website shows that no dentists are taking on new NHS patients in the North East Lincolnshire PCT area.

  Patients seeking to register with a dentist can access information on the dental practices taking on new NHS patients by contacting NHS Direct, their local PCT or by accessing the www.nhs.uk website. Registrations are being accepted in Stamford, Grantham and Lincoln.

  The Department has approved an application for funding one full time salaried dentist plus support staff, which has been submitted by North East Lincolnshire PCT.

  Following local discussion between the PCT and local dental practitioners, a proposal has been developed to establish an urgent "dental access service" based in Grimsby to serve north east Lincolnshire patients.

  Disciplinary Investigations
  Mr. Geoffrey Robinson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what guidelines are in place to ensure that disciplinary investigations within NHS trusts are independent; [137371]
  581W
  (2) what scrutiny is undertaken to ensure that (a) disciplinary investigations within NHS trusts are independent and (b) investigatory panels make undisputed conclusions. [137372]

  Mr. Hutton
  [holding answer 12 November 2003]National health service trusts are free to employ staff under such terms as they see fit (section 16, NHS and Community Care Act 1990). Trusts are also responsible for the establishment of their own local disciplinary procedures for medical and dental staff. In the 1990s, many trusts developed new procedures often based on the procedures set out in circulars HC(90)9 and HSG(94)49.

  The Department has been working closely with the British Medical Association to develop a new national framework. Trusts will be required to ensure that their local procedures adhere to the principles and procedures set out in the framework.

  Mr. Geoffrey Robinson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he is taking to ensure that, in contentious disciplinary cases, evidence submitted to an investigation is not(a) altered and (b) summarised. [137373]

  Mr. Hutton
  [holding answer 12 November 2003]All disciplinary issues are a matter for the employing national health service trust, which must ensure that their procedures comply with employment law. The Department is currently working with the British Medical Association to introduce a new national framework for hospital doctors and dentists. Serious cases should be referred to the General Medical Council or the General Dental Council.

  Distalgesic Tablets
  Mr. Dhanda
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when the decision was taken to place Distalgesic tablets on Schedule 10 to the NHS (General Medical Services) Regulations 1992; and on what advice the decision was taken. [137097]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  Distalgesic tablets were placed on Schedule 10 of the NHS (General Medical Services) Regulations 1992, in April 1985. The listing was made on the recommendation of the then advisory committee on national health service drugs, an independent committee of pharmaceuticals and medical experts.

  East Kent Hospitals
  Mr. Brazier
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether the payment to overcome exceptional circumstances referred to in his July announcement on the future of East Kent Hospitals and in his Minister of State's letter to the hon. Member for Canterbury is a grant or a loan. [130350]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  [holding answer 16 September 2003]Kent and Medway Strategic Health Authority has been told by the NHS Bank to assume the one-off payment of £17 million in respect of East Kent Hospitals is recoverable from future primary care trust allocations after the current planning round.

  Elderly Medicine
  Sandra Gidley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the likely demand for specialists in elderly medicine. [138155]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The NHS Plan provides for increases in national health service staffing, including 7,500 more consultants between 1999 and 2004. So far, an additional 1551 specialists in geriatric medicine and 841 in old age psychiatry have been appointed, in addition to a range of other specialties who provide services to older people. The NHS has developed local delivery plans for 2003 to 2006, which are based on local assessment of need for staff. These suggest annual increases of between 3 per cent. and 4 per cent. between now and 2006 in geriatric medicine (+ 20 to 30 whole-time equivalent) and between 3 per cent. and 4 per cent. between now and 2006 in old age psychiatry (+ 10 to 20 whole-time equivalent).

  1Whole-time equivalent consultants.

  2Whole-time equivalent consultants.

  Sources

  1Medical and Non Medical census: 30 September 1999 and 30 June 2003.

  2 NHS local delivery plans.

  Emergency Care Strategy Unit
  Chris Grayling
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the(a) priorities and (b) work programme of the Emergency Care Strategy Unit. [138073]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The emergency care strategy team within the Department of Health is responsible for managing and developing government policy relating to emergency care. The scope of this work includes accident and emergency ambulance services and critical care, with priorities to reflect NHS Plan targets.

  Further information can be found on the emergency care pages on the Department's website at www.doh.gov.uk/emergencycare.

  Emergency Services
  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many times in each of the last 12 months an ambulance has taken over(a) 15 minutes, (b) 30 minutes, (c) 60 minutes and (d) 90 minutes to respond to category B emergency calls in East Sussex; and if he will make a statement; [136044]

  (2) what percentage of emergency calls from GPs surgeries were answered within 15 minutes in East Sussex in each of the last 12 months; and if he will make a statement; [136045]

  (3) what percentage of emergency calls were answered within 19 minutes in East Sussex in each of the last 12 months, broken down by category; and if he will make a statement. [137191]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The Department does not collect this information by general practitioner surgeries. Information is collected on National Health Service trust basis. A copy is available in the Library and at http://www.doh.gov.uk/public/sbQ313.pdf.

  Eye Tests
  David Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many pensioners in the Haltemprice and Howden constituency received free eye tests in the last two years for which figures are available. [135924]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The table shows the number of National Health Service sight tests paid for in East Riding and Hull Health Authority for 2001–02 and 2002–03. Figures for the number of sight tests by constituency or age are not collected centrally. The table shows the number of sight tests where "patient aged 60 and over" was given as the eligibility category and all sight tests.

  Eligibility to NHS sight tests was extended to those aged 60 and over from 1 April 1999.

  General Ophthalmic Services: Number of sight tests paid in East Riding and Hull HA for the years 2001–02 and 2002–03

  Thousand

  Total sight test for patients aged 60 and over

  All sight tests

  2001–02

  44.6

  111.0

  2002–03

  41.3

  108.0

  Note

  Data on eligibility category is derived from a 2 per cent. sample.

  Fatal Operations
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people died during operations in the hospitals in the London borough of Havering in 2002. [137322]

  Mr. Hutton
  This information is not collected centrally.

  Flu Vaccine
  Sandra Gidley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the take-up rates for flu vaccine were at(a) 1 November and (b) 1 December 2002 for each health authority. [138158]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  Influenza vaccine uptake rates in those aged 65 years and above for 1 November and 1 December 2002 by strategic health authority are shown in the following table.

  Percentage uptake

  Strategic health authority

  November 2002

  December 2002

  Birmingham and Black Country

  50.8

  60.6

  Shropshire and Staffordshire

  57.1

  68.2

  West Midlands South Health Authority

  57.2

  67.2

  Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland

  55.0

  65.8

  Trent

  58.7

  68.6

  Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire

  53.9

  64.3

  Essex

  54

  64.7

  Norfolk Suffolk and Cambridgeshire

  58.3

  68.1

  South Yorkshire

  57.7

  67.3

  West Yorkshire

  57.6

  66.8

  North and East Yorkshire and Northern Lincolnshire

  60.1

  69.8

  Northumberland Tyne and Wear

  58.7

  67.9

  County Durham and Tees Valley

  55.5

  66.0

  Greater Manchester

  53.8

  63.5

  Cumbria and Lancashire

  53.8

  67.0

  Cheshire and Merseyside

  57.9

  67.5

  North East London

  53.4

  61.5

  584W

  Percentage uptake

  Strategic health authority

  November 2002

  December 2002

  North Central London

  45.2

  56.6

  South East London

  46.2

  54.1

  South West London

  50.5

  61.8

  North West London

  47.4

  56.6

  Hampshire and Isle of Wight

  55.5

  68.4

  Thames Valley

  54.9

  68.3

  Surrey and Sussex

  55.4

  66.3

  Kent and Medway

  55.6

  65.4

  Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire

  54.4

  67.3

  South West Peninsula

  54.8

  64.1

  Dorset and Somerset

  56.5

  68.5

  Mr. Hepburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people aged 65 years or over have been immunised against influenza in(a) South Tyneside, (b) Tyne and Wear, (c) the North East and (d) the UK in each year since 1997. [133215]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  Monitoring of influenza vaccinations given to those aged 65 and over started in 2000. The number of people receiving flu vaccine since 2000 are shown in the table.

  Health Authority/Primary Care Trust

  Number of people immunised

  2000–01

  Gateshead and South Tyneside1

  42,093

  Tyne and Wear2

  128,644

  North East3

  157,190

  England4

  4,965,370

  2001–02

  Gateshead and South Tyneside1

  43,082

  Tyne and Wear2

  124,226

  North East3

  162,909

  England4

  5,113,036

  2002–03

  South Tyneside

  19,480

  Tyne and Wear3

  128,521

  Northumberland Tyne and Wear Strategic Health Authority4

  167,742

  England5

  5,487,645

  1Data recorded by Health Authority only until 2002, when they became primary care trusts (PCTs). Gateshead and South Tyneside were one health authority (HA) in 2000–01 and 2001–02.

  2Tyne and Wear not recorded as a HA or PCT. We have therefore used current strategic health authority (SHA)/PCT data to record Tyne and Wear as the following Newcastle, North Tyneside, Gateshead, South Tyneside, Sunderland Teaching PCT.

  3 North East data based on current SHA/PCT breakdown (see next point).

  4 PCTs covered by Northumberland Tyne and Wear SHA are Newcastle, North Tyneside, Gateshead, South Tyneside, Sunderland Teaching PCT and Northumberland. We have therefore used the same PCTs to provide the North East figure for 2000–01 and 2001–02.

  5 Devolved territories record their own information on flu uptake.

  Food Manufacturers
  Chris Grayling
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent representations he has received from manufacturers of foods for particular nutritional uses. [136892]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  Food Standards Agency officials have met recently with various stakeholders to discuss issues affecting foods for particular nutritional uses. Topics discussed include the draft European Regulation on health and nutrition claims, the proposed European Directive on 'sports foods' and gluten-free foods.
  585W
  Manufacturers of foods for particular nutritional uses have concerns about the potential impact of the proposed regulation on health and nutrition claims on the labelling of these foods.

  Food Supplements
  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if the Food Standards Agency will meet representatives of(a) the Health Food Manufacturers Association, (b) the Institute for Optimum Nutrition and (c) other stakeholder organisations to discuss ways of improving the evidence base for the assessment of nutrient safety. [136610]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The Food Standards Agency has been in regular dialogue with stakeholders. This has included meeting manufacturers' associations and other stakeholders to advise on the requirements for submission of dossiers on nutrient sources to European Food Safety Authority, and advising, where requested, on the types of research needed to fill data gaps on the safety of individual vitamins and minerals.

  Foundation Hospital Trusts
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will require chief executives of putative NHS foundation hospital trusts to publish details of their consultations with the public on the proposal for foundation hospitals together with an assessment of the results. [138521]

  Mr. Hutton
  Before authorising a national health service foundation trust, the Independent Regulator must be satisfied that consultation has taken place and has been satisfactory. Documentation submitted to the Independent Regulator by applicants must therefore show evidence of consultation with key stakeholders. This document will be public.

  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions he has had with putative NHS foundation trusts concerning the means whereby the token sum required for people to become members might be collected. [138557]

  Mr. Hutton
  The Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Bill was amended in House of Lords Committee to remove the requirement on prospective members of national health service foundation trusts to commit to paying a sum of up to a pound.

  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether doctors who have been struck off the medical register are eligible for election to the board of governors of a foundation trust. [138558]

  Mr. Hutton
  Subject to Parliament, the legislation on national health service foundation trusts will allow a NHS foundation trust's constitution to make further provision as to the circumstances in which a person may not become or continue as a member of the Board of Governors. It will be up to each NHS foundation trust to decide whether to include in their constitution a provision that doctors who have been struck off the medical register are not eligible to sit on the Board of Governors.
  586W
  If a NHS foundation trust's constitution did not include any such provision, then a doctor who had been struck off the medical register would be eligible to sit on the Board of Governors if elected by any of the public, patient or staff constituencies, provided that they were otherwise eligible to stand.

  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to his answer of 4 November 2003,Official Report, column 585W, on foundation hospitals, if he will place in the Library copies of the material produced by putative NHS foundation hospital trusts which seek public support for such status. [137591]

  Mr. Hutton
  Copies of the documents requested will be placed in the Library shortly.

  Guidance Updates (NICE)
  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the cost was in each of the last three years of sending guidance updates from the National Institute for Clinical Excellence to(a) all hon. Member and (b) Members of the National Assembly for Wales. [136601]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The average cost per mailing for both right hon. and hon. Members and Welsh Assembly Members is £500.

  GP Waiting Times
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average waiting time for an appointment with a general practitioner was in the London borough of Havering in 2002–03.[137325]

  Mr. Hutton
  Information on the time each patient waits to see a general practitioner is not collected. However, data on the availability of appointments show that in March 2003, 90 per cent. of the population of Havering Primary Care Trust were able to be offered an appointment with a general practitioner within two working days.

  GPs
  Mr. Flook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients were registered with GP practices in Taunton in each year since 1997. [137230]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  Information on the number of patients registered with general practitioner practices in Taunton since 1997 is shown in the tables.

  Patients of unrestricted principals and equivalents (UPEs)1 in Somerset HA; 1997–2001

  Numbers (headcount)

  Somerset HA

  1997

  491,210

  1998

  491,104

  1999

  493,256

  2000

  502,039

  2001

  462,530

  Notes

  UPEs include GMS unrestricted principals, PMS contracted GPs and PMS salaried GPs.

  Data as at 1 October 1997–99 and 30 September 2000–01

  Source

  Department of Health General and Personal Medical Services
  Statistics
  587W

  Patients of unrestricted principals and equivalents (UPEs)1 in Taunton HA; 1999–2002

  Numbers (headcount)

  Taunton and Area PCG

  Taunton Deane PCT

  4XM98

  5K2

  1999

  140,852

  —

  2000

  144,049

  —

  2001

  137,774

  —

  2002

  —

  105,406

  Notes:

  UPEs include GMS unrestricted principals, PMS contracted GPs and PMS salaried GPs.

  Data as at 1 October 1999 and 30 September 2000–02

  Source:

  Department of Health General and Personal Medical Services Statistics.

  Patients of unrestricted principals and equivalents (UPEs)1 in Taunton; 1999–2002

  Numbers (headcount)

  Taunton and Area PCG

  Taunton Deane PCT

  4XM98

  5K2

  1999

  140,852

  —

  2000

  144,049

  —

  2001

  137,774

  —

  2002

  —

  105,406

  Notes:

  UPEs include GMS unrestricted principals, PMS contracted GPs and PMS salaried GPs.

  Data as at 1 October 1997–99 and 30 September 2000–01

  Source:

  Department of Health General and Personal Medical Services Statistics.

  Mr. Flook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many(a) nurses, (b) non-medical, non-nursing care workers and (c) administrative staff were employed in general practitioner practices in Taunton in each year since 1997. [137380]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The information requested is shown in the tables.

  Practice staff1 by type 1997 to 2001 for Somerset health authority

  Whole-time equivalent

  1997

  1998

  1999

  2000

  2001

  Practice Staff1

  604

  616

  583

  601

  629

  Of which:

  Practice Nurse

  102

  105

  106

  113

  114

  Direct Patient Care

  21

  24

  8

  8

  14

  Admin and Clerical

  481

  487

  468

  481

  487

  Other

  —

  1

  —

  —

  15

  1 Practice Staff includes Practice Nurses, Direct Patient Care, Admin and Clerical and Other

  Note:

  Data as at 1 October 1992–99 and 30 September 2000–01

  Source:

  Department of Health General and Personal Medical Services Statistics.
  588W

  Practice staff1 by type 1992 to 2001 for Somerset health authority

  Number (headcount)

  1997

  1998

  1999

  2000

  2001

  Practice Staff1

  923

  914

  907

  907

  1,058

  Of which;

  Practice Nurse2

  183

  191

  194

  176

  206

  1 Practice Staff includes Practice Nurses, Direct Patient Care, Admin and Clerical and Other

  2 Headcount practice nurse figures are estimated for these years. Headcount figures for other types of practice staff are not available separately.

  Note:

  Data as at 1 October 1997–99 and 30 September 2000–01

  Source:

  Department of Health General and Personal Medical Services Statistics.

  Practice staff1 for Taunton by type

  Whole-time equivalent

  1999

  2000

  2001

  2002

  Taunton and Area

  Practice Staff

  160

  173

  n/a

  n/a

  Of which:

  Practice Nurse

  30

  32

  n/a

  n/a

  Direct Patient Care

  4

  6

  n/a

  n/a

  Admin and Clerical

  126

  134

  n/a

  n/a

  Other

  —

  —

  n/a

  n/a

  Taunton Deane PCT

  Practice Staff

  n/a

  n/a

  175

  261

  Of which:

  Practice Nurse

  n/a

  n/a

  30

  47

  Direct Patient Care

  n/a

  n/a

  7

  10

  Admin and Clerical

  n/a

  n/a

  129

  199

  Other

  n/a

  n/a

  9

  4

  n/a = Not available

  Note:

  1 Practice Staff includes Practice Nurses, Direct Patient Care, Admin and Clerical and Other

  Practice staff1 for Taunton by type

  Number (headcount)

  1999

  2000

  2001

  2002

  Taunton and Area PCG

  Practice Staff

  276

  252

  n/a

  n/a

  Of which:

  Practice Nurse

  54

  48

  n/a

  n/a

  Taunton Deane PCT

  Practice Staff

  n/a

  n/a

  284

  400

  Of which:

  Practice Nurse

  n/a

  n/a

  55

  56

  n/a = Not available

  1 Practice Staff includes Practice Nurses, Direct Patient Care, Admin and Clerical and Other. Headcount figures for other types of practice staff are not available separately.

  Notes:

  1. Data as at 1 October 1999 and 30 September 2000–02.

  2. Practice Nurse figure estimated in 1999.

  Source:

  Department of Health General and Personal Medical Services Statistics.

  Group B Streptococcus
  Mr. Jenkins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what cost analysis he has carried out of introducing a
  589W
  pilot screening programme for pregnant women to test for Group B Streptococcus; and what he estimates the costs involved would be. [136418]

  Dr. Ladyman
  The UK National Screening Committee (NSC) has commissioned an assessment of the existing evidence on screening for Group B Streptococcus in pregnancy against criteria used to assess potential screening programmes to ensure they do more good than harm. This assessment will include consideration of the costs that would be involved in introducing a screening programme. The NSC is expected to consider policy options at its meeting in December 2003.

  Health Care (York)
  Hugh Bayley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the(a) average waiting time for an initial appointment to see a cancer specialist and (b) average time between initial referral and appropriate specialist treatment for cancer at York District Hospital was in each year since 1996–97. [135960]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The information is not available in the format requested. The table shows the number of cancer patients treated within certain timeframes at York Hospitals National Health Service Trust.

  Patients treated within 31 days of being urgently referred by their G (D) P with suspected cancer and subsequently diagnosed with cancer: York Hospitals NHS Trust

  Quarter

  Cancer site

  Total patients treated

  Percentage treated within 31 days

  2001–02

  4

  Children's Cancers

  0

  n/a

  Testicular cancer

  0

  n/a

  Acute Leukaemia

  0

  n/a

  2002–03

  1

  Children's cancers

  0

  n/a

  Testicular cancer

  3

  100.00

  Acute Leukaemia

  0

  n/a

  2002–03

  2

  Children's cancers

  0

  n/a

  Testicular cancer

  1

  100.00

  Acute Leukaemia

  0

  n/a

  2002–03

  3

  Children's cancers

  0

  n/a

  Testicular cancer

  3

  100.00

  Acute Leukaemia

  0

  n/a

  2002–03

  4

  Children's cancers

  0

  n/a

  Testicular cancer

  1

  100.00

  Acute Leukaemia

  0

  n/a

  2003–04

  1

  Children's cancers

  0

  n/a

  Testicular cancer

  1

  100.00

  Acute Leukaemia

  1

  100.00

  Patients treated within 31 days of being diagnosed with breast cancer: York Hospitals NHS Trust

  Quarter

  Total patients treated

  Percentage treated within 31 days

  2001–02

  4

  64

  100.00

  2002–03

  1

  70

  100.00

  2002–03

  2

  56

  100.00

  2002–03

  3

  48

  100.00

  2002–03

  4

  67

  100.00

  2003–04

  1

  62

  100.00

  590W

  Patients treated within 62 days of being urgently refered by their G(D)P with suspected cancer and subsequently diagnosed with breast cancer: York Hospitals NHS Trust

  Quarter

  Total patients treated

  Percentage treated within 62 days

  2003–04

  1

  25

  100.00

  Note:

  Data were not collected prior to the dates in the tables.

  Source:

  Department of Health form QMCW.

  Health Service Ombudsman
  Mr. Clifton-Brown
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many Health Service Ombudsman cases were considered in the last year for which figures are available; how many cases were(a) upheld and (b) rejected; what the average time taken to consider a case was; and what the average cost per case was. [137334]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The Health Service Ombudsman publishes information about the handling of cases in her annual report, copies of which are available in the Library and on the Ombudsman's website at www.ombudsman.org.uk.

  Health Services (Somerset)
  Mr. Flook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many(a) children and adolescents, (b) adults and (c) pensioners were treated by the Somerset Partnership Mental Health Trust in each year since 1997. [135422]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  Information on the total number of patients admitted for treatment by Somerset National Health Service Trust since 1997 is available by age, and is shown in the table. Admissions are defined as the first period of in-patient care under one consultant within one healthcare provider. These figures do not represent the number of in-patients as a person may have more than one admission within the year.

  Total patients by age within Somerset Partnership NHS Trust

  Age group

  0–14 years

  15–59 years

  60–74 years

  75+ years

  1997–98

  7

  1,210

  473

  715

  1998–99

  *

  1,262

  372

  707

  1999–2000

  6

  1,298

  378

  711

  2000–01

  10

  1,338

  357

  789

  2001–02

  *

  1,274

  312

  609

  Notes:

  1. Due to reasons of confidentiality, figures between one and five have been suppressed and replaced with an asterisk.

  2. Figures for 2001–02 have not been adjusted for shortfalls in data.

  Source:

  Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), Department of Health.

  Mr. Flook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to his answer of 5 November 2003,Official Report, column 689W, on Health Services (Somerset), what the reasons are for the increases in (a) places in private residential homes in 1998 and (b) places in independent nursing homes in 1998. [138828]

  Dr. Ladyman
  The years 1997–99 showed a steady increase in the numbers of places in private residential homes and places in independent nursing homes, in Somerset, as shown in the table. The reasons behind this trend have not been determined.
  591W

  Number of places in Somerset, 1997–99

  Private residential homes

  Independent nursing homes

  1997

  2,265

  2,575

  1998

  2,995

  2,830

  1999

  3,000

  2,870

  Source:

  K036, RA AND RH(N) FORM A

  Hearing Aids
  Richard Ottaway
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average current waiting time is in the South West London Strategic Health Authority for a hearing aid assessment to fit digital hearing aids. [136823]

  Hospital Public Health Medicine and Community Health Services: Medical and Dental consultants (including Directors of Public Health) and Doctors in Training within specified organisations

  Number (headcount)

  Taunton Deane PCT

  Taunton and Somerset NHS Trust

  2002

  March 2003

  June 2003

  1997

  1998

  1999

  2000

  2001

  2002

  March 2003

  June 2003

  Consultant (including Directors of Public Health)

  2

  2

  1

  86

  90

  92

  99

  104

  109

  115

  115

  Accident and emergency

  0

  0

  0

  2

  2

  2

  2

  2

  2

  3

  3

  Anaesthetics (inc. Intensive care medicine)

  0

  0

  0

  11

  12

  14

  14

  15

  17

  18

  18

  Cardiology

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  3

  3

  4

  4

  4

  Chemical pathology

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  0

  0

  Clinical radiology

  0

  0

  0

  7

  8

  8

  9

  9

  9

  10

  10

  Dermatology

  0

  0

  0

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  Endocrinology and diabetes mellitus

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  2

  3

  2

  2

  2

  Gastroenterology

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  3

  3

  3

  3

  2

  General surgery

  0

  0

  0

  6

  6

  7

  7

  8

  9

  9

  9

  Gentio-urinary medicine

  0

  0

  0

  1

  1

  1

  1

  1

  1

  1

  1

  Geriatric medicine

  0

  0

  0

  4

  4

  4

  4

  5

  4

  5

  5

  Haematology

  0

  0

  0

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  Histopathology

  0

  0

  0

  4

  3

  4

  4

  4

  4

  6

  7

  Medical microbiology and virology

  0

  0

  0

  0

  2

  1

  2

  2

  2

  2

  2

  Neurology

  0

  0

  0

  2

  2

  2

  3

  3

  2

  3

  3

  Obstetrics and gynaecology

  0

  0

  0

  5

  5

  5

  6

  6

  6

  7

  6

  Occupational health

  0

  0

  0

  1

  1

  1

  1

  1

  1

  1

  1

  Opthalmology

  0

  0

  0

  6

  6

  6

  5

  5

  5

  5

  6

  Oral and maxillo facial surgery

  0

  0

  0

  2

  2

  2

  2

  2

  2

  2

  2

  Orthodontics

  0

  0

  0

  1

  1

  1

  1

  2

  2

  2

  2

  Otolaryngology

  0

  0

  0

  3

  3

  2

  3

  3

  4

  4

  4

  Paediatrics

  0

  0

  0

  6

  6

  5

  6

  6

  6

  6

  6

  Public health medicine

  2

  2

  1

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Rehabilitation medicine

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  0

  0

  Respiratory medicine

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  2

  2

  2

  2

  2

  Rheumatology

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  2

  1

  2

  2

  2

  Trauma and orthopaedic surgery

  0

  0

  0

  6

  6

  6

  7

  8

  8

  8

  8

  Urology

  0

  0

  0

  3

  3

  3

  4

  4

  4

  4

  4

  Other

  0

  0

  0

  10

  11

  12

  0

  0

  0

  0

  0

  Doctors in training

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  108

  114

  115

  124

  133

  139

  n/a

  n/a

  Accident and emergency

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  5

  5

  6

  7

  9

  10

  n/a

  n/a

  Anaesthetics (inc. Incentive care medicine)

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  11

  11

  10

  12

  13

  15

  n/a

  n/a

  Cardiology

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  Gastroenterology

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  0

  0

  0

  0

  2

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  General surgery

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  12

  13

  13

  15

  17

  18

  n/a

  n/a

  Geriatric medicine

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  1

  2

  3

  3

  1

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  Haematology

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  3

  4

  4

  4

  2

  2

  n/a

  n/a

  Neurology

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  1

  1

  0

  0

  0

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  Obstetrics and gynaecology

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  9

  10

  8

  10

  10

  11

  n/a

  n/a

  Occupational health

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  0

  0

  0

  1

  1

  1

  n/a

  n/a

  Opthalmology

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  7

  7

  7

  6

  7

  7

  n/a

  n/a

  Oral and maxillo facial surgery

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  3

  n/a

  n/a

  Orthodontics

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  1

  1

  1

  1

  1

  1

  n/a

  n/a

  Otolaryngology

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  4

  5

  5

  5

  5

  5

  n/a

  n/a

  Paediatrics

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  14

  13

  12

  15

  16

  18

  n/a

  n/a

  Rehabilitation medicine

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  1

  n/a

  n/a

  Respiratory medicine

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  5

  n/a

  n/a

  Rheumatology

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  0

  0

  0

  0

  1

  —

  n/a

  n/a

  Trauma and orthopaedic surgery

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  10

  11

  10

  11

  11

  12

  n/a

  n/a

  Urology

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  5

  4

  5

  5

  4

  5

  n/a

  n/a

  Other

  0

  n/a

  n/a

  22

  24

  28

  26

  27

  25

  n/a

  n/a

  Notes:

  n/a= not available. March and June 2003 data are taken from mini censuses that collected Consultants only. Data as at 30 September 1992 to 2002 and 31 March 2003 and 30 June 2003.

  Source

  Department of Health medical and dental workforce census.
  592W
  Mr. Hutton
  These figures are not held centrally.

  Health Services (Taunton)
  Mr. Flook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many(a) consultants and (b) junior hospital doctors there were in each clinical speciality at (i) Taunton and Somerset NHS Hospital Trust and (ii) Taunton Deane Primary Care Trust in each year since 1997. [137243]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The numbers of consultants and junior hospital doctors in each clinical speciality at Taunton and Somerset National Health Service Hospital Trust and Taunton Deane Primary Care Trust are shown in the table.

  Heath Care (Bath/North East Somerset)
  Dan Norris
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many(a) GPs and (b) nurses were employed in Bath and North East Somerset in (i) 1997 and (ii) 2003. [136325]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  Information on the number of general practitioners and nurses employed in Bath and North East Somerset in 1997 is not available. The latest available information for 2002 and 2003 is shown in the tables.

  All general medical practitioners1for Bath and North East Somerset Primary Care Trust

  Number(headcount)

  2001

  142

  March 2002

  143

  2002

  136

  March 2003

  154

  JUNE 2003

  144

  1All practitioners include GMS unrestricted principals, PMS contracted Gps, PMS salaried GPs, restricted principals, assistants, GP registrars, salaried doctors (Para. 52 SFA), PMS other, GP retainers and flexible career scheme Gps.

  Note

  Data as at 30 September 2001–02, 31 March 2002–03 and 30 June 2003.

  Source

  Department of Health General and Personal Medical Services Statistics.

  Total qualified nursing staff for Bath and North East Somerset Primary Care Trust

  Number(headcount)

  2001

  2002

  529

  517

  Qualified nursing, midwifery and health Visiting staff

  422

  424

  GP practice nurses

  107

  93

  Note

  Data as at September each year.

  Sources

  Department of Health General and Personal Medical Services Statistics.

  Department of Health Non-Medical Workforce Census.

  Hepatitis C
  Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on progress in working out the details in relation to his announcement on 29 August that he would establish a financial assistance scheme for people infected with hepatitis C as a result of being given blood products by the NHS. [137747]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  We are making every effort to progress the hepatitis C financial assistance scheme as quickly as possible and expect to announce details of the scheme's eligibility criteria and payment structure shortly.

  Herceptin
  Virginia Bottomley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he is taking to ensure that there is equal access in different areas to Herceptin. [136283]
  594W
  Miss Melanie Johnson
  My right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health, has asked the National Cancer Director, Professor Mike Richards, to look at the National Health Service in every region and ensure the cancer drugs and treatments, including herceptin, which have been approved by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence, are available nationally.

  Professor Richards will be working with cancer networks and the pharmaceutical industry over the next few months to assess the position and identify and address any underlying variations in prescription rates.

  Waiting Lists
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many people are waiting for hip replacements in each of the London boroughs; [137324]

  (2) how many patients are waiting for orthopaedic surgery in the London borough of Havering; [137327]

  (3) how many patients are waiting for cancer surgery in each of the London boroughs. [137329]

  Mr. Hutton
  The information on specific procedures is not identified in the headline waiting times collected by the Department, which are specialty based.

  Information for individual trusts and specialties is available on the Department's website at www. doh.gov.uk/waitingtimes.

  Hypertension
  Chris Grayling
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much extra funding will be provided to practices to support standards in managing high blood pressure; and what the criteria will be for claiming it. [130111]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The new contract for general medical services (QMS), accepted by general practitioners on 20 June 2003, will significantly benefit patients by improving the quality of care, including the management of high blood pressure, and widening the range of services available at GP surgeries.

  Two thirds of the additional investment linked to the GMS contract has been earmarked to reward practices for better services. This funding will be allocated through a new Quality and Outcomes Framework, which sets out a range of indicators relating to the detection, recording and management of patients with high blood pressure. Practices will gain a certain number of points according to their performance against these indicators. A typical practice with average list size achieving all the hypertension points might expect to earn £12,975.

  Under the new arrangements for the national health service as outlined in "Shifting the Balance of Power", primary care trusts now allocate funding from their own devolved budgets to deliver national targets and milestones and to meet local priorities. The NHS Planning and Performance Framework target for coronary heart disease (CHD) registers requires that the majority of patients at high risk of CHD, particularly those with hypertension, diabetes and a body mass index

  595W
  greater than 30 are covered by systematic treatment regimes, including appropriate advice on diet, physical activity and smoking.

  Infant Formula Milk
  Mrs. Brooke
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what representations he has received on advertisements for infant formula milk(a) on television and (b) in parents' magazines; [135035]

  (2) what representations he has received on stopping the promotion of breast milk substitutes for feeding to infants. [135042]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  [holding answer 29 October 2003]I have received some letters and emails within the last year about these subjects in general. The Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula Regulations 1995 control the advertisement and promotion of infant formula milk and breast milk substitutes.

  Insulin
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what estimate he has made of the number of patients who are suited to treatment with animal insulin rather than synthetic insulin; [137592]

  (2) how many people with diabetes require (a) animal insulin and (b) synthetic insulin; [137597]

  (3) what representations his Department has received from patients about the suitability of synthetic insulin. [137600]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  Data on the number of people using these insulins are not collected. However, the table shows the number of prescription items that were dispensed in the community in England, and their cost, in the 12 months ended June 2003.

  Decisions on the most suitable type of insulin should be made by people with diabetes in consultation with their healthcare providers. The Department has received no representations about the suitability of synthetic insulin.

  Number of prescription items and net ingredient cost of Insulins that were dispensed in the community in England for the 12 months ending June 2003

  Number of prescription items (thousand)

  Net ingredient cost (£000)

  Highly purified animal insulin

  128.1

  4,217.2

  Human sequence (GM Insulin)

  3,522.0

  150,528.8

  All Insulins

  3,650.0

  154,746.0

  Notes

  1. The data is from the Prescription Cost Analysis (PCA) system which covers all prescription items that are dispensed in the community in England. This does not include drugs dispensed in hospitals or private prescriptions.

  2. Insulins are those defined in the British National Formulary (BNF) paragraph 6.1.1, "Insulins". Insulin drugs have been grouped into highly purified animal and human sequence (GM) insulin in line with the British National Formulary (BNF).

  3. Doctors write prescriptions on a prescription form. Each single item written on the form is counted as a prescription item. The net ingredient cost refers to the cost (which the dispenser is reimbursed) of the drug before discounts and does not include any dispensing costs or fees.
  596W
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what evidence he has received on adverse reactions to synthetic insulin among diabetics which were not experienced when animal insulin was used; and if he will make a statement; [137593]

  (2) what plans he has to issue guidance to the medical profession about adverse reactions to synthetic insulin; [137595]

  (3) what studies he has (a) commissioned and (b) received on the suitability of synthetic insulin for treatment of diabetes; [137598]

  (4) what steps his Department takes to avail itself of research from a wide range of sources into the safety and suitability of synthetic insulin. [137599]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM) and its Sub-Committee on Pharmacovigilance (SCOP) have kept the safety of synthetic (human) insulins under close review and have considered the available data on a number of occasions. Most recently in 2002, the SCOP considered the findings of an independent review of controlled clinical trial data by the Cochrane Collaboration. The conclusions of the Cochrane review were that there is no difference in the incidence of adverse events between patients on synthetic insulin compared with patients on animal insulins. The SCOP confirmed its previous advice that there is no clear evidence of safety problem specific to human insulin. However, the issue will be reviewed again should further information become available.

  The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) receives reports of suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) via the Yellow Card scheme. The most commonly reported suspected ADRs with both synthetic (human) and animal insulins are disorders of metabolism and nutrition such as hypoglycaemia and hypoglycaemia unawareness, followed by skin and subcutaneous tissue disorder such as injection site reaction. However the reporting of a reaction does not necessarily mean that the drug caused the problem.

  A higher number of suspected ADR reports have been received in association with synthetic insulin through the Yellow Card Scheme, however this may reflect the fact that 80 per cent. of patients with Type 1 Insulin Dependent Diabetes Mellitus are estimated to be receiving synthetic insulin in the United Kingdom.

  Full guidance on prescribing and use of synthetic insulins, including possible side effects, is provided in the product information for prescribes and patients. This includes warnings about the risk of hypoglycaemia unawareness particularly upon transfer from animal insulins to synthetic insulins. Key prescribing information is also included in the British National Formulary, which is sent by the Department to doctors and pharmacists.

  Both human and animal derived insulins are currently available and the MHRA is not aware of any specific plans for the discontinuation of production of animal derived insulins. However, decisions as to the most suitable type of insulin for particular patients are clinical matters and must be made by individual doctors.
  597W
  Mr. Amess
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will meet representatives of the Insulin Dependent Diabetes Trust to discuss the continued(a) choice between and (b) availability of (i) synthetic and (ii) animal insulin. [137594]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  I am not aware of any problems with either the choice between or availability of the various types of insulin. I should, however, be interested to have details of the Insulin Dependent Diabetes Trust's concerns and would be happy for them to write to me in the first instance.

  Mr. Amess
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he will take to ensure competition in(a) the manufacture of insulin and (b) the manufacture of different types of insulin for treatment of diabetes; and if he will make a statement. [137596]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The Department, working closely with other bodies such as the NHS Purchasing and Supply Agency and pharmaceutical companies, has arrangements in place to ensure security of supply of medicines.

  In addition the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme aims to:
  secure the provision of safe and effective medicines for the NHS at reasonable prices;
  promote a strong and profitable pharmaceutical industry capable of such sustained research and development expenditure as should lead to the future availability of new and improved medicines;
  encourage the efficient and competitive development and supply of medicines to pharmaceutical markets in this and other countries.

  Finally, the patent system provides considerable incentives for companies to compete in the development of new and innovative medicines.

  Learning Disabilities
  Mr. Paul Burstow
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much funding has been allocated to the provision of services for people with learning disabilities since the publication of the White Paper "Valuing People": how this funding has been spent; and what funding remains unallocated. [138187]

  Dr. Ladyman
  Over £3 billion a year is spent on health and social care provision for people with learning disabilities. The White Paper, "Valuing People: A New Strategy for Learning Disability for the 21st Century" (Cm 5086), published in March 2001, which set out our proposals for improving services for people with learning disabilities, their families and carers, announced two new funds to support its proposals: the implementation support fund (ISF) from April 2001 and the learning disability development fund (LDDF) from April 2002. Funding has been allocated to support priorities set out in "Valuing People".

  Money from the £2.3 million ISF was fully allocated in both 2001–02 and 2002–03. We expect it to be fully allocated in 2003–04. Funding has been used to support a range of work, including:
  The development and support of advocacy services
  The setting up and support of the national forum of people with learning disabilities and its network of regional forums
  598W
  The preparation, publication, and dissemination of good practice guidance on a range of subjects
  The setting up and support of the Learning Disability Telephone Information and Helpline (funded jointly with MENCAP)
  Extension of the learning disability awards framework.

  The LDDF was introduced in April 2002. £2 million of the £22.6 million revenue element available in 2002–03 was used to support the "Valuing People" support team and its related activities. The remainder was distributed to health authorities on a pro-rata basis to be used as agreed through their partnership board, with their partner local authorities to support the following priorities for service change:
  Modernising day centres
  Completing the reprovision of the remaining long-stay hospitals to enable people to move to more appropriate accommodation
  Developing supported living approaches for people with learning disabilities living with older carers
  Promoting the further development of advocacy
  Supporting the wider introduction of person centred planning
  Enhancing leadership in learning disability services.

  In 2003–04, £2 million was again allocated for the "Valuing People" support team, with £21 million being distributed to primary care trusts to be used on the above priorities for service change.

  The capital element of the LDDF comprises £20 million a year to be used on the following priorities:
  Enabling local providers to develop specialist services for people with severe challenging behaviour
  Developing integrated health and social services facilities for children and people with severe disabilities and complex needs
  Developing supported living approaches for people with learning disabilities living with older carers
  Implementing the results of person centred planning for people currently living in national health service campuses.

  In 2002–03, bids were invited from learning disability partnership boards and £16 million of the available £20 million was allocated. In 2003–04, the £20 million capital was allocated direct to strategic health authorities as part of their strategic capital allocations.

  London NHS Trusts
  Chris Grayling
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the total aggregate cumulative deficit of London NHS trusts was at the end of the most recent financial year for which records are available. [133743]

  Mr. Hutton
  The combined balance sheets of all London national health service trusts at the end of 2002–03 show a net cumulative deficit on the income and expenditure reserve account of £47.7 million. This figure does not necessarily represent liabilities which will need to be settled nor is it an indication of poor financial performance. Changes in accounting policy and the periodic re-valuation of assets over recent years have distorted the apparent financial position of NHS trusts.

  The latest annual accounts for 2002–03 show London NHS trusts made an overall surplus of £4.3 million. All have balanced financial plans for 2003–04.

  Market Research
  Matthew Taylor
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list each item of market and opinion research commissioned since May 1997 by(a) his Department and (b) agencies and non-departmental public bodies for which his Department is responsible; what the purpose of each item was; and whether the results were published. [137008]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  A list of research projects carried out by the Department since 1 May 1997 was placed in the Library in July 1999. The list may not include all research projects, as some information was not centrally available. The list has been updated year on year, with the most recent list, for 2002–03, being placed in the Library in July 2003.

  We are committed to consulting and involving the public to help inform both policy formulation and the delivery of better quality and more responsive public services.

  Market or opinion research is commissioned only when it is justified by the needs of the policy programme and is the most economical, efficient and effective way to achieve the purpose.

  Medicine Reviews
  Sandra Gidley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list, by primary care trust, the(a) numbers and (b) percentages of patients over 75 who have had their medicines reviewed at least annually in the last three years. [137929]

  Dr. Ladyman
  This information is not collected centrally.

  Mental Health
  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health when he proposes to publish the summary of responses to the consultation on the Draft Mental Health Bill. [139096]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The Government's response to the consultation will be published prior to introduction of the Bill. It will be available in hard copy and on the Department of Health website.

  At that time, copies of responses will be placed in the Library, except in cases where respondents have asked for confidentiality.

  Mersey Regional Ambulance Service
  Helen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health for what reason no Warrington-based ambulances were available in Warrington during the weekend of 1 and 2 November 2003; and if he will take steps to ensure that Mersey Regional Ambulance Service do not allow this situation to occur again. [136788]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The shortfall in the number of Warrington-based ambulances in Warrington during 1 and 2 November 2003 was due to the diversion of blue light admissions from Warrington Hospital accident and emergency department. Ambulances were diverted to other hospitals in the area, which included 600W
  Manchester and Stoke. This had a direct impact on the length of time taken for ambulances to return to the Warrington area.

  Helen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps the Mersey Regional Ambulance Service has taken to develop an effective internal and external communications strategy as recommended by the Commission for Health Improvement; and if he will place a copy of the strategy in the Library. [138444]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  [holding answer 13 November 2003]In July 2002, the Mersey Regional Ambulance Service appointed a communications manager with considerable senior level experience. A review of both internal and external communications has taken place along with a review of the trusts ability to provide effective communications. The trust is currently drawing up its communications strategy. A copy will be placed in the Library when it is completed.

  Helen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps the Mersey Regional Ambulance Service has taken to arrange with NHS acute trusts locations for ambulance liaison assistants which maintain patient confidentiality. [138445]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  [holding answer 13 November 2003]Cheshire and Merseyside Strategic Health Authority reports that several initiatives have been taken forward to address this issue. In particular:A major redesign of Aintree Hospital included refurbishment work within the ambulance liaison assistants (ALA) area. This is now more accessible for patients and more suited to their needs. This has also involved a redesign of the office furniture and now all telephone conversations are conducted behind a higher level counter;
  During the last 12 months a refurbishment project has been carried out by the Countess of Chester Hospital and this included work in the ALA lounge. Specifically, this involved relocating the patient transport service lounge to make it more accessible and more open plan to create a better environment. Telephone conversations are now held in a much more secure environment behind high level counters;
  Work is also currently ongoing with the Royal Liverpool Hospital. As part of its major entrance redesign, this has included the creation of a purpose built patient discharge and ambulance liaison lounge. This is a confidential environment.

  Furthermore, recognising the need to work more closely with its hospital partners, the Mersey Regional Ambulance Service National Health Service Trust has recently completed a management restructure, which empowers managers to work on a more integrated basis within the health economy to ensure such projects are taken forward.

  Helen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what procedures have been put in place by Mersey Regional Ambulance Service to ensure that all crews receive information and training on new vehicles prior to their introduction. [138446]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  [holding answer 13 November 2003]A number of procedures ensure that all staff receive training and information on new vehicles prior to their introduction. These are consistent with the Mersey Regional Ambulance Service national health service trust's health and safety policy and supported by the head of training and development.
  601W
  The trust also operates a vehicle working group, which is made up of managers, staff and trade union representatives. This group agrees the format of all new vehicles and equipment as well as the formal training plan to ensure staff receive appropriate training prior to the vehicles being put into service.

  Helen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will place a copy of Mersey Regional Ambulance Service's child protection policy in the Library. [138447]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  holding answer 13 November 2003]Following the Commission for Health Improvement (CHI) action plan, the Mersey Regional Ambulance Service national health service trust agreed to review its current child protection arrangements.

  A draft policy is awaiting approval by the trust board. The trust is on target to achieve the timescales of the CHI recommendations. A copy will be placed in the Library in due course.

  Helen Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what progress has been made by Mersey Regional Ambulance Service in developing a plan for the training of staff in clinical audit skills; and if he will place a copy of the plan in the Library. [138448]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  [holding answer 13 November 2003]Cheshire and Merseyside Strategic health authority reports that the Mersey Regional Ambulance Service is developing a trust-wide training programme for frontline staff in clinical audit skills and will incorporate this into the training and education strategy by December 2003.

  Department of Health Vacancies Survey, March 2003—Vacanciesin strategic health authority areas and by Government regional office area for qualified midwives—three month vacancy rates, numbers and staff in post

  Qualified midwives

  March 2003

  September 2002

  Three month vacancy rate (percentage)

  Three month vacancy (number)

  Staff in post (whole-time equivalent)

  Staff in post (headcount)

  England

  3.1

  572

  18,119

  23,249

  East of England

  4.1

  60

  1,630

  2,159

  Q01 Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire strategic HA

  0.0

  —

  672

  910

  Q02 Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire strategic HA

  9.1

  45

  472

  605

  Q03 Essex strategic HA

  3.9

  16

  486

  644

  London

  7.7

  214

  2,812

  3,601

  Q04 North West London strategic HA

  4.5

  30

  633

  842

  Q05 North Central London strategic HA

  10.1

  53

  498

  628

  Q06 North East London strategic HA

  5.5

  31

  615

  724

  Q07 South East London strategic HA

  12.2

  83

  580

  769

  Q08 South East London strategic HA

  4.9

  17

  487

  638

  North East

  0.8

  8

  993

  1,241

  Q09 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear strategic HA

  0.3

  1

  537

  675

  Q10 County Durham and Tees Valley strategic HA

  1.4

  6

  457

  566

  Yorkshire and the Humber

  2.2

  43

  1,909

  2,321

  Q11 North and East Yorkshire and Northern Lincolnshire strategic HA

  1.3

  7

  526

  651

  Q12 West Yorkshire strategic HA

  2.9

  26

  850

  1,021

  Q23 South Yorkshire strategic HA

  1.8

  10

  533

  649

  North West

  1.1

  33

  3,069

  3,833

  Q13 Cumbria and Lancashire strategic HA

  0.3

  2

  768

  985

  Q14 Greater Manchester strategic HA

  1.4

  19

  1,310

  1,572

  Q15 Cheshire and Merseyside strategic HA

  1.2

  12

  991

  1,276

  602W
  A copy of the programme will be placed in the Library when it is completed.

  Midwives
  Mr. Baron
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what the average vacancy rate is for midwives in the NHS, broken down by region; what proportion of midwife vacancies have remained vacant for more than three months in(a) England and (b) each region in the last year for which figures are available; which 10 regions of England have the highest vacancy rates; and what these rates are; [139021]

  (2) what assessment he has made of the effect of the vacancy rate for midwives on decisions by midwives to leave the profession. [139240]

  Mr. Hutton
  Information on the number of vacancies for midwives lasting three months or more is collected in the national health service vacancy survey, information on the number of vacancies lasting less than three months is not collected centrally. The available information is shown in the table by Government regional office area and strategic health authority.

  No assessment has been made on the effect of vacancy rates for midwives on decisions by midwives to leave the profession. The vacancy rate for midwives is comparable with that for the overall nursing work force. Since 1997, the number of midwives employed in the NHS has increased by 860 and the Government will continue to increase the NHS midwifery work force through a range of recruitment and retention initiatives.
  603W

  Department of Health Vacancies Survey, March 2003—Vacancies in strategic health authority areas and by Government regional office area for qualified midwives—three month vacancy rates, numbers and staff in post

  Qualified midwives

  March 2003

  September 2002

  Three month vacancy rate (percentage)

  Three month vacancy (number)

  Staff in post (whole-time equivalent)

  Staff in post (headcount)

  South East

  4.7

  122

  2,522

  3,414

  Q16 Thames Valley strategic HA

  2.0

  14

  722

  1,004

  Q17 Hampshire and Isle of Wight strategic HA

  3.5

  20

  536

  730

  Q18 Kent and Medway strategic HA

  5.7

  30

  509

  660

  Q19 Surrey and Sussex strategic HA

  7.2

  59

  755

  1,020

  South West

  1.6

  28

  1,785

  2,358

  Q20 Avon, Gloucestershire and Wiltshire strategic HA

  2.3

  19

  827

  1,091

  Q21 South West Peninsula strategic HA

  1.3

  8

  612

  797

  Q22 Dorset and Somerset strategic HA

  0.3

  1

  345

  470

  East Midlands

  1.3

  17

  1,307

  1,697

  Q24 Trent strategic HA

  0.1

  1

  819

  1,053

  Q25 Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland strategic HA

  3.1

  16

  488

  644

  West Midlands

  2.2

  47

  2,091

  2,625

  Q26 Shropshire and Staffordshire strategic HA

  1.5

  8

  508

  652

  Q27 Birmingham and the Black Country strategic HA

  3.7

  39

  1,010

  1,234

  Q28 Coventry, Warwickshire, Herefordshire and Worcestershire strategic HA

  0.0

  —

  573

  739

  Three month vacancy notes

  1. Three month vacancy information is as at 31 March 2003

  2. Three month vacancies are vacancies which Trusts are actively trying to fill, which had lasted for three months or more (whole time equivalents)

  3. Three month Vacancy Rates are three month vacancies expressed as a percentage of three month vacancies plus staff in post

  4. Three month Vacancy Rates for non-medical staff are calculated using staff in post from the Vacancy Survey, March 2003

  5. Percentages are rounded to one decimal place

  6. `—' zero

  Staff in post notes

  1. Staff in post data is from the Non-Medical Workforce Census, September 2002

  2. '—' zero

  General notes

  1. Vacancy and staff in post numbers are rounded to the nearest whole number

  2. Calculating the vacancy rates using the above data may not equal the actual vacancy rates

  3. Due to rounding, totals may not equal the sum of component parts

  4. Strategic HA figures are based on Trusts, and do not necessarily reflect the geographical provision of healthcare

  Sources

  Department of Health Vacancies Survey, March 2003

  Department of Health Non-Medical Workforce Census, September 2002

  Mixed Wards
  Sandra Gidley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how many wards in NHS hospitals have regularly had patients of both sexes staying at the same time in the last 12 months; [138156]

  (2) on how many occasions over the last 12 months hospitals have admitted a patient into a ward reserved for patients of the opposite sex, broken down by NHS hospital trust. [138159]

  Mr. Hutton
  The Department does not collect information at the level of the individual ward. National health service trusts are required only to report on total patient throughput per annum.

  MRI Scans
  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the existing capacity for MRI scanning for NHS patients in the(a) public and (b) private sectors; and if he will make a statement. [137083]
  604W
  Miss Melanie Johnson
  Past under-funding of the national health service led to the inadequate provision of essential diagnostic equipment, unevenly distributed across the country. The Government are committed to putting right this under-investment and is providing unprecedented levels of central funding to expand capacity and replace ageing equipment.

  There are currently 207 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanners installed in the NHS in England, compared with 110 machines in 1997, representing an 88 per cent. increase in total numbers. By December 2004, this will increase further to approximately 276 MRI scanners, a 150 per cent. increase on 1997.

  There are approximately 60 MRI scanners in private hospitals in England. The private sector is only able to provide a small amount of additional capacity for the NHS. The utilisation of any radiology equipment is dependent on the availability of skilled staff. Both the NHS and private sector use staff from the same work force pool.
  605W
  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average waiting time for MRI scans in England was in each of the last 10 years, broken down by region. [137084]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  Data on waiting times for diagnostic tests are not collected centrally.

  National Service Framework for Children
  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what measures aimed at children with learning disabilities will be included in the national service framework for children. [138494]

  Dr. Ladyman
  A key part of the national service framework for children, young people and maternity services will focus on the needs of disabled children, including those with learning disabilities. This will involve looking at how services can respond to their needs more flexibly and improving the transition to adulthood.

  NHS Direct
  Mr. Berry
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the maximum period is which he requires should elapse before NICE guidance is reflected in(a) the advice given by NHS Direct and (b) the content of NHS Direct Online. [133369]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  When content of National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance requires amendment to National Health Service Clinical Assessment System (CAS) clinical content, the change would normally be made in the next clinical release. Main releases are currently made twice yearly. When the need for change is identified as more urgent than the timetable for the next main release, guidance regarding the change is issued first to all staff by a message system which is part of NHS CAS and this is followed by an interim version release of the clinical content between the main releases. Depending on the timing of release of NICE guidance in relation to the next planned main clinical release, it could otherwise be up to six months before the clinical content was revised. Advice on the urgency of implementing changes is given by the NHS Direct national medical adviser in consultation with the NHS Direct CAS clinical panel. NHS Direct is working with the system supplier to be able to amend clinical content more frequently.

  If someone required information only on a treatment, the situation is as follows. The NICE website is on the recommended list for all NHS Direct call centres. Also, a monthly current awareness bulletin is produced and posted on 'indirect' (NHS Direct's Intranet site) as well as being e-mailed to site information staff (they are encouraged to publicise at sites). This would feature any new NICE guidelines.

  If NICE guidance requires a change to the content of NHS Direct Online, it would usually be updated in their content within 48 hours, although this process can be shortened to within the hour for urgent cases.

  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what percentage of calls to NHS Direct were answered within 30 seconds in the most recent 12 month period, broken down by month, for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement. [136874]
  606W
  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The percentage of calls to NHS Direct that were answered within 30 seconds for the most recent 12 month period, broken down by month are shown in the table. The overall percentage for the most recent 12 month period is 63 per cent.

  Analysis date

  Percentage1

  2002

  November

  60

  December

  61

  2003

  January

  70

  February

  61

  March

  57

  April

  55

  May

  62

  June

  63

  July

  64

  August

  65

  September

  69

  October

  67

  1 Percentage of calls answered in 30 seconds

  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many members of staff are employed by NHS Direct; and if he will make a statement. [136876]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  Currently, all NHS Direct members of staff are employed by their host organisation trust. NHS Direct employs approximately 3,000 (whole time equivalent) members of staff nationally. Of these, around 1,063 are nurses and 543 call handlers. The remaining staff consists of health information advisors, managers, trainers, nurse supervisors and administration staff. Each of the 22 sites for clinical governance purposes employs a medical director (doctor).

  Chris Grayling
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what recent assessment he has made of the quality of clinical advice provided by NHS Direct to patients. [138074]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  NHS Direct has a well established record for offering good clinical advice. This was confirmed in the sector report published by the Commission for Health Improvement on 10 November, following its review of 19 out of the 23 NHS Direct sites in England.

  NHS Staff
  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many NHS employees belong to a trade union; and which ones. [134811]

  Mr. Hutton
  The Department does not hold centrally the number of national health service employees who belong to a trade union.

  The Office for National Statistics produces an estimate for the United Kingdom of the proportion of public sector employees with trade union membership, by industry classification, using data from the Labour Force Survey. The figure for health for autumn 2002 is 62 per cent.
  607W
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many staff are employed by the NHS in(a) the London borough of Havering and (b) each NHS trust in London. [137330]

  Hospital, Public Health Medicine, Community Health Services (HCHS) and General and Personal Medical Services: All NHS staff by organisation

  Numbers (headcount)

  As at 30 September 2002

  All NHS staff1

  Medical and dental1

  Non-medical staff2

  GPs3

  Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust

  RF4

  6,113

  538

  5,575

  n/a

  Havering PCT

  5A4

  1,061

  7

  930

  124

  Royal Free NHS Trust

  RAL

  4,928

  538

  4,390

  n/a

  Royal National Orthopaedic NHS Trust

  RAN

  941

  87

  854

  n/a

  North Middlesex Hospital NHS Trust

  RAP

  2,302

  233

  2,069

  n/a

  Hillingdon Hospital NHS Trust

  RAS

  2,884

  250

  2,634

  n/a

  North East London Mental Health NHS Trust

  RAT

  1,635

  89

  1,546

  n/a

  Kingston Hospital NHS Trust

  RAX

  2,818

  324

  2,494

  n/a

  Ealing Hospital NHS Trust

  RC3

  1,585

  182

  1,403

  n/a

  West Middlesex University NHS Trust

  RFW

  1,999

  198

  1,801

  n/a

  Greenwich Healthcare NHS Trust

  RG2

  2,273

  206

  2,067

  n/a

  Bromley Hospitals NHS Trust

  RG3

  2,265

  244

  2,021

  n/a

  Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust

  RGC

  2,509

  247

  2,262

  n/a

  Queen Mary's, Sidcup NHS Trust

  RGZ

  2,488

  218

  2,270

  n/a

  Guys and St. Thomas's NHS Trust

  RJ1

  7,785

  936

  6,849

  n/a

  Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust

  RJ2

  2,655

  246

  2,409

  n/a

  St. Mary's Hospital NHS Trust

  RJ5

  4,752

  564

  4,188

  n/a

  Mayday Health Care NHS Trust

  RJ6

  2,851

  275

  2,576

  n/a

  St. George's Group NHS Trust

  RJ7

  5,430

  648

  4,782

  n/a

  King's Healthcare NHS Trust

  RJZ

  5,456

  920

  4,536

  n/a

  Whittington Hospital NHS Trust

  RKE

  2,115

  241

  1,874

  n/a

  West London Mental Health NHS Trust

  RKL

  3,776

  194

  3,582

  n/a

  Newham Healthcare NHS Trust

  RNH

  1,684

  176

  1,508

  n/a

  Royal Hospital of St. Bartholomew, The Royal London Hospital and London Chest Hospital NHS Trust

  RNJ

  6,873

  918

  5,955

  n/a

  Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust

  RNK

  352

  42

  310

  n/a

  Great Ormond Street Hospital For Sick Children NHS Trust

  RP4

  2,761

  361

  2,400

  n/a

  Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Trust

  RP6

  1,008

  187

  821

  n/a

  Oxleas NHS Trust

  RPG

  2,173

  97

  2,076

  n/a

  Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust

  RPY

  1,789

  192

  1,597

  n/a

  Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust

  ROM

  2,652

  385

  2,267

  n/a

  Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust

  RON

  5,673

  781

  4,892

  n/a

  Homerton Hospital NHS Trust

  RQX

  1,859

  215

  1,644

  n/a

  Pathfinder NHS Trust

  RQY

  2,738

  245

  2,493

  n/a

  Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust

  RRP

  2,429

  163

  2,266

  n/a

  London Ambulance Service NHS Trust

  RRU

  3,630

  0

  3,630

  n/a

  University College London Hospitals NHS Trust

  RRV

  5,419

  789

  4,630

  n/a

  Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust

  RT3

  2,550

  281

  2,269

  n/a

  Brent, Kensington, Chelsea and Westminster Mental Health NHS Trust

  RV3

  2,697

  199

  2,498

  n/a

  South London and Maudsley NHS Trust

  RV5

  4,708

  462

  4,246

  n/a

  North West London Hospitals NHS Trust

  RV8

  4,398

  551

  3,847

  n/a

  Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust

  RVL

  4,036

  429

  3,607

  n/a

  Epsom and St. Helier NHS Trust

  RVR

  4,386

  462

  3,924

  n/a

  East London and the City Mental Health NHS Trust

  RWK

  2,053

  151

  1,902

  n/a

  Camden and Islington Mental Health and Social Care Trust

  TAF

  1,198

  103

  1,095

  n/a

  1 Data excludes medical Hospital Practitioners and medical Clinical Assistants, most of whom are also GPs working part time in hospitals.

  2 Figures for London based on the Strategic Health Authority Areas Q04 North West London SHA Q05 North Central London SHA, Q06 North East London SHA, Q07 South East London SHA Q08 South West London SHA, and RRU the London Ambulance Service NHS Trust.

  3 All Practitioners include GMS Unrestricted Principals, PMS Contracted GPs, PMS Salaried GPs, Restricted Principals, Assistants, GP Registrars, Salaried Doctors (Para 52 SFA), PMS Other and GP Retainers.

  n/a—not available

  Sources:

  Department of Health Medical and Dental Workforce Census

  Department of Health Non-medical Workforce Census

  Department of Health General & Personal Medical Services Statistics

  Non-medical Staff
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many non-medical staff are employed in(a) each of London's national health service trusts and (b) in the London borough of Havering. [137326]
  608W
  Mr. Hutton
  Information is not collected by London borough. The information shown in the table includes national health service organisations within the London borough of Havering.

  Mr. Hutton
  Information on the number of non-medical staff employed in the London borough of Havering is not collected centrally. Information on the number of non-medical staff employed by Havering Primary Care Trust, and in each of London's national health service trusts, is shown in the table.
  609W

  NHS hospital and community health services: All non-medical staff in the London area by organisation as at 30 September 2002

  Headcount

  5A4

  Havering PCT

  930

  RAL

  Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust

  4,390

  RAN

  Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust

  854

  RAP

  North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust

  2,069

  RAS

  Hillington Hospital NHS Trust

  2,634

  RAT

  North East London Mental Health NHS Trust

  1,546

  RAX

  Kingston Hospital NHS Trust

  2,494

  RC3

  Ealing Hospital NHS Trust

  1,403

  RF4

  Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust

  5,575

  RFW

  West Middlesex University NHS Trust

  1,801

  RG2

  Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Trust

  2,067

  RG3

  Bromley Hospitals NHS Trust

  2,021

  RGC

  Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust

  2,262

  RGZ

  Queen Mary's Sidcup NHS Trust

  2,270

  RJ1

  Guy's and St Thomas 1 NHS Trust

  6,849

  RJ2

  Lewisham Hospital NHS

  2,409

  RJ5

  St. Mary's NHS Trust

  4,188

  RJ6

  Mayday Healthcare NHS Trust

  2,576

  RJ7

  St. George's Healthcare NHS Trust

  4,782

  RJZ

  King's College Hospital NHS Trust

  4,536

  RKE

  Whittington Hospital NHS Trust

  1,874

  RKL

  West London Mental Health NHS Trust

  3,582

  RNH

  Newham Healthcare NHS Trust

  1,508

  RNJ

  Barts and The London NHS Trust

  5,955

  RNK

  Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust

  310

  RP4

  Great Ormond Street Hospital For Children NHS Trust

  2,400

  RP6

  Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Trust

  821

  RPG

  Oxleas NHS Trust

  2,076

  RPY

  Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust

  1,597

  RQM

  Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust

  2,267

  RQN

  Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust

  4,892

  RQX

  Homerton University Hospital NHS Trust

  1,644

  RQY

  South West London and St. George's Mental Health NHS Trust

  2,493

  RRP

  Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust

  2,266

  RRU

  London Ambulance Service NHS Trust

  3,630

  RRV

  University College London Hospitals NHS Trust

  4,630

  RT3

  Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust

  2,269

  RV3

  Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust

  2,498

  RV5

  South London and Maudsley NHS Trust

  4,246

  RV8

  North West London Hospitals NHS Trust

  3,847

  RVL

  Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust

  3,607

  RVR

  Epsom and St Helier NHS Trust

  3,924

  RWK

  East London and The City Mental Health NHS Trust

  1,902

  TAF

  Camden and Islington Mental Health and Social Care Trust

  1,095

  Note:

  Figures for London based on the Strategic Health Authority Areas Q04 North West SHA, Q05 North Central London SHA, Q06 North East London SHA, Q07 South East London SHA, Q08 South West London SHA, and RRU the London Ambulance Service NHS Trust.

  Source:

  Department of Health Non-medical Workforce Census

  Nurses
  Mr. Flook
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many nurses(a) were in training and (b) completed training at Taunton and Somerset NHS Hospital Trust in each year since 1997. [137231]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  Information on the number of nurses in training or completing training at Taunton and Somerset Hospitals National Health Service Trust is not available centrally. The number of training commissions in the Somerset, Devon and Cornwall area in 2002–03 was 547, an increase of 41 per cent. since 1998–99.
  610W
  The Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) publishes an annual statistical report, which includes information about the number of nurses registering each year, a requirement for employment in the NHS. This data can be found on the NMC website at www.nmc-uk.org.uk.

  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many nurses have left the register in each of the last five years. [138039]

  Mr. Hutton
  [holding answer 11 November 2003]The Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) publishes an annual statistical report, which includes information about the number of nurses and midwives leaving the register. These data can be found on the NMC's website at: www.nmc-uk.org.uk

  Older People
  Sandra Gidley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which hospitals have introduced self-administration schemes for medicines for older people. [137931]

  Dr. Ladyman
  This information is not collected centrally.

  Sandra Gidley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what analysis he has made of the(a) levels and (b) patterns of services for older people in order to facilitate comparisons across health authorities. [137937]

  Dr. Ladyman
  In July 2002, the Department published its national health service performance ratings and indicators for 2001–02. This compared performance of NHS trusts, also grouped by strategic health authority and, for the first time, primary care organisations.

  The indicator set included several performance indicators relating to services for older people including services following a fall or a stroke.

  The indicators and ratings can be found at www.doh.gov.uk/performanceratings/2002.

  The Department also collects, on a regular basis, performance information relating to targets, including those relating to older people's services, in "Improvement, Expansion and Reform," the 2003–06 priorities and planning document.

  Overseas Treatment Scheme
  Mr. Brazier
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health on what basis patients are selected for the NHS overseas treatment scheme; and who is involved in the making of that decision. [136746]

  Mr. Hutton
  Local national health service trusts determine the process for selecting patients for treatment abroad. However, two key determinants are always addressed:The patient is clinically fit to travel
  The patient is clinically fit to be operated on

  In general, in selecting patients for a NHS overseas treatment scheme, acute trusts will review their waiting lists and identify suitable patients who are then contacted to offer patients the choice of travelling for treatment either overseas or in the private sector. Where patients express an interest in treatment abroad, either

  611W
  the local trust or the overseas commissioner (in accordance with local agreement) seeks approval from the patient's general practitioner that they are fit to travel. Before travelling overseas, all patients attend an overseas assessment clinic, run by the overseas clinicians. This allows the overseas clinicians to carry out a pre-operative assessment to determine whether the patient is suitable for surgery and to travel to the overseas hospital.

  Performance Targets
  Mr. Flight
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the total cost was of(a) setting, (b) monitoring and (c) measuring the performance targets for his Department in 2002–03; and how many and what grades of civil servants monitor these targets. [137946]

  Mr. Hutton
  Performance targets for the Department were agreed as part of Spending Review 2002. The monitoring and measurement of Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets forms part of departmental performance management. Performance management is an integral part of the day to day running of the Department and, as such, it is not possible to separate the specific costs out. The monitoring of progress towards, and performance against, the Department's PSA targets is undertaken by a wide variety of staff at all levels of the organisation.

  Mr. Flight
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list the performance targets that(a) his Department and (b) its agencies and non-departmental public bodies are required to meet; and if he will specify for each target (i) who sets it and (ii) who monitors achievement against it. [137962]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker) on 23 June 2003,Official Report, column 581W.

  The Department of Health Report 2003 provides information on its agencies and non-departmental public bodies. Performance against targets is monitored by the Department, including through meetings between Secretary of State and Ministers and the Chief Executive of the body.

  Personal Alarms
  Mr. Hoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to supply personal alarms to NHS staff. [137466]

  Mr. Hutton
  The decision to supply personal alarms to national health service staff is the responsibility of each individual NHS employing body.

  The Counter Fraud and Security Management Service (CFSMS) was launched in April 2003, with a remit encompassing policy and operational responsibility for the management of security in the NHS. The CFSMS will shortly be publishing a strategy on the management of security in the NHS. From June 2004, a NHS security management manual will be made available to trained and accredited security management specialists in each NHS health body, which will contain advice on the issue of personal alarms to NHS staff and professionals.

  Personal Care
  Mr. Patrick Hall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what evaluation he has made of the impact of free personal care in Scotland. [138929]

  Dr. Ladyman
  It is a matter for the Scottish Executive to evaluate the implementation of free personal care in Scotland.

  Pharmaceutical Regulations
  Brian Cotter
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to carry out a regulatory impact assessment on the proposals to reform and modernise the NHS (Pharmaceutical Services) Regulations 1992. [137302]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  I refer the hon. Member to the draft regulatory impact assessment and competition assessment at Annex C of our consultation document, "Proposals to reform and modernise the NHS (Pharmaceutical Services) Regulations 1992" published on 29 August 2003. This is available on the Department's website at www.doh.gov.uk/pharmacy regulationconsultation.

  Comments on the consultation document and draft assessments can be sent, by 21 November 2003, to Peter Dunlevy, Pharmacy and Prescriptions Branch, Department of Health, Room 155, Richmond House, 79 Whitehall, London SW1A 2NS or e-mailed to peter.dunlevy@doh.gsi.gov.uk. We will publish a final full regulatory impact assessment and competition assessment in due course having analysed all comments received. These assessments will be placed in the Library.

  Plastic Bottles
  Mr. Hoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what assessment he has made of the safety of plastic bottles for consumption of fluids for(a) babies and (b) the general public; [136077]

  (2) what research he has collated on risks to health of using plastic bottles for feeding babies; and what assessment he has made of the practice in other EU countries. [137218]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The composition of plastic bottles used for drinks consumed by babies and the general public is strictly controlled to ensure the safety of foodstuffs contained in them. These controls are harmonised throughout the European Union and they set limits on the migration of substances into foodstuffs to prevent harmful quantities being present.

  The materials used to make plastic bottles for feeding babies are subject to strict controls that have been harmonised throughout the European Union. These controls are based on a detailed assessment of safety data by European scientific experts.

  Podiatry
  Sandra Gidley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average time has been that patients have had to wait for podiatry appointments in each primary care trust, in each year since 2001. [138160]
  613W
  Mr. Hutton
  This information is not collected centrally.

  Premature Babies
  John Mann
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) if he will ensure that premature babies at Guys and St. Thomas' Hospital receiving preventative treatment for respiratory syncytial virus are not discharged without assurance that they will be able to return to the hospital as required to complete their course of treatment; [136926]

  (2) if he will ensure that premature babies at Guys and St. Thomas' Hospital at high risk of contracting respiratory syncytial virus and chronic lung disease do not have their treatment curtailed due to cost cutting requirements; [136927]

  (3) how many paediatric wards were closed to new admissions owing to respiratory syncytial virus infection in the last year for which records are available. [136928]

  Mr. Hutton
  It is the current view of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation that children less than two years of age with severe chronic lung disease and who are on home oxygen during the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) season should receive prophylactic treatment during the respiratory syncytial virus season. I am assured by Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital National Health Service Trust that it will continue to provide full courses of the prophylactic treatment for these children.

  Information on the number of wards closed to new admissions owing to RSV is not collected centrally.

  Proton Therapy
  Mr. Ben Chapman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on proton therapy in the context of the NHS cancer plan. [137066]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The NHS Cancer Plan set out our commitment to maintain a modern stock of equipment in the national health service which offers the latest imaging and treatment techniques. We are aware of the benefits proton therapy can offer to the small number of patients with ocular cancer and will keep under review its potential for the treatment of other cancers.

  Mr. Ben Chapman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has for further investment in proton therapy equipment at the Clatterbridge Centre for Oncology. [137363]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  There are currently no plans for further investment in proton therapy equipment at Clatterbridge Centre for Oncology.

  Public Interest Disclosure Act
  Mr. Pickthall
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what his Department's obligations under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 are. [138560]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The Department recognises that it has an obligation under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 to ensure that all employees are able to raise 614W
  matters of concern about malpractice or illegal acts (whether it has been committed or is likely to be committed), such as,

  unlawful conduct;

  a failure to comply with any legal obligation;

  a miscarriage of justice;

  financial malpractice;

  danger to the health and safety of any individual at work;

  damage to the environment; and

  concealing of information in relation to any of the above.

  The Department's employees have been provided with guidance on how to raise their concerns. While employees are encouraged to raise their concerns with their line manager, they can raise their concerns wherever or at whatever level they feel appropriate within the Department. Employees can also raise their concerns to an appropriate authority outside of the Department.

  The Department's guidance clearly states that employees who raise concerns will be protected from discrimination, bullying, harassment or victimisation.

  Respiratory Physiotherapy
  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which primary care trusts offer(a) pulmonary rehabilitation and (b) domiciliary respiratory physiotherapy; and how many patients are undergoing such treatment in each. [138040]

  Dr. Ladyman
  [holding answer 11 November 2003]This information is not held centrally. However, a survey carried out earlier this year by the British Lung Foundation and British Thoracic Society found that 160 out of 266 hospitals across the country provide some form of pulmonary rehabilitation to lung patients.

  The National Institute of Clinical Excellence is currently developing a guideline on the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary and secondary care. It is expected that the guideline will be published in February 2004.

  Respite Care
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what additional resources the Government made available for respite care since 1997 in(a) the UK, (b) the north west region and (c) St. Helens. [137979]

  Dr. Ladyman
  The Carers Grant was introduced in 1999 to support local councils in arranging short breaks services for carers. It has provided an extra £325 million over five years to increase the number of breaks for carers.

  The Carers Grant allocations since 1999 are shown in the table.

  England (£ million)

  North west region (£)

  St. Helens (£)

  1999–2000

  20

  2,719,403

  71,679

  2000–01

  50

  6,855,503

  177,417

  2001–02

  70

  9,469,014

  245,713

  2002–03

  85

  11,451,858

  297,557

  2003–04

  100

  14,087,110

  393,460

  615W
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the Government's policy for the provision of respite care for carers is. [137980]

  Dr. Ladyman
  Carers are entitled to an assessment to determine their needs as carers and eligibility for support including short-term breaks. The Carers Grant, worth £100 million this year, provides money for local councils to provide short breaks and other services for carers to enable them to take a break. The introduction of the short-term break voucher scheme earlier this year provides more choice and flexibility for service users and their carers.

  Smear Tests
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of smear tests in England and Wales resulted in women being recalled as a result of inadequate smears in the last five years; and if he will make a statement. [136875]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The number of inadequate smears that resulted in women being recalled are shown in the table.

  Screening year

  Number of inadequate smears

  1998–99

  364,116

  1999–2000

  379,501

  2000–01

  359,441

  2001–02

  367,329

  2002–03

  357,707

  On 22 October, the National Institute of Clinical Excellence recommended that liquid based cytology (LBC) should be introduced across the cervical screening programme in England. LBC is a new method of preparing cervical samples for examination and reduces the likelihood of an inadequate test from one in 10 to one in 100. The Government welcomed the recommendations, which mean that approximately 300,000 women a year will not need to be recalled.

  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what percentage of UK women participated in the Pap Screening Programme, broken down by those(a) under 30, (b) 30 to 49,(c) 50 to 59 and (d) 60 to 64 in the last 12 months for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement. [136878]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  The percentage coverage of the national health service cervical screening programme, broken into age groups and taken from the cervical screening programme statistical bulletin, is shown in the table.

  Age range

  Percentage coverage

  20 to 29

  63

  30 to 49

  82.8

  50 to 59

  82.3

  60 to 64

  77.3

  Coverage is the proportion of women resident who have had a test with a result at least once in the previous five years.

  Smog
  Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the(a) mortality and (b) morbidity caused by smog in London in the last five years. [136539]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  No estimates of the impact of air pollution on mortality or morbidity in London have been made.

  Smoking
  Mr. Jim Cunningham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of 16 to 18-year-olds are addicted to cigarettes in the UK. [136812]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  [holding answer 10 November 2003]The available data are shown in the table.

  Cigarette smoking status among adults aged 16 to 18 by gender, Great Britain, 2001

  Percentages

  Status

  Men

  Women

  Total

  Current smokers

  Less than 10 per day

  9

  10

  10

  10 to 19 per day

  10

  16

  13

  20 or more per day

  2

  4

  3

  Total current smokers

  21

  30

  26

  Ex-regular smokers

  4

  6

  5

  Never or only occasionally smoked cigarettes

  74

  64

  69

  Base

  532

  630

  1,162

  Source:

  ONS General Household Survey, published as "Living in Britain 2001, results from the General Household Survey".

  Social Care Bodies
  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many administrative staff have been employed by social care bodies(a) directly and (b) indirectly in each of the last six years. [138486]

  Dr. Ladyman
  Figures for the last six years for administrative staff employed by local authorities in central and/or strategic positions in social services are shown in the table.

  Number of administrative staff

  1997

  16,400

  1998

  17,300

  1999

  18,500

  2000

  19,400

  2001

  18,800

  2002

  18,000

  These are whole-time equivalents and the figures are as at 30 September in each year. They represent a wide range of staff, including senior directing staff, planning staff, training managers and officers, registration and inspection officers and senior support staff.
  617W
  The source of these figures is form SSDS001. This is the annual return of staffing figures provided by local authorities to the Department. The Department does not hold figures on staff employed indirectly by authorities, or employed by the independent sector.

  Stroke Units
  Mr. Baron
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) pursuant to his answer of 27 October 2003,Official Report, column 99W, on stroke, how the stroke units that do not have rehabilitation stroke beds seek to rehabilitate their patients; [138930]

  (2) pursuant to his answers of 27 October 2003, Official Report, column 99W and 23 October 2003, Official Report, column 736W, on strokes, whether he intends that specialist stroke units should have separate acute care and rehabilitation units; and whether a combined unit is sufficient to meet the stroke service target. [139011]

  Dr. Ladyman
  The stroke service model in the national service framework for older people states that an integrated stroke service will involve specialist stroke services providing acute care and rehabilitation. Decisions on how that rehabilitation will be provided are best taken at a local level. Different models of care may emerge, but we anticipate that most trusts will establish a rehabilitation stroke unit.

  The target of all general hospitals that care for people with stroke to have a specialised stroke service by April 2004, as described in the stroke service model, is well on its way to being met. 94 per cent. of the hospitals that provide stroke care now have a specialised stroke service.

  Sandra Gidley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health which general hospitals which care for people who have had strokes have not developed plans to introduce a specialised stroke service from 2004. [137932]

  Dr. Ladyman
  171 out of 181 hospitals which provide stroke services are planning to meet the target on time. Officials are in discussions with those who may not meet the target and hope to meet them in the near future to identify what central support we can provide to help them achieve the target.

  Supported Accommodation
  Mr. Keith Bradley
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what powers a local authority has to place an adult whose family live in that local authority in supported accommodation in another local authority area; and which local authority has the financial responsibility for that adult. [138965]

  Dr. Ladyman
  When a council makes arrangements for an adult to enter residential accommodation under section 21 of the National Assistance Act 1948, the council should make the placement in the most appropriate accommodation to meet the individual's assessed need subject to the National Assistance Act 1948 (Choice of Accommodation) Directions 1992. In doing so the placing council may place the individual in residential accommodation its own area or in the area of another council in England. Generally, no matter where the individual is placed, the placing council retains 618W
  care management and financial responsibility for the individual for as long as he remains in residential accommodation under section 21.

  Waiting List Deaths
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people died while on a waiting list for an operation in each national health service hospital in(a) London and (b) the London borough of Havering in (i) 1995, (ii) 1997, (iii) 1999, (iv) 2001 and (v) 2002. [137323]

  Mr. Hutton
  This information is not held centrally.

  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many patients were waiting for surgery in the London borough of Havering on 31 December(a) 2002, (b) 2001, (c) 2000, (d) 1999, (e) 1998 and (f) 1997. [137328]

  Mr. Hutton
  This information is not held centrally.

  Information for individual trusts and specialties is available on the Department's website at http://www.doh.gov.uk/waitingtimes

  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for health how many people are waiting for an operation in each of the London boroughs. [137332]

  Mr. Hutton
  This information is not collected centrally.

  Information for individual trusts and specialties is available on the Department's website at www.doh.gov.uk/waitingtimes.

  Work-related Stress
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many cases of work related stress have been reported in his Department in each of the last three years; how much compensation has been paid to employees; how many work days have been lost due to work related stress, and at what cost, what procedures have been put in place to reduce work related stress, and at what cost; and if he will make a statement. [136858]

  Ms Rosie Winterton
  The Department holds no data on reported cases of work related stress, so we cannot identify costs. Central records on compensation payments do not record work-related stress separately.

  The Department has a number of procedures in place to help managers and staff to be aware of and to reduce work-related stress.

  The Department is committed to its legal obligation to provide a safe working environment for employees and its commitment to meeting targets for reducing the number of working days lost generally due to work related injuries and illness arising from the Government's Revitalising Health and Safety initiative.

  Working Time Directive
  Mr. Hancock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the impact of the Working Time Directive on the NHS; and if he will make a statement. [136134]
  619W
  Mr. Hutton
  The Working Time Directive (WTD) came into force for all staff in the national health service, with the exception of junior doctors in training, in 1998 and has already been effectively implemented. From August 2004, doctors in training will be subject to a limit of 58 hours a week under the WTD. A substantial programme of work is currently under way to support implementation within the NHS in the context of providing safe and effective services. Trusts have been asked to provide action plans for compliance with the Directive in respect of doctors in training by 31 December, to be agreed with their strategic health authorities.

  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the impact of the implementation of the European Working Time Directive on(a) hospital waiting times and (b) junior doctor training. [137069]

  Mr. Hutton
  Strategic health authorities (SHAs) are assessing the readiness of trusts to comply with the Working Time Directive (WTD) for doctors in training and continuing to deliver service priorities, including waiting times. Trusts have been asked to provide action plans for compliance with the WTD in respect of doctors in training by 31 December, to be agreed with their SHAs. A substantial programme of work is underway to support implementation and WTD pilots are beginning to demonstrate that the right mix of solutions can be found locally to deliver improved services for patients, fairer working hours and extended opportunities across the work force.

  The pilots are also implementing medical training posts, which are designed to offer doctors suitable programmes of training and achieve WTD compliance. Also, the modernising medical careers programme has been informed by the requirements of the WTD. These initiatives, together with discussions taking place with the Medical Royal Colleges, are designed to ensure that doctors continue to receive the high quality training that they and their patients deserve.

  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions he has had on the implementation of the European Working Time Directive in the health sector in other EU countries. [137070]

  Mr. Hutton
  Ministers and officials at the Department held discussions with counterparts in other member states throughout the previous negotiation and subsequent implementation of the European Working Time Directive (WTD).

  Further to the recent announcement of a Commission Review of the WTD, which they were required to undertake, we continue to actively engage with fellow member states to ensure that the interests of health workers and the national health service are protected. We expect the Commission to publish their proposals in late November and we continue to work to try and influence the content of this communication.

ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

  Abattoirs
  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) if she will make a statement on the Government's policy towards small abattoirs; [137247]

  (2) how many slaughterhouse premises have closed in the last 12 months; and what effect this has had on increasing journey times of livestock to slaughter within the United Kingdom. [137269]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  Slaughtering of livestock for human consumption is a commercial activity provided in response to the market, and livestock producers are free to choose which abattoirs to use. According to information provided by The Food Standards Agency, 25 red meat abattoirs had their licences terminated in the United Kingdom over the last 12 months.

  The Government support the robust enforcement of rules protecting animal welfare during transport. However, they do not attempt to manage the sector in a dirigiste way, including the numbers and locations of abattoirs.

  As part of the wider Strategy for Sustainable Farming and Food, we are working with industry to help secure a network of abattoirs and meat cutting plants including small enterprises. As part of our work, we are finalising data on the structure of the sector and this should help in the further development of strategic policies. We are already encouraging the use of investment grants within the England Rural Development Programme to help improve industry structure, processing and marketing. In addition, we are committing significant resources to the Red Meat Industry Forum and are actively participating in its work to improve the competitiveness of the red meat supply chain.

  Agricultural Subsidies
  Andrew George
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many(a) UK and (b) other EU countries she estimates would be affected if (i) 300,000 euro, (ii) 250,000 euro and (iii) 200,000 euro limits were placed upon public support for agricultural holdings. [135771]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  England would be affected by each of these limits. Questions regarding the payment of direct grants and subsidies in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland should be directed to the devolved authorities in Scotland and Wales and the Northern Ireland Administration.

  According to commission figures, in the 2000 EU financial year 11 of the 14 member states excluding Greece would have been affected by each of these limits. Statistics are not available for Greece.

  Andrew George
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many farm holdings in(a) the UK and (b) each member state she estimates would be affected if the EU were to place a 300,000 euro limit on the payment it makes; and how many euros would be held back from agricultural support under such a system. [135772]
  621W
  Mr. Bradshaw
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 23 October 2002,Official Report, column 314W. We have not made an assessment of what funds would be generated in this hypothetical policy scenario.

  According to figures from the European Commission, in the 2000 EU financial year, 11 of the 14 member states excluding Greece would have been affected by each of these limits. Statistics are not available for Greece.

  Bechtel
  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will list the contracts for consultancy and other work carried out by Bechtel for agencies responsible to her Department and its predecessor in each year since 1997, stating in each case(a) the nature of the work, (b) the value of the contract and (c) the duration of the contract; and if she will make a statement. [137883]

  Alun Michael
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 5 November 2003,Official Report, column 628W. From information held centrally, Defra and its agencies have let no contracts with Bechtel.

  Scottish Beef Exports
  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much Scottish produced beef has been exported by(a) weight and (b) value in the last five years for which figures are available; and how much of these exports comprised (i) beef of Scottish origin and (ii) beef of foreign origin. [135827]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  This is a matter for the Scottish Executive.

  For information, the following table shows UK exports of beef in the last five years.

  Exports of beef

  Tonnes

  £000

  1998

  4,884

  12,157

  1999

  5,647

  19,720

  2000

  5,387

  20,983

  2001

  5,409

  18,763

  2002

  5,318

  18,057

  Sources:

  HM Customs and Excise

  Data prepared by Statistics (Commodities & Food) Consultancy Trade & IT, ESD, DEFRA

  Bovine Tuberculosis
  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what arrangements she will put in place to assist dairy farmers affected by herd breakdowns as a result of bovine tuberculosis. [138028]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  There are already a number of measures in place to help farmers, including dairy farmers, with herds affected by bovine TB. Compensation is paid at the market rate for all animals slaughtered under TB control measures and in late 2002 we introduced licensed movements of non-reactor cattle on to and off farms under restriction, subject to veterinary risk assessment. In seeking 622W
  ways to assist farmers dealing with TB, a balance must be struck between reducing the burden on industry and effective disease control.

  We have a wide ranging research programme in place which is seeking, amongst other things, to develop a vaccine for TB, to improve diagnosis of the disease and establish how bovine TB is spread. All farmers are likely to benefit from the outcomes of the research. The bovine TB programme is under review and we will be consulting on proposals for a new long-term strategy, and on short term policy options, around the end of the year.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of the number of cattle which are awaiting tests to identify bovine tuberculosis. [138029]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  At the end of September 2003 there were just over 3,300 cattle herds awaiting bovine tuberculosis tests. Details of the number of overdue herd tests are published each month on the Defra website at defra.gov.uk/animalh/tb/stats/index.htm

  The number of individual animals awaiting tests is not available.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of(a) the funding for and (b) the number of veterinary surgeons which would be required to ensure there was no waiting list for cattle tests to identify bovine tuberculosis. [138030]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  In 2002/03 we spent £14 million on TB testing to bring the backlog of 27,000 overdue tests built up during the outbreak of foot and mouth disease (FMD) under control. We expect to spend in the region of £10.3 million on the testing programme in this financial year.

  At the end of September 2003 the number of outstanding herd tests had been reduced to just over 3,300. This is about the same level as that prior to the outbreak of foot and mouth disease. The rolling nature of the testing programme means that herd tests are falling due all the time and we are therefore unlikely to reduce the overdue list to zero.

  We propose to consult on additional testing (pre and post-movement testing and changes to testing frequencies) as part of a short term measures package and are preparing estimates of the veterinary resource input for such proposals.

  We recently consulted on proposals to permit suitably trained and competent non-veterinarians to carry out TB tests. Responses are still being analysed. However, there is no intention in the proposal to require local veterinary practices to use lay testers.

  Andrew George
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what system she has in place to monitor bovine TB factor compensation payments; and whether her Department collates and publishes the results of monitoring. [136411]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  Bovine TB compensation payments are based on the market value of the animals. The valuations are agreed between the Department and the farmer, or between professional valuers working on behalf of the Department and on behalf of farmers.
  623W
  A consultation on proposals to rationalise existing compensation arrangements for all notifiable animal diseases is underway. The main aim of that exercise will be to increase transparency and operational simplicity by creating a single approach for all notifiable diseases. In the interim, the Department is considering what can be done to monitor valuers and the level of valuations in recognition of deficiencies in the current system which were highlighted in recent audit reports.

  The Department publishes aggregated data on the numbers of stock slaughtered and compensation paid in Great Britain in the annual report of the Chief Veterinary Officer.

  Foxes
  Mr. Gray
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what discussions she has had with the(a) State Veterinary Service and (b) Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals about the re-homing of captured foxes. [138378]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  [holding answer 13 November 2003]The release of foxes and other wild animals from animal rehabilitation centres is an issue that is being considered as part of our consideration of the proposed Animal Welfare Bill. We hope to be able to propose that animal rehabilitation centres should be licensed and required to operate to a code of practice, including provisions for a code for the release of wild animals. Discussions on the rehabilitation of wild animals have included representatives of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the State Veterinary Service.

  Correspondence
  Sir Michael Spicer
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she will reply to the letter of 24 September from the hon. Member for West Worcestershire to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State with responsibility for nature conservation and fisheries. [138829]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  I responded to the hon. Member on 6 November 2003.

  Crematoria
  Mrs. Dean
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what estimate she has made of the effect upon the cost of a cremation arising from(a) the cost of installing gas cleaning filtration systems to remove mercury emissions and (b) the need to travel a greater distance to the nearest crematorium if closures take place; [137918]

  (2) what representations she has received about the review being undertaken by the Environment Agency's Local Authority Unit into the Best Available Techniques Not Entailing Excessing Costs for crematoria; [137919]

  (3) what estimate has been made of the cost of fitting gas cleaning filtration systems into crematoria; [138017]

  (4) what estimate has been made of the number of crematoria which would be likely to close if there was a requirement to fit cleaning and filtration systems; [138018]
  624W
  (5)what plans she has to conduct (a) quantified and (b) qualified research into mercury emissions from crematoria prior to reaching a decision on whether gas cleaning filtration systems should be fitted; [138019]

  (6) what account she will take on any decision to enforce the fitting of filtration systems into United Kingdom crematoria of trends on levels of mercury emissions; [138020]

  (7) what assessment she has made of the content of the Local Authority Unit report into Best Available Techniques Not Entailing Excessive Costs (BATNEEC) for crematoria; and what representations she has received which disagree with the report's recommendations. [138563]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  Estimates of the impacts of controlling mercury from crematoria were contained in a consultation paper the Department issued on 7 May 2003. A summary of the responses to the consultation has been placed on the Defra website at www. defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/crematoria

  The main interim conclusions reached from this consultation exercise are as follows:
  reducing emissions of mercury from crematoria should aim to be achieved without forcing any crematoria closures due to physical constraints such as insufficiency of space or heritage considerations
  a requirement to remove teeth prior to cremation is not acceptable
  the next step should be to explore developing a fair mechanism for reducing emissions from only a proportion of existing crematoria
  any improvements required for existing crematoria should be spread over a number of years
  detailed proposals on the basis of the above will be subject to full consultation in due course
  new crematoria should be required to install mercury abatement.

  Dairy Sector
  Mr. Hoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what measures she is taking to support dairy farmers in(a) Lancashire and (b) the UK. [136036]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  Dairy farmers in Lancashire, in common with the rest of the UK, benefit from expenditure on the dairy CAP worth nearly 2 billion euros across the EU15. This expenditure will increase with the introduction of direct payments to dairy farmers from 2004.

  We believe that in the long term the future of the dairy sector is best secured through pursuing the objectives of our Strategy for Sustainable Farming and Food. We have made a grant of nearly £0.5 million to the Food Chain and we have supported the establishment of English Food and Farming Partnerships, a new industry led body that has been set up specifically to support and encourage collaborative activity across all agricultural sectors. Furthermore my noble friend Lord Whitty has been chairing meetings of a Dairy Supply Chain Forum made up of senior figures from across the diary sector. This Forum and its sub-groups have been examining ways in which collaborative action can promote supply chain efficiency, and how levels of innovation and new

  625W
  products development might be increased, and considering the likely impact of the CAP reform package on the dairy sector. It also intends to consider the kinds of changes that the sector might need to make to adjust to the new environment created by the reforms.

  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many dairy firms went out of business in the last year; and what assessment she has made of the causes. [137285]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  Data from the Office for National Statistics shows that in 2002, 50 enterprises classified as manufacturers of dairy products were de-registered for VAT. This compares to 525 enterprises under this classification registered for VAT at the end of 2002. Although these figures may be indicative of the number of firms which went out of business, the Government have made no assessment of the reasons for these de-registrations, and it should be noted that de-registration can occur for reasons other than an enterprise ceasing to trade, such as its turnover falling below the VAT threshold.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what arrangements she has put in place to evaluate the effect of the farm gate price of raw milk on average net(a) income and (b) profit of dairy farms in the United Kingdom; [137893]

  (2) what estimate she has made of the threshold of the farm gate price of raw milk that would enable dairy farming to be economically viable. [137894]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  The Department monitors incomes on dairy farms through the annual Farm Business Survey and also, from time to time, via special studies into the economics of milk production. Incomes for the years ended February 2002 and February 2003 on a range of farm types, including dairy farms, will be published by the Department at the end of this month. Forecast incomes for the year ending February 2004 will be published in January 2004. In regard to economic viability, there are a number of factors that influence economic performance, including milk yield, milk price and efficiency of input use and these all vary from farm to farm. The wide range in economic performance across dairy farms is reflected in the wide range in the break even ex-farm milk price.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the likely effect of the current proposals for Common Agricultural Policy reform on the farm gate price of milk. [137895]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  When fully implemented, the reforms agreed in June in Luxembourg will reduce the support price for butter by 10 per cent. more than the 15 per cent. reduction originally agreed for both butter and skimmed milk powder under Agenda 2000 (i.e. a 25 per cent. cut in the support price for butter). If farm gate prices were to fall to the same extent, the price per litre might be reduced by a further 0.95p beyond the impact of Agenda 2000. However, we share the European Commission's assessment that farm gate prices are unlikely to settle at this level: indeed, the overall package of compensation agreed reflects this. (Producers will be compensated through an increase in 626W
  the level of direct payments of a further 0.74ppl over and above the compensation originally agreed in Agenda 2000.) The figures quoted above are based on an exchange rate of 70p/euro.

  Our economic assessment indicates that decoupling of direct payments from production will have a beneficial effect on farm incomes; we would expect the main dairy-specific price impact to be in relation to the value of milk quota.

  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the competitive position of the dairy processing industry in each EU member state. [137246]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  KPMG, in its report on "Prices and Profitability in the British Dairy Chain", which was commissioned by the Milk Development Council and published earlier this year, found that in 1997 (the most recent year for which UK data was available), apparent labour productivity in the UK dairy processing sector was somewhat below the EU average and significantly lower than in the Netherlands, Ireland, Austria and France. However, there has been significant investment in larger, more efficient, dairy plant in the UK since 1997 and this gap may well have closed.

  Mr. Hoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions she has had with(a) supermarkets and (b) dairy farmers regarding the price of milk. [136035]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  While the Government share producers' concerns over the low farmgate price of milk, price negotiations between producers and processors, or processors and supermarkets, are a private commercial matter in which the Government cannot and should not get involved, as long as competition rules are respected.

  The Secretary of State has had no formal meetings with representatives of the dairy industry or retailers to discuss milk prices. However, Ministers frequently meet with representatives from all parts of the dairy supply chain and are therefore aware of the issues. Matters affecting the whole dairy supply chain are regularly discussed at the forum chaired by my noble friend Lord Whitty.

  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of the growth of the United Kingdom milk and milk products industry over the next(a) five, (b) 10 and (c) 15 years. [137292]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  A study commission by Defra, the Scottish Executive, the National Assembly for Wales and the Department for Agriculture and Rural Development, Northern Ireland by the Centre for Agriculture, Food and Resource Economics at the University of Manchester, which was published in April 2002, concluded that on balance the elimination of dairy market support and milk quotas, together with compensating decoupled direct payments would not result in a significant change in UK milk production. It also concluded that such a reform of the dairy CAP would result in dynamic benefits to the processing sector as it moved from the production of commodity products to value-added products. Nevertheless, this study could not predict and could therefore not consider the actual
  627W
  outcome of the agreement reached on CAP reform in June. Under the umbrella of the Dairy Supply Chain Forum, which is chaired by my noble Friend Lord Whitty, Defra is co-funding with the Milk Development Council and the Dairy Industry Association, supported by the National Farmers Union, a study on the impacts of the agreement on Dairy CAP reform and some of the options available to the UK. Preliminary results for this work should be available in December, with a final report published in January. Once this is complete, we intend to work with the industry through the Forum to consider the long-term implications and the adjustments the sector will need to make to the new environment.

  Egg Industry
  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what procedures she has put in place to assess the effect of tariff reductions on egg imports on the UK's egg industry. [138034]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  There is still a considerable way to go in the WTO negotiations on tariff reductions before consideration can be given to the level of reduction applying to individual products. But we are well aware of the egg industry's concerns and we will do all we can to ensure the most favourable outcome possible for UK producers.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what direct subsidies are available to egg producers in(a) the United Kingdom, (b) France and (c) Germany. [138035]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  Given that the CAP regime for eggs is a very light one, it does not provide direct subsidies for EU egg producers. Some limited financial assistance is available to the UK egg industry under the England Rural Development Programme and Regional Selective Assistance. We do not hold information on the extent to which other member states make similar assistance available to their egg producers.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what conditions producers are required to meet to be licensed to receive export refunds for egg and poultry products; how many licences have been issued to UK farmers; and what level of export refunds are available to licence holders. [138036]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  In order to receive export refunds for egg and poultry products the applicant must be registered with the Rural Payments Agency (RPA). Export licences are required where quantities to be exported exceed certain amounts. Applicants for export licences must be natural or legal persons who, at the time applications are made, are able to prove to the satisfaction of the RPA that they have engaged in trade in the egg, or poultry, sector for at least 12 months.

  Within the period of 1 November 2002 and 1 November 2003, 162 egg licences and 395 poultry licences were issued to UK farmers.
  628W
  The level of export refund is determined by product (CN) code. Different egg/poultry products will have different product codes and rates of export refund, however for the period 1 November 2002 to 1 November 2003 the highest and lowest rates prevailing were:
  Egg products—lowest 1.70 euros/100gs; highest 75 euros/ 100kgs
  Poultry Products—lowest 0.80 euros/100kgs; highest 40 euros/100kgs

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the timetable is for determining whether United Kingdom egg producers may continue to use enriched cages for housing laying hens. [138077]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  The future of enriched cages will be reviewed on an EU basis when the Welfare of Laying Hens Directive 99/74/EC is next considered by the Agriculture Council in 2005.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the conclusion of the European Union's Agricultural Research Department report that under EU Council directive 99/74/EC on the Welfare of Laying Hens, EU countries will not be able to compete in their home egg market after 2012; and if she will make a statement. [138078]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  The Government will consider this report along with other economic assessments in preparation for the review of the Welfare of Laying Hens Directive 99/74/EC in 2005.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps she has taken to assist UK egg producers to compete in(a) European and (b) world wide markets. [138079]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  Subsidies to compete in the EU market would be incompatible with the principles of the Single Market. The EU egg regime provides for some limited export refunds in respect of egg exports to third countries.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will press the European Union to bring forward measures to enable EU countries to maintain their market share in the European egg market. [138080]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  The UK will continue to play an important role in formulating EU policy in this area.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what volume in tonnes of shelled eggs was(a) produced by United Kingdom farms, (b) produced by United Kingdom farms and sold at United Kingdom retail outlets and (c) produced by United Kingdom farms and exported in the last 10 years for which figures are available; and to which countries shelled eggs were exported. [138083]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  (a) The following table shows the production of shelled eggs in the United Kingdom for the last 10 years:
  629W

  UK egg production

  Thousand tonnes

  Of which: For human consumption

  Total Production of eggs1

  Total

  Eggs sold in shell

  Eggs Processed

  1993

  202

  180

  158

  22

  1994

  202

  179

  155

  24

  1995

  199

  176

  151

  26

  1996

  200

  177

  150

  26

  1997

  206

  181

  153

  29

  1998

  206

  181

  151

  30

  1999

  194

  169

  138

  32

  2000

  195

  170

  139

  31

  2001

  209

  184

  153

  31

  2002

  222

  196

  164

  32

  1 Includes eggs for human consumption, eggs for hatching, hatching eggs for export and waste

  (b) There are no figures available on the volume of United Kingdom production of shelled eggs that is sold at retail outlets in the United Kingdom. However, the following table provides the volume of total UK production for human consumption less exports which will provide an indication of the volume of UK

  Tonnes

  Country

  1993

  1994

  1995

  1996

  1997

  1998

  1999

  2000

  2001

  2002

  Irish Republic

  2,853

  1,868

  2,142

  4,875

  6,529

  3,790

  3,808

  4,896

  4,177

  4,241

  Netherlands

  4,052

  2,280

  2,666

  693

  5,074

  5,407

  582

  258

  184

  120

  Italy

  352

  419

  713

  549

  262

  3,091

  2,054

  3,126

  260

  63

  France

  216

  400

  436

  398

  350

  3,235

  4,334

  900

  372

  198

  Germany

  438

  373

  176

  494

  1,372

  2,334

  695

  788

  684

  349

  Denmark

  57

  200

  89

  79

  321

  4,191

  110

  39

  23

  18

  Belgium-Lux

  1,690

  464

  1,518

  174

  562

  191

  8

  29

  41

  Spain

  204

  442

  478

  276

  363

  798

  484

  488

  550

  591

  Saudi Arabia

  19

  0

  0

  0

  132

  271

  747

  1,612

  Bulgaria

  2,470

  1

  Hungary

  3

  21

  9

  28

  8

  422

  6

  48

  167

  905

  Czech Republic

  2

  4

  19

  1,222

  11

  29

  57

  U.S.A.

  131

  177

  69

  24

  8

  35

  95

  136

  84

  23

  Croatia

  4

  8

  4

  13

  126

  285

  176

  103

  19

  27

  Austria

  4

  4

  31

  0

  7

  572

  Turkey

  0

  5

  12

  11

  4

  169

  279

  Greece

  2

  3

  1

  0

  331

  Others

  188

  169

  278

  275

  101

  202

  240

  75

  94

  246

  Total figure

  10,212

  6,828

  8,589

  7,913

  15,105

  27,673

  12,737

  11,174

  7,605

  9,632

  Note:

  Please note that figures of 0 are less than 0.5 tonnes.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what volume in tones of whole egg powder was(a) produced in the United Kingdom, (b) produced in the United Kingdom and sold in United Kingdom retail outlets and (c) produced in the United Kingdom and exported in the last 10 years for which figures are available; and to which countries whole egg powder was exported. [138084]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  No figures are available on the production of whole egg powder in the United Kingdom, nor on the volume of egg powder sold through United Kingdom retail outlets.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the reasons for the egg production costs in the United Kingdom; and what assessment she has 630W
  production sold onto the UK market (including retail, catering, food processing and hatching eggs) UK Production of shelled eggs less exports (thousand tonnes).

  UK production of shelled eggs less exports

  Thousand tonnes

  1993

  191

  1994

  195

  1995

  190

  1996

  192

  1997

  191

  1998

  178

  1999

  181

  2000

  184

  2001

  201

  2002

  212

  Note:

  Includes table eggs, hatching eggs and other eggs for human consumption

  (c) The following table provides details of shell egg exports over the last 10 years. This will be mainly of UK origin but may include some re-exports of imported eggs.

  made of the reason for the primary egg production costs in (a) Poland, (b) the Ukraine and (c) the USA. [138085]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  We have made no assessment of the costs of egg production in those countries, but some of this information has been produced by the egg industry. Costs will depend on a number of different factors such as the costs of land and labour, inputs, transport etc.

  Fishing Fleet
  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what targets she has set for the decommissioning of the UK fishing fleet; and if she will take steps to ensure that the oldest boats and lines constitute the same proportion of boats decommissioned as they do of the entire fleet; [138089]
  631W
  (2) whether the UK's decommissioning plans are supported by binary decommissioning of fishing vessels within EU member states; [138090]

  (3) what estimate she has made of the likely number of vessels in the UK fishing fleet in each of the next 10 years; [138091]

  (4) what assessment she has made of the effects on fishing communities of the decommissioning of the UK fishing fleet; [138092]

  (5) what estimate she has made of the cost of a benefits package in relation to decommissioning of the UK fishing fleet; [138093]

  (6) what estimate she has made of the cost of the process of decommissioning the UK fishing fleet; [138094]

  (7) what plans there are for decommissioning fishing fleets in other EU member states; [138096]

  (8) what branches of the Civil Service are covered by paragraph 14(7) of Statutory Instrument 2669. [138097]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  The objective of the 2003 decommissioning schemes in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland is to remove 15–20 per cent. of the 2001 effort on cod in the North Sea and west of Scotland fisheries (Northern Ireland have also targeted vessels catching cod in the Irish Sea). We are therefore focusing the schemes on those vessels which spend most time fishing for cod. The age of the vessels is not relevant in that context.

  Other member states will decide for themselves whether a decommissioning scheme is appropriate to their particular circumstances. However the effort control measures that are in place under the Community's 2003 Days at Sea scheme apply to the fleets of all European Union countries fishing in the North Sea and west of Scotland—not simply the UK.

  While the Government are keen to reduce overcapacity within the European fleet, we have set no targets for the future size of the UK fleet.

  We are working with the Regional Development Agencies to ensure that the full range of Government support and regional funding is made available as appropriate to individuals and businesses in fishing communities in order to enable them to deal with the consequences of decommissioning.

  More than £60 million has been made available within the UK for decommissioning and associated financial support in 2003.

  It is for applicants to the schemes to decide the basis for their decommissioning bids, but these may include any anticipated costs of decommissioning e.g scrapyard fees.

  The provisions of the decommissioning scheme in England (as defined in Statutory Instrument 2669) are enforced by the staff of the Department's Sea Fisheries Inspectorate.

  Food Standards
  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps the Government is taking to ensure that consumer interests are represented on food advisory groups. [137257]
  632W
  Miss Melanie Johnson
  I have been asked to reply.

  The expert committees and working parties that advise the Food Standards Agency (FSA), including those committees which also advise the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and/or the Department of Health, all have at least one consumer representative member. The FSA regularly holds meetings with consumer groups to discuss and explain food policy issues and consumer groups are always included in FSA consultations.

  Animal By-products
  Judy Mallaber
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether her Department has a database of registered animal by-products approved premises available to enforcement agencies, with particular reference to the Meat Hygiene Service. [137589]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  As required by Regulation (EC) 1774/ 2002 (which lays down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption), Defra maintains information on various premises that require approval to be able to operate e.g. pet food plants. This information is available to the Meat Hygiene Service for enforcement purposes and can be obtained from local Defra animal health offices (who issue the approvals).

  Import Bans
  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on powers to ban importation of foods whose production standards are illegal in this country. [137282]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  All consignments of animal products (including meat and fish) imported into the UK from other EU member states must have been produced in accordance with the rules laid down in Community legislation. Imports from third countries must have been produced to standards at least equivalent to those in the legislation. Among other things, the legislation sets out the licensing, structural and veterinary supervision requirements to be applied in production plants and each consignment must be accompanied by appropriate health certification.

  If there is an outbreak of disease or if any other phenomenon occurs which is likely to present a risk to human or animal health, Community legislation allows us to take appropriate safeguard action, which may include a ban on imports of products from all, or parts, of the country concerned.

  Any consignment of animal products imported from third countries are subject to veterinary inspection on entering the EU to ensure that conditions of import have been complied with and to ensure that they have remained in a satisfactory condition during transport. Food not of animal origin imported from countries outside the EU is also subject to routine food safety controls at the point of entry to the UK under imported food legislation. Any products that do not meet appropriate requirements may be rejected and either re-exported or destroyed.
  633W
  Food from other EU member states is in free circulation within the EU and is not subject to routine checks at UK ports. Such food can be subject to import checks where there is information to support such action. All imported food, including food from other EU member states, may be inspected at the point of destination in the UK and is subject to the same controls and checks at retail level.

  Food Labelling
  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the labelling by country of origin of meat sold in the United Kingdom. [137281]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  I have been asked to reply.

  European Union rules require country of origin labelling for fresh or frozen veal and beef cuts and veal and beef mince sold prepacked or non-prepacked. For other meats, and for processed veal and beef, country of origin need not be given unless failure to do so might mislead a purchaser as to its true origin. Where origin information is given voluntarily it must not be false or misleading.

  The Food Standards Agency has issued guidance notes for industry and enforcement authorities, which emphasise the need to ensure that origin labels are clearly worded to avoid misleading consumers, for example by applying 'British' labelling to products like ham or bacon prepared from imported meat.

  The Government are pressing at EU level for compulsory origin labelling on all meats and some meat products, and for tighter controls on misleading origin declarations. It welcomes the European Commission's identification of rules on origin labelling as one of the key issues to be considered in its current review of EU labelling rules.

  Waste Management
  Dr. Kumar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what is being done to assess the impact of the different waste management practices required as a consequence of the(a) Landfill Directive and (b) the Waste Management Strategy. [137530]

  Mr. Morley
  A number of studies looking at the health impacts of different waste management options are being carried out by the Environment Agency. Following recommendations in the Strategy Unit report Waste not, Want not, and the 2002 Pre-Budget Report, the Government commissioned a review of existing literature and evidence of the health and environmental effects of different waste management: options. The first phase of the report has looked at facilities which handle municipal solid waste and waste of a similar nature. This is now being peer reviewed by the Royal Society and is due to be published around the time of the Pre-Budget Report.

  The Government will consider whether there are further research requirements in the light of the conclusions of the Review.

  Mobile Telephone Costs
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much she spent on official mobile phone calls in 2002. [132119]

  Margaret Beckett
  Records of itemised phone bills are not kept beyond six months. Usage is fully in accordance with the guidelines set out in the Ministerial Code.

  Market Towns
  Dr. Jack Cunningham
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessments she has made of the effect of the Government's policy on market towns in(a) Cumbria and (b) Copeland since the proposals were published; and if she will make a statement. [138470]

  Alun Michael
  In Summer 2002, 76 out of the 120 towns that were then involved in the Market Towns Initiative (MTI) responded to a questionnaire survey. The findings provided a snapshot of what had been achieved in the first year of the MTI, particularly in four key areas: establishing partnerships; community involvement; getting the best out of the health check, vision and action plan; and project successes. This research note can be found at: http://www.countryside.gov.uk/Publications/ articles/crn_60.asp. No specific analysis of any town, district or county was undertaken. However, this year the Countryside Agency is working in partnership with Defra to carry out a more intensive analysis of the problems and achievements arising in the 200 + towns of the Market Towns Initiative. This report is due to be published in May 2004.

  Organic Farming/Biotechnology Research
  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much the Government spent in 2001–02 on research into(a) organic farming and (b) biotechnology. [137248]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  The table shows Defra spending in the financial year 2001–02 on research into organic farming and biotechnology.

  £ million

  Organic fanning

  2.127

  Biotechnology

  29.7

  Biotechnology is defined as the application of biological organisms, systems and processes to manufacturing and service industries. This definition covers genetic modification (GM) but goes much wider to include fused cell techniques, protein engineering, fermentation and cell culture, production of vaccines and monoclonal antibodies (and many other areas) all of which have applications in conventional agriculture.

  Poultry Meat
  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what procedures she has put in place to assess the impact of Brazilian turkey imports into the United Kingdom on the UK's turkey producing industry. [138037]
  635W
  Mr. Bradshaw
  Additional duties can be imposed on poultry meat imports from outside the Community if prices are unrealistically low and are threatening market stability. However, under WTO rules these additional duties can be applied only to a limited number of chicken and turkey products. Action in this area is taken at EU level.

  Earlier this year, the European Commission began investigating industry concerns over the misdescription of basted turkeys as a means of evading proper duties. As part of this, we submitted information on turkey imports into the U.K. Those investigations are continuing.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the volume in tonnes of(a) poultry meat produced in the UK, (b) poultry meat produced in the UK and sold at UK retail outlets and (c) poultry meat produced in the UK and exported overseas was in the last year for which figures are available. [138032]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  The information requested is as follows:

  (a) 1,534 thousand tonnes of poultry meat was produced in the UK in 2002 (the last year for which figures are available).

  (b) There are no figures available on the volume of UK poultry meat that is sold at UK retail outlets. However, the volume of UK production less exports which was 1,320 thousand tonnes in 2002 provides an indication of the volume of UK production sold onto the UK market (including retail, catering and the food processing sector).

  (c) 214 thousand tonnes of poultry meat (carcase weight equivalent) was exported from the UK in 2002 (the last year for which figures are available). This will mainly be of UK origin but may include some re-exports of imported poultry meat.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what mechanisms are in place to ensure that poultry meat imports from(a) the European Union and (b) third country suppliers meet the same (a) quality and (b) health and safety requirements that poultry meat producers in the UK are required to meet; [138081]

  (2) what procedures are in place to assess whether egg products imported to the United Kingdom meet the same quality standards as domestic egg products. [138086]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  All consignments of poultry meat and egg products imported into the UK from other EU member states must have been produced in accordance with the requirements laid down in Community legislation. Imports from third countries must have been produced to standards at least equivalent to those in the legislation.

  All consignments of poultry meat and egg products imported into the UK from third countries must enter at designated UK Border Inspection Posts (BIPs) where they are subject to veterinary inspections. All consignments are subject to documentary and identity checks and at least 50 per cent. of consignments undergo
  636W
  physical checks. These ensure import conditions are met and that the products remain in a satisfactory condition during transport.

  In line with Community rules, random spot checks at destination may be carried out on consignments of poultry meat and egg products imported into the UK from other EU member states.

  Mr. Hayes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what support the Government provides to(a) poultry meat and (b) egg producers. [138082]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  The Government do not provide any specific support for either of these sectors. The Government readily acknowledges that both industries have excellent track records of innovation and market orientation. From their perspective, the principal need is for Government to avoid imposing unnecessary burdens or obstacles, while ensuring that environmental and animal health and welfare standards, among others, meet public requirements.

  Radioactivity in Food and the Environment
  Llew Smith
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what liaison took place between the United Kingdom regulatory bodies and the Radiation Protection Institute for Ireland in the production of the report on radioactivity in food and the environment, RIFE 8; [136721]

  (2) when she received the most recent annual report on radioactivity in food and the environment from the regulatory agencies; how members of the public may obtain this report; and if she will make a statement on the key findings of the RIFE 8 report. [136722]

  Miss Melanie Johnson
  I have been asked to reply.

  The Radioactivity in Food and the Environment report (RIFE 8) contains full details of the monitoring of radioactivity in food and the environment undertaken by the Food Standards Agency, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, the Environment Agency and the Environment and Heritage Service for Northern Ireland in 2002.

  The report shows that in 2002 radiation doses to the UK public as a result of man-made radioactive discharges to the environment were well below national and international limits.

  The report was published on 29 October and is available in the Library.

  The report was also sent to the Radiation Protection Institute for Ireland (RPII) and its findings will be discussed at the next biannual meeting of the UK Ireland Contact Group on Radioactivity Matters attended by the RPII and the UK regulatory bodies.

  Members of the public may obtain a hardback copy of the report (or an electronic version on CD) by writing to the Food Standards Agency at Aviation House, 125 Kingsway, London WC2B 6NH. The report is free. Copies of the report may also be downloaded from the website of the Food Standards Agency at www. food.gov.uk

  Religious Slaughter
  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will list for each species the total number of animals religiously slaughtered in the United Kingdom for the last year for which figures are available. [137278]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  Information on the number of animals and birds slaughtered by religious methods in the United Kingdom is not collected routinely.

  Information on religious slaughter in Great Britain is gathered as part of the Animal Welfare Review (carried out every two years by the Meat Hygiene Service on behalf of Defra), but the Review collects data only on a weekly basis. The latest published Animal Welfare Review contains information on Muslim (Halal) and Jewish (Kosher) slaughter gathered in 2001. The data given in the table were for the period 3 to 9 September 2001 for red meat animals, and for the period 14 to 20 May 2001 for poultry.

  Species

  Halal, stunned prior to Slaughter

  Halal, not stunned prior to slaughter

  Kosher, stunned prior to slaughter

  Kosher, not stunned prior to slaughter

  Cattle (including calves)

  1,116

  0

  0

  833

  Young lambs

  54,469

  4,028

  0

  2,277

  Other sheep

  23,589

  7,880

  0

  0

  Goats

  120

  21

  0

  0

  Broilers

  913,997

  131,656

  0

  34,728

  Hens

  128,408

  21,780

  0

  1,970

  Turkeys

  0

  0

  0

  637

  Ducks

  0

  36

  0

  476

  Religious slaughter is rarely carried out in Northern Ireland. There have been only a few instances involving a small number of sheep, and all the animals were stunned prior to slaughter.

  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what tonnage of animals religiously slaughtered in Britain in the last year for which figures are available was exported overseas; and to which countries. [137279]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  This information is not available since there is no requirement for an exporter to supply details of the method of slaughter in order to obtain an export health certificate.

  Meat Imports
  Mr. Weir
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions she has had with the Scottish Executive on the impact of the proposed reform of the Common Agricultural Policy on meat imports from South America. [133229]
  638W
  Mr. Bradshaw
  My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and other Defra Ministers, have had frequent discussions with the Scottish Executive on all aspects of CAP reform, but the reform is unlikely to have any direct impact on the level of South American meat imports.

  Mr. Weir
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions she has had with representatives of UK meat producers on the impact of the proposed reform of the Common Agricultural Policy on meat imports from South America. [133230]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  Ministers and officials have met regularly with representatives of UK meat producers such as the National Farmers Union and the National Beef Association, to discuss all aspects of CAP reform.

  Rural Payments Agency
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what target time has been set for the Rural Payments Agency to reimburse food manufacturers for the additional costs of using EU origin sugar; and if she will make a statement. [139134]

  Alun Michael
  For year 2003–04 the Rural Payments Agency has a target to pay 80 per cent. of all valid non-IACS claims within 28 days of the claims becoming processable and all claims within EU deadlines or in their absence 60 days.

  For the period 1 April 2003 to 12 November 2003 the target has been met. It is anticipated that this level of performance will be maintained throughout the 2003–04 year.

  Women in Agriculture
  Gregory Barker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what funding is available from the European Union for schemes to help women into agriculture. [137276]

  Mr. Bradshaw
  The England Rural Development Programme (ERDP), which is funded by Government and the European Union, provides support for rural areas, by encouraging sustainable rural businesses and thriving communities. It helps farmers and foresters respond better to consumer requirements and become more competitive, diverse, flexible and environmentally responsible. It also provides help to rural businesses and communities which need to adapt and develop. The Programme covers 10 separate schemes which provide new opportunities for farmers and others to protect and improve the countryside, to develop sustainable rural enterprises and to help rural communities to thrive. It is estimated that the Programme will provide £1.6 billion in support between 2000 and 2006. Defra believes the best way to encourage enterprise in rural areas is to provide the right economic framework and, where necessary, to target support measures e.g. rural enterprise and training, towards appropriate people. Awards of ERDP funds are made in line with principles of equal opportunities.

TRANSPORT

  Bus Services
  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many passengers used bus services in(a) Shrewsbury and Atcham and (b) Shropshire in each year since 1997. [138349]

  Mr. McNulty
  The number of bus passengers is not available for Shrewsbury and Atcham. Information included by Shropshire County Council in its latest Annual Progress Report for its Local Transport Plan showed that there were an estimated 6.3 million local bus passenger journeys in Shropshire in 2001–02, followed by 6.6 million in 2002–03. There is no reliable estimate of bus passenger journeys in Shropshire for earlier years.

  Childhood Obesity
  Alan Simpson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what research his Department has commissioned into the impact of pedestrian strategies on childhood obesity; [138739]

  (2) what discussions he has had with other Departments about implementing a strategy to tackle childhood obesity. [138740]

  Mr. McNulty
  My Department has not commissioned specific research on this topic. We are, however, closely involved with the work of the cross-departmental Activity Coordination Team, which is developing a strategy to raise levels of physical activity among both children and adults.

  In addition, on 17 September 2003 we launched, in conjunction with the Department for Education and Skills, an action plan that includes measures to promote healthy and safe travel to school on foot and by bike.

  Coastguard (Essex)
  Mr. Francois
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many part-time coastguards were employed by the Essex Coastguard Service on 1 September 2003. [139510]

  Mr. McNulty
  On 1 September 2003, the Maritime and Coastguard Agency employed 56 part-time auxiliary coastguards in Essex.

  Cycling
  Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many people have died while cycling in London in each of the past 10 years. [138667]

  Mr. McNulty
  The following table shows the number of pedal cyclists killed in road accidents in Greater London in each of the last 10 years.

  Pedal cyclists killed in road accidents in Greater London

  Number

  2002

  20

  2001

  21

  2000

  14

  1999

  10

  1998

  12

  1997

  12

  640W

  Pedal cyclists killed in road accidents in Greater London

  Number

  1996

  20

  1995

  15

  1994

  15

  1993

  18

  Total

  157

  Mr. Pike
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps he is taking to promote safety guidance aimed at young cyclists; and if he will make a statement. [139438]

  Mr. McNulty
  We have produced a large body of material on cycle safety aimed at younger children promoting the use of cycle helmets as well as other cycle safety messages such as conspicuousness and training. We have also developed a Cycle Sense campaign aimed at teenagers that was launched on 21 May this year. The campaign encourages teenagers to wear cycle helmets and consists of posters and a new Cycle Sense website.

  Dangerous Goods Safety Advisers
  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the cost of the Dangerous Goods Safety Adviser Scheme has been in each year since the scheme was established; and how many advisers have been trained in each year. [138370]

  Mr. McNulty
  The regulations implementing EU Directive 96/35/EC were made in February 1999 and dangerous goods safety advisers (DGSA) had to be appointed by a qualifying undertaking from 1 January 2000. The Directive does not include a requirement for approved training. Competence is proved by the successful completion of a written examination, which leads to the award of a DGSA certificate. The first certificate was awarded in October 1998.

  The number of certificates issued in each year are as follows:

  Number

  1998–99

  75

  1999–2000

  2,237

  2000–01

  1,061

  2001–02

  389

  2002–03

  321

  The costs of undertaking the approved examinations and the issue of the vocational certificate issuing arrangements are currently £230. This is to undertake a typical examination consisting of the core module, the transport module and the class module. An additional fee of £85 is payable to undertake an additional module or class examination. As there is no formal training required, there are no records of any associated training costs. The level of training necessary will depend on the competence of the candidate.

  The Health and Safety Executive consulted with stakeholders prior to the making of the regulations. In its consultative document, the HSE estimated the quantified costs to society over a 10-year period at between £580 million and £990 million. These costs are incurred by consignors and operators of transport

  641W
  involved with the carriage of dangerous goods by road and rail. These estimated costs have not been updated or verified.

  Driving Standards Agency
  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the budget of the Driving Standards Agency is in 2003–04. [138417]

  Mr. McNulty
  The DSA is a trading fund and is not given a budget by the Department. The Agency's business plan for 2003–04 plans for an expenditure of some £110 million.

  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many daily(a) telephone calls and (b) website hits were received on average by the Driving Standards Agency from people trying to book a driving test, in the last 12 months for which figures are available. [138419]

  Mr. McNulty
  During the period November 2002 to October 2003, the Driving Standards Agency (DSA) received 6,627,063 calls to the national test booking line. This is approximately 26,000 calls per working day.

  Figures are not available for the number of hits on the Agency's website but, during the same period, some 327,000 theory test bookings were made online. The

  1997–98

  1998–99

  1999–2000

  2000–01

  2001–02

  2002–03

  Tests taken

  1,202,147

  1,334,829

  1,274,381

  1,241,364

  1,346,656

  1,510,018

  Tests passed

  579,689

  634,308

  583,960

  570,415

  605,205

  675,617

  Pass rate (percentage)

  48.22

  47.52

  45.82

  45.95

  44.94

  44.74

  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many driving test examiners have been employed in each of the last six years, expressed as(a) head count and (b) full-time equivalents. [138421]

  Mr. McNulty
  For the last five years for which data are readily available, the average number of driving examiners employed by the Driving Standards Agency each month was:

  1999

  2000

  2001

  2002

  2003 (to October)

  Headcount

  1,261.05

  1,271.08

  1,313.06

  1,391.25

  1,493.05

  Full-time equivalent

  1,257.23

  1,268.07

  1,311.34

  1,388.84

  1,488.14

  Note:

  Figures before 1999 are not held.

  Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
  Mr. Gardiner
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will press the DVLA to include a contact telephone number on their envelopes. [138612]

  Mr. Jamieson
  I am currently content that the arrangements in place at DVLA are satisfactory and I would be concerned that the inclusion of the DVLA phone number on the envelope could potentially compromise the secure delivery of valuable documents.
  642W
  facility to book practical tests online was introduced last month, and some 7,000 customers have already booked their practical test using this method.

  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the average waiting time for booking a driving test, broken down by area, was in the last 12 months for which figures are available. [138418]

  Mr. McNulty
  For the period November 2002 to October 2003, the waiting times for a driving test in each of the Driving Standards Agency's five areas were:

  Weeks

  Category of test

  London

  Midlands and Eastern

  Wales and Western

  Northern

  Scotland

  Car

  9.9

  9.6

  7.6

  9.8

  6.9

  Motorcycle

  3.1

  3.8

  2.5

  3.8

  2.1

  Lorry/bus

  3.6

  4.6

  2.8

  4.8

  3.6

  Tim Loughton
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many people have(a) taken and (b) passed a driving test in each of the last six years. [138420]

  Mr. McNulty
  In the last six years the number of people taking and passing practical driving tests, and pass rates, were:

  EU Committees
  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the dates of meetings of(a) the EU Committee for the implementation of the Community framework for co-operation in the field of accidental or deliberate marine pollution, (b) the EU Committee on application of the legislation on access to the groundhandling market at Community airports and (c) the EU Technical Adaptation Committee on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work during the Danish and Greek presidencies; what items were on each agenda; what representative of the Scottish Executive was present on each occasion; what preparatory meetings were held for each meeting; which officials were present at each preparatory meeting; and if he will make a statement. [132684]

  Mr. McNulty
  The information is as follows:

  (a) During the period in question, this Committee met on 14 March 2003. It typically meets twice a year. Its agenda focuses on a five-year rolling programme of work in the field of pollution prevention and control.

  (b) There were no meetings of this Committee during the period in question.

  (c) UK involvement in this Committee is not the responsibility of the Department for Transport.

  UK officials consult widely and the views of the Devolved Administrations, including the Scottish Executive, are fully reflected at Committee meetings.

  643W
  Exemption 2 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information covering internal discussion and advice applies.

  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the dates of meetings of(a) the EU Committee on application of the legislation on the minimum level of training for seafarers and the recognition of certificates issued by training institutes or administration of third countries and (b) the EU

  (a) Minimum level of training of seafarers and the recognition of certificates issued by training institutes or administration of third countries

  Date

  Agenda

  Attendees

  22 October 2002

  High-level meeting with representative of the member states and EEA countries.

  MCA officials

  1—To exchange views on the proposal for review of the Directive 2001/25

  6 February 2003

  Shipping Working Party 1—To discuss the text of the proposed amendments to the Directive 2001/25

  MCA, officials, UK permanent representative and Department for Transport (DfT) officials

  12 February 2003

  Shipping Working Party 1—To discuss the text of the proposed amendments to the Directive 2001/25

  MCA officials, UK permanent representative and DfT officials

  4 March 2003

  Shipping Working Party 1—To discuss the text of the proposed amendment to the Directive 2001/25

  MCA officials, UK permanent representative and DfT officials

  (b) The EU Committee for the adaptation to technical progress of recording equipment in road transport (tachographs) during the Danish and Greek presidencies.

  The Committee has met only once in the last 12 months, on 26 June 2003, under the Greek presidency. The Committee considered and approved editorial amendments to the technical specification to Commission Regulation (EC) 1360/2002, adapting to technical progress to Council Regulation (EEC) 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport (digital tachographs). These amendments were subsequently published as a corrigendum to that regulation. There are currently no plans for further meetings.

  For both these Committees, Exemption 2 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information covering internal discussion and advice applies.

  UK officials consult widely and the views of the Devolved Administrations, including the Scottish Executive are fully reflected at Committee meetings.

  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether the EU Committee on the reciprocal recognition of national boatmasters' certificates for the carriage of goods and passengers by inland waterway met during the Danish and Greek presidencies; and if he will make a statement. [132721]

  Mr. McNulty
  This Committee did not meet during the period in question.

  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the dates of meetings of(a) the EU Committee for the adaptation to technical progress of roadworthiness tests of vehicles, (b) the EU Standing Committee for Implementation of the Directive on Marketing of Biological Products and (c) the EU Scientific Committee for occupational exposure limits to chemical agents during the Danish and Greek presidencies; what items were on each agenda; what representative of the
  644W
  Committee for the adaptation to technical progress of recording equipment in road transport (tachographs) during the Danish and Greek presidencies; what items were on each agenda; what representative of the Scottish Executive was present on each occasion; what preparatory meetings were held for each meeting; which officials were present at each preparatory meeting; and if he will make a statement. [132720]

  Mr. McNulty
  The information is as follows:

  Scottish Executive was present on each occasion; what preparatory meetings were held for each meeting; which officials were present at each preparatory meeting; and if he will make a statement. [132722]

  Mr. McNulty
  The information is as follows:

  (a) There was one meeting only of this Committee during the relevant period. It was on 3 to 4 December 2002. It discussed Directives on Vehicle Emissions and Registration of vehicles. It also discussed developments on a regulatory standard on roadworthiness testing and the results of an emissions research study during the period.

  (b) and (c) UK involvement in these Committees is not the responsibility of the Department for Transport.

  UK officials consult widely and the views of the Devolved Administrations, including the Scottish Executive, are fully reflected at Committee meetings. Exemption 2 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information covering internal discussion and advice applies.

  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the dates of meetings of the European Energy and Transport Forum during the Danish and Greek presidencies; what items were on each agenda; what representative of the Scottish Executive was present on each occasion; what preparatory meetings were held for each meeting; which officials were present at each preparatory meeting; and if he will make a statement. [132729]

  Mr. McNulty
  During the period in question, the European Energy and Transport Forum met in plenary session on 8 October 2002 (inaugural meeting), 21 January 2003 and 27 June 2003. Trans-European transport networks, interoperability of road toll collection systems and infrastructure charging were its principal topics of discussion at these meetings.
  645W
  UK officials consult widely and the views of the Devolved Administrations, including the Scottish Executive, are fully reflected at Committee meetings. Exemption 2 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information covering internal discussion and advice applies.

  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list the dates and locations of meetings of(a) the EU Committee for granting Community aid in the field of trans-European networks on transport, (b) the EU Committee on the Development of trans-Europe Transport Networks and (c) the EU Committee on the adaptation to scientific and technical progress of legislation concerning the transport of dangerous goods during the Danish and Greek presidencies; what items were on each agenda; what representative of the Scottish Executive was present on each occasion; what preparatory meetings were held for each meeting; which officials were present on each occasion; and if he will make a statement. [132730]

  Mr. McNulty
  The information requested is as follows.

  (a) The EU Committee for granting Community aid in the field of trans-European networks on transport met once during the period on 30 June 2003 in Brussels. The agenda comprised issues regarding the financing of the network and the projects of common interest on it.

  (b) The EU Committee on the Development of trans-European Transport Networks (TEN-T) met three times during the period, on 26 November 2002, 4 March 2003 and 3 June 2003 in Brussels. The agenda comprised items regarding progress towards completion of the TEN-T and its further development.

  (c) The EU Committee on the adaptation to scientific and technical progress of legislation concerning the transport of dangerous goods met on 9 December 2002 and 4 June 2003 during the period in question. It typically meets twice a year. The Committee discussed derogations and modifications of the annexes to three Directives on the transport of dangerous goods. They also discussed security measures for the transport of dangerous goods and the date of implementation of the transportable pressure equipment Directive and the work of the Committee of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods.

  UK officials consult widely and the views of the Devolved Administrations, including the Scottish Executive, are fully reflected at Committee meetings. Exemption 2 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information covering internal discussion and advice applies.

  Heathrow Airport
  Mr. Ben Chapman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the effect on regional economies of a third runway at Heathrow Airport. [138621]

  Mr. McNulty
  The assessment of additional capacity options is based on direct benefits to passengers from allowing more people to fly and giving passengers a greater choice of timings and routes. No assessment has been made of the wider economic benefits including 646W
  those to regional economies of additional airport capacity, though some of these will be captured in the direct benefits, particularly to business passengers.

  M6 Toll Road
  Mr. Evans
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when the M6 toll road will become operational. [137357]

  Mr. McNulty
  The M6 Toll road is being developed by Midland Expressway Ltd. The Department is expecting them to make an announcement on the road opening date shortly.

  MOT Computerisation
  John Thurso
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the cost was at today's prices of the contract with Siemens Business Services to run the MOT computerisation programme; when this contract was awarded; how much has been spent to date; and how much will have been spent by the time the system is operational. [138144]

  Mr. McNulty
  The cost of the contract with Siemens Business Services (SBS) to run the computerised MOT service is £1.07 per test at today's prices. SBS have been paid nothing so far and will not receive any transaction payments until the first MOT stations are computerised.

  The MOT Computerisation Contract was awarded in 2000. Expenditure to end of 2002–03 on managing and delivering VOSA's contracted products is £8.4 million and the forecast spend from April 2003 until roll-out in May 2004 is £9.6 million.

  John Thurso
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the progress of the MOT computerisation programme; and what assessment(a) has been conducted and (b) is planned of the (i) success and (ii) value for money of its implementation. [138145]

  Mr. McNulty
  Siemens Business Services (SBS) activity since the MOT Computerisation Contract was awarded has included design, development and testing of hardware and software needed to supply the service, and they are close to concluding their testing of the system functionality. VOSA is due to begin its trials of the new service in December 2003.

  Treasury Task Force commissioned a full review of the project in January 2000 before the contract was awarded. The review concluded that the project had a high probability of success. A further review of progress by an Office of Government Commerce independent expert was conducted in July 2002. This review concluded that an amended contract, then being negotiated, should ensure the first MOT stations would be computerised by mid-February 2004.

  A third independent review of progress now under way will report by 20 November 2003.

  A readiness-for-service review, to be conducted at the end of VOSA trials, will confirm the viability of the business case and that the services and users are ready for go-live. This review will also cover value-for-money set out in the business case and approved by HM Treasury.
  647W
  John Thurso
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the timetable was for the introduction of the MOT computerisation programme when the contract with Siemens Business Services to run the system was awarded; and what it is now. [138146]

  Mr. McNulty
  The original contracted date for the first MOT stations to be computerised was May 2002. The earliest likely date for implementation is now mid-May 2004.

  Railway Maintenance
  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much was spent on clearing railway lines of litter in each of the last five years. [138361]

  Mr. McNulty
  This is an operational matter for Network Rail. Responsibility for clearing railway lines of litter usually forms part of Network Rail infrastructure maintenance contracts and as such there is no specific budget, rather spending on litter clearance is subsumed into the general maintenance budgets.

  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many trees have been(a) planted and (b) felled on rail embankments in each year since 1997. [138362]

  Mr. McNulty
  This is an operational matter for Network Rail who are responsible for the maintenance of over 20,000 miles of track in the UK much of which requires the management of vegetation. Detailed figures of the number of trees planted or felled are not available.

  Rail Services
  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the performance against target was for(a) reliability, (b) punctuality and (c) safety of rail services between Shrewsbury and (i) Wolverhampton, (ii) Hereford, (iii) Chester and (iv) Aberystwyth in the last year for which figures are available. [138348]

  Mr. McNulty
  The Strategic Rail Authority publishes performance information in its six monthly "On Track" publication, copies of which are placed in the Library of the House. Information is provided for the services of each operator in aggregate, not by specific routes. There is no single performance measurement or target for 'safety'.

  Mrs. Ellman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when the line from Weaver Junction to Liverpool Lime Street will be modernised to enable trains to run at 125 mph. [138922]

  Mr. McNulty
  The Strategic Rail Authority's "West Coast Main Line Strategy", published in June 2003, envisages that the modernisation of the line from London to Crewe will be completed in autumn 2004 and the Crewe-Weaver Junction-Liverpool section in summer 2005, including sections with a maximum line speed of 125mph. With the introduction of 125-mph trains, journey times between London and Liverpool will be substantially reduced from autumn 2004.

  Roadworks
  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what estimate he has made of how many 648W
  roadwork cones are (a) accidentally destroyed and (b) stolen in each of the last three years for which figures are available. [138359]

  Mr. McNulty
  Figures for the number of cones accidentally destroyed or stolen are not recorded.

  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many pedestrians were injured in accidental falls into holes dug as a result of roadworks in each of the last five years. [138360]

  Mr. McNulty
  The Highways Agency has no record of any pedestrian being injured in accidental falls into holes dug as a result of roadworks on its roads, in any of the last five years.

  My Department does not hold figures centrally for local authority roads.

  Road Schemes
  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has undertaken into the environmental effects of proposals by Norfolk County Council to build a road through the Ringland Valley. [138209]

  Mr. Jamieson
  None. Options for a Northern Distributor Road form part of a review of the Norwich Area Transport Strategy currently being undertaken by Norfolk County Council. It has not taken a decision in principle on the need for the road and so there have been no proposals put forward for assessment by the Secretary of State.

  Vehicles (Tinted Windows)
  Mr. Chope
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what response he has made to the concerns represented by the Glass and Glazing Federation about the impact on the owners of vehicles with lightly tinted windows of proposed amendments to Regulation 32 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations. [138735]

  Mr. Jamieson
  Officials have already met with representatives from the Glass and Glazing Federation and have fully answered their concerns.

  Mr. Chope
  To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will issue guidance on how the proposed amendments to Regulation 32 of the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations should be enforced in respect of existing vehicles already fitted with(a) lightly and (b) heavily tinted windows. [138737]

  Mr. Jamieson
  Guidelines have already been issued to the Department's own enforcement staff in the Vehicle Operator Services Agency. These guidelines have been copied for information to the police.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

  Afghanistan
  Mr. Hepburn
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what further measures are planned to help combat opium production in Afghanistan. [138429]

  Mr. Rammell
  The UK is the lead nation on Counter Narcotics (CN) in Afghanistan and has a PSA target to contribute to a reduction in poppy cultivation in Afghanistan by 70 per cent. in five years with elimination in 10 years. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the UK are working closely with the Afghan Transitional Administration to help them implement their National Drug Control Strategy.

  The UK has developed a plan of activities to support the Afghan authorities in implementing their Strategy, including law enforcement, institution building, drugs demand reduction and alternative livelihoods for poppy farmers.

  As the lead nation, the UK has committed £70 million over three years and posted additional personnel to Afghanistan to lead this work. It is also planned to hold a counter-narcotics conference in February 2004 in Kabul, involving Afghan and international representation, to encourage further international support for the delivery of the Afghan strategy. I will co-host this with President Karzai.

  Ascension Island
  Mr. Steen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) when he next plans to make an official visit to Ascension Island; and for what purpose; [139102]

  (2) if he will meet the hon. Members for (a) Totnes, (b) Vale of Glamorgan and (c) Cheltenham to discuss St. Helena before his departure to Ascension Island. [139103]

  Mr. Rammell
  My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has no plans to visit Ascension Island in the near future.

  However, I will pay a short visit to Ascension Island during a brief stop-over on the way to the Falkland Islands on 26 November 2003. During this visit I have no plans to meet the Legislative Council of St Helena, but will meet the Island Council of Ascension.

  The Foreign Secretary has no plans to meet with the hon. Member for Totnes, my hon. Friend the Member for Vale of Glamorgan (Mr. Smith), and with the hon. Member for Cheltenham (Mr. Jones) to discuss St. Helena. However, I shall meet with them before my visit to discuss St. Helena and Ascension Island.

  Embassy Closures
  Mr. Simmonds
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many British embassies(a) have closed and (b) are expected to close in financial year 2003–04. [137100]
  650W
  Mr. Rammell
  1 refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Banbury (Tony Baldry) on 6 October 2003,Official Report, column 1112W.

  Mr. Simmonds
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many foreign embassies in the United Kingdom(a) have closed and (b) are expected to close in financial year 2003–04. [137101]

  Mr. Straw
  To date, no foreign diplomatic missions have closed in the United Kingdom in financial year 2003–04.

  The Seychelles Government have informed us of their intention to close their High Commission in London on 31 December 2003.

  Colombia
  Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what monitoring takes place to ensure that military aid to Colombia does not indirectly support paramilitary action against civilians. [137720]

  Mr. Rammell
  I refer my hon. Friend to the answer my right hon. Friend the Minister of State, Ministry of Defence gave on 10 November 2003,Official Report, columns 46–47W.

  Community Liaison Unit
  Dr. Kumar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the work of the Community Liaison Unit. [137534]

  Mr. Mullin
  The Community Liaison Unit (CLU) is based in the Human Rights Section of Consular Directorate in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. It provides assistance to British Nationals in danger of a forced marriage overseas.

  The CLU covers three main areas of work:

  Casework:

  Since the establishment of the CLU in October 2000, staff have dealt with over 600 cases of young British Nationals fearing or escaping from a forced marriage overseas. Forced marriage is a serious human rights abuse and is not sanctioned by any religion or culture. It is quite different from an arranged marriage, in which the parties give their full and free consent. The CLU has dealt with victims, male and female, aged between 11 and 39, and from a wide range of backgrounds including Sikh, Hindu, Catholic and Muslim to date.

  Public sector guidance:

  The CLU also works with other Government Departments to develop guidance for public sector services that may come into contact with forced marriage cases. To date the CLU has developed a video for schools, guidelines for police and are currently awaiting clearance on guidelines for social services. They have also provided support to link UK and foreign police services tackling some of these issues.

  Outreach:

  The CLU also work in the UK with NGOs, refuges, community groups, public sector, and faith groups to raise awareness of the issue and the help available to

  651W
  victims. Overseas, the CLU and posts (Embassies and High Commissions) work with partners in the judiciary, police and NGO community.

  The Community Liaison Unit also worked in partnership with the British Muslim community from 2000–03 to organise the British Hajj Delegation to Mecca. Responsibility for the Hajj Delegation has now moved to the Middle East Assistance section of Consular Directorate. This section deals with consular assistance to distressed British Nationals in the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia, which means they are better placed to offer assistance to British Hajjis.

  Correspondence
  David Winnick
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs for what reasons the letter dated 14 October from the hon. Member for Walsall, North, Home Office ref: PO15398/3 concerning an immigration appeal was sent to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office; when the letter was transferred; and for what reasons an immigration appeals matter was sent to the Foreign Office. [139035]

  Mr. Mullin
  My hon. Friend's letter dated 14 October was transferred to UKvisas, the department responsible for entry clearance matters overseas, as the appeal related to a refusal of entry clearance. At the time of receipt of my hon. Friend's letter, the appeal did not show on Home Office records. The letter was therefore transferred to UKvisas by the Home Office on 4 November so that further enquiries could be conducted with our High Commission in New Delhi.

  I will write to my hon. Friend in the next few days on this case.

  Democratic Republic of Congo
  Mrs. Spelman
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps are being taken to encourage British firms to trade with the Democratic Republic of Congo.[136345]

  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  UK Trade and Investment does not pursue an active programme to encourage British firms to trade with the Democratic Republic of Congo but it does provide information and advice to UK companies wishing to trade there, with particular emphasis on the mining sector.

  Mr. Hoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo. [137601]

  Mr. Mullin
  Encouraging progress is being made in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The Transitional National Government (TNG) in Kinshasa is functioning. Welcome moves have been made recently to improve the DRC's relations with Rwanda and Uganda. The TNG now provides the Congolese people with a real opportunity to end the cycle of violence and human rights abuses and start on the path to democracy and development.

  Pockets of fighting remain, particularly in the east of the country. We are concerned by recent clashes between "Mai-Mai" and forces of the former Forces Armées Rwandaises/lnterahamwe in eastern DRC. We
  652W
  welcome and support efforts by the UN Mission in the DRC (MONUC)—acting under their new Chapter VII mandate as authorised by UN Security Council Resolution 1493 (2003)—to tackle this problem.

  In the north-eastern district of Ituri, MONUC's Ituri Brigade have responded robustly and effectively to outbreaks of violence and are now establishing themselves outside the regional capital of Bunia.

  EU Constitution
  Mr. Spring
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what amendments the Government will seek to make to article(a) I-14, (b) III-62 (2) and (c) III-63 of the draft EU Constitution; and if he will make a statement; [137155]

  (2) whether the Government is seeking an explicit rejection of (a) further tax harmonisation and (b) a federal fiscal policy in the European Union in the draft EU Constitution; and if he will make a statement. [137156]

  Mr. MacShane
  The Government set out their approach to the Intergovernmental Conference in the White Paper, "A Constitutional Treaty for the EU: The British Approach to the European Union Intergovernmental Conference."

  As the Government make clear in the White Paper, they will oppose proposals which might lead to unnecessary rigidities or undermine the central role of member states in determining their economic policies. They will work to ensure outcomes that will bolster stability, promote flexibility and enhance the ability of European countries to raise productivity and employment levels.

  The Government also believe that the right of member states to determine their own tax policies is a fundamental one. Tax matters are a key component of national sovereignty and vital to the social and economic well-being of the country. That is why, in the IGC, the Government will insist that tax matters continue to be decided by unanimity.

  Mr. Blizzard
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on his policy regarding the energy chapter of the proposed European Union constitution as it affects the UK offshore oil and gas industry. [137759]

  Mr. MacShane
  I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to my right hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, East and Wallsend (Mr. Brown) on 11 November 2003,Official Report, column 204W.

  Council of Ministers
  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to his answer of 1 September 2003,Official Report, columns 796–97W, on the European Council of Ministers, what items were on the agenda for the Gymnich Informal Meeting of Ministers for Foreign Affairs on (a) 1 September 2002, (b) 9 to 10 February 2002 and (c) 2 to 4 May 2003; when the agenda for each

  653W
  was received by his Department; whether the agenda was forwarded to the Scottish Executive; and if he will make a statement. [137294]

  Mr. MacShane
  The Gymnich Informal Meeting of Ministers for Foreign Affairs can take in all the key policy issues of the day, as well as broader strategic issues. The last four meetings have addressed inter alia such issues as: enlargement, wider Europe, counter proliferation, Middle East Peace Process, Western Balkans, ESDP and Iraq.

  The Gymnich offers Foreign Ministers an opportunity to discuss broad policy themes in an informal setting. The nature of the Gymnich means that there is no formal agenda. The Gymnich does not form conclusions or take decisions. Items to be discussed are set out in a letter from the Foreign Minister of the country holding the Presidency to his colleagues. However, the issues actually discussed at the Gymnich often vary from the preliminary suggestions in this letter.

  We usually receive the Presidency's letter about two weeks before the Gymnich. The letter is not a document, which is automatically forwarded to the Scottish Executive. However here, as elsewhere, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office is alert to the need to consult the Scottish Executive on issues which touch on devolved areas in Scotland (including non-devolved matters which will have a distinctive impact of importance in Scotland) in line with the Concordat between HMG and the Scottish Executive.

  India
  John Mann
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the UK's relationship with India. [138202]

  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  Bilateral relations have steadily strengthened over recent years. Our relationship with the Indian government is now closer than it has been for a long time across a broad range of policy areas. UK development assistance will increase to £250 million in 2004–05. We are encouraging closer education links between the UK and India, including through a substantial British Council programme. And there has been a marked increase in bilateral trade to 5 billion in 2001. The large British community of Indian origin plays a very important part in maintaining and developing the UK's relationship with India.

  Indonesia
  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many United Kingdom citizens were affected by the flash floods in the Gunung Leuser national park on Sumatra Island, Indonesia on 3 November; how many United Kingdom citizens have been identified as(a) missing, (b) injured and (c) killed; what assistance the Government has offered the Government of Indonesia in their search and rescue operations; and if he will make a statement. [137293]
  654W
  Mr. Mullin
  There are no reports of any British Nationals missing, injured or killed following the floods in the Gunung Leuser national park in Northern Sumatra. Our Consul-General went to Medan from 4 to 6 November and together with the Honorary Consul, visited the site, and checked with police, hospitals and mortuaries. We remain in close contact with the local authorities. Our Rapid Deployment Team was put on standby to help but was not, in the end, required.

  The Indonesian Government has announced an assistance package of 1 billion Indonesian Rupiahs (£70,420) for reconstruction and relocation of displaced people. They have not sought any international assistance.

  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment his Department has made of the impact the imposition of martial law in Aceh on 15 May has had on(a) civil rights and (b) media freedom in the area; when this was raised with (i) the head of the Aceh Martial Law Administration, (ii) President Megawati Sukarnoputri and (iii) representatives of the Government of Indonesia; what assurances were (A) requested and (B) received; and if he will make a statement. [137709]

  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  We remain concerned about the situation in Aceh. Most recently, I met the Indonesian ambassador on Monday 10 November and raised our concerns about the extension of martial law, and the Indonesian Government's recent decision not to allow the Tokyo Group (EU, Japan, US and the World Bank) to visit Aceh. Our ambassador to Indonesia wrote to the Indonesian Government in August 2003 requesting that NGOs be granted permission to return to Aceh. When I visited Indonesia on 3–4 June 2003, I stressed to President Megawati that Indonesian military action in Aceh should be proportionate and in accordance with international standards on human rights. We have not approached the head of the Aceh Martial Law Administration as our concerns about the situation in Aceh are raised through Indonesian Central Government. Some media have recently been granted permission to gain access to Aceh to report on the situation there. NGOs have not yet been granted permission to return to Aceh.

  We, with our EU partners, urged the Indonesian Government to protect non-combatants in the on-going operations in Aceh, and to pursue a peaceful negotiated solution to the conflict. We remain convinced that a long-term solution to the Aceh problem can be achieved only through political negotiation and consultation between the Indonesian Government and the Acehenese people.

  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with(a) President Megawati Sukarnoputri, (b) representatives of the Government of Indonesia, (c) UK-based non-governmental organisations and (d) local non-governmental organisations concerning the extension of the state of martial law in Aceh; and if he will make a statement. [137710]
  655W
  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  On 6 November the Tokyo Group (EU, Japan, United States and the World Bank), which co-chaired the preparatory Conference on peace and reconstruction in Aceh, issued a statement to the Indonesian Government expressing their concern at the extension of martial law in Aceh. I met the Indonesian ambassador on Monday 10 November and also reiterated our, and the international community's, concerns about the extension of martial law. The UK continues to work through NGOs and the UN to provide assistance to the people of Aceh.

  We with our EU partners, continue to urge the Indonesian Government to return to the negotiating table as soon as possible, as only political negotiation will offer a long term solution to this ongoing conflict. We stand ready to assist both sides in this process wherever appropriate.

  International Terrorism
  Mr. Rosindell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps the Government are making to prevent links being formed between the Irish Republican Army and other international terrorist and guerrilla organisations. [136766]

  Mr. MacShane
  UK authorities co-operate with their international partners both bilaterally and through international fora to combat all forms of terrorism.

  Iran
  Mr. Best
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he will undertake further joint initiatives with the foreign ministers of France and Germany with regard to relations with Iran. [137639]

  Mr. Rammell
  We will continue to work with like-minded governments in any combination required to impress on Iran the need to co-operate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency and to rebuild international confidence in Iran's intentions. Following the visit to Tehran last month by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and his French and German counterparts, the onus now lies on Iran to deliver on its commitments. We are also calling on Iran to address international concerns on human rights, international terrorism and support for the Middle East Peace Process.

  Iraq
  Harry Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps the occupying powers are taking to ensure access to safe, legal pregnancy termination services in Iraq; what policy, and direct funding to achieve it, the UK is adopting on this matter; and if he will make a statement. [135435]

  Mr. Rammell
  Pregnancy termination services are a matter for the Iraqi Ministry of Health. Reproductive health services are available in Iraqi hospitals.

  Israel
  Mr. Sarwar
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the building by Israel of the security wall; and what discussions he has had with the Israeli Government on the issue. [137118]

  Mr. Rammell
  We recognise Israel's legitimate security concerns, and deplore the terrorist suicide bombings of Israeli civilians. We have urged the Palestinian Authority to do more to stop such bombings. But we believe that Israel's building of a wall, or fence, on occupied land is unlawful. We have repeatedly urged the Government of Israel to reconsider the route of the fence. My right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary have raised this issue on a number of occasions with the Israeli Prime Minister and Foreign Minister. My noble Friend the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean also raised the matter with the Israeli Foreign Minster, Silvan Shalom, during her visit to Israel on 30 September. She also raised with Zvi Shtauber, Israeli Ambassador on 22 October and Yosef Paritzky, the Israeli Minister for National Infrastructure on 29 October.

  We have made representations through our Embassy in Tel Aviv expressing concern at the route and likely impact of the fence. Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials have also made representations through the Israeli Embassy in London, most recently on 5 November.

  Mr. Best
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions he has had with the Israeli Government about the building of the wall. [137524]

  Mr. Rammell
  My right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary made clear our concerns about the route of the wall, or fence, to the Israeli Prime Minister and Foreign Minister on a number of occasions. My noble Friend the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean also raised the matter with the Israeli Foreign Minster, Silvan Shalom, during her visit to Israel on 30 September. She also raised with Zvi Shtauber, Israeli Ambassador on 22 October and Yosef Paritzky, the Israeli Minister for National Infrastructure on 29 October.

  We have made representations through our Embassy in Tel Aviv expressing concern at the route and likely impact of the fence. Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials have also made representations through the Israeli Embassy in London, most recently on 5 November.

  Nagorno-Karabakh
  Mr. David Atkinson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the terms of reference of the UK-funded project to improve the prospects for a settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. [137481]

  Mr. Rammell
  The UK will be funding a £2 million three year project aiming to improve the prospects for a permanent settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The purpose of the project will be to improve understanding of the conflict among all stakeholders, to
  657W
  improve the conflict sensitivity of national and international actors in the region and to implement a number of activities which will contribute to the development of constituencies for peace in the region. This should improve the prospects for a permanent settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict. We shall continue to encourage the governments of both Azerbaijan and Armenia to look to the future and build a better relationship between their two countries.

  Our policy on the Nagorno Karabakh dispute is that we will support any mechanism for its resolution which both parties can accept and which has a realistic chance of delivering a lasting political settlement. We continue to support the work of the OSCE Minsk Group.

  Northern Cyprus
  Mr. Dismore
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the conduct of the election in Northern Cyprus with particular reference to(a) legal action against the media, with reference to the cases of (i) Murat Kanatli, (ii) Basaran Duzgun, (iii) Hasan Hasturer, (iv) Suleyman Erguclu, (v) Hasan Kahvecioglu and (vi) Mehmet Davuleu, (b) the recent incidents involving the Peace and Democracy Movement, (c) the television interview by Mr. Denktash in which he claimed that Turkish Cypriots would be raped by Greek Cypriots, (d) the protest at Doganci (Elye) on 25 March and (e) the extent to which citizenship is being extended to settlers from mainland Turkey. [138777]

  Mr. MacShane
  The elections in north Cyprus on 14 December are of pivotal importance to the future of the island. This is an important opportunity for Turkish Cypriots to decide their own future. It is essential that these elections should be conducted in a transparent and democratic manner, free from interference. We are calling on all those who have influence, including Turkey, to help ensure the elections in the north are free and fair. We welcome indications from the Turkish Government of the importance they attach to this.

  With regard to legal action against the media, we are deeply concerned about any attempts to limit press freedom. On the particular cases raised, we condemn the physical attack on the journalist Murat Kanatli, reportedly by the 'Grey Wolves' group in north Cyprus. The five further journalists mentioned were charged with a range of offences, including insulting the Turkish Security Forces and undermining the "state". These charges relate to articles reporting events at Doganci (Elye) on 25 March 2003, when opposition parties and pro-solution forces tried to hold a symbolic referendum in support of the Annan Plan. The police raided the protest, an army contingent removed the "ballot box" and the organisers were arrested. The timing of these prosecutions (seven months after the event) adds weight to the assertion that the indictments are politically motivated. Furthermore, we are concerned by reports that a number of these cases will be tried in a military court.
  658W
  On the recent incidents involving the Peace and Democracy movement, we are concerned about reports of attacks on their party headquarters.

  We do not wish to offer detailed comments on the remarks attributed to Mr Denktash. If he did say such things, it was clearly intended to be inflammatory.

  We continue to have concerns about the number of "settlers" who have recently been granted citizenship in north Cyprus. The fact that this took place in such numbers immediately before an election is undermining confidence in the electoral process. The opposition in northern Cyprus has applied to the "Higher Electoral Council" (YSK) for an injunction barring those who have become citizens since the municipal elections in June 2002 from voting in the elections on 14 December. We await a ruling on that particular issue. The Turkish Cypriot courts have already barred two hundred people from voting in the elections who had been granted citizenship by the "Council of Ministers".

  We will continue to monitor the situation in Cyprus very closely in the build up to elections on 14 December.

  Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty
  Mr. Hancock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; and if he will make a statement. [136700]

  Mr. MacShane
  The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) remains the cornerstone of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and receives the wholehearted support of the UK and the vast majority of the international community— indeed it has the greatest membership of any arms control treaty.

  The NPT currently faces a number of challenges. It is not yet universal, and the UK continues to urge Israel, India and Pakistan to accede to the Treaty as non-nuclear weapon states. We are also concerned about North Korea's admission of a uranium enrichment programme and its announced intention to withdraw from the Treaty. This issue can only be resolved by DPRK's strict compliance with the NPT and full implementation of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards.

  The NPT has survived many challenges in its 33-year history and it remains a strong Treaty. The UK looks forward to participating fully in the 2004 NPT Preparatory Committee and the Review Conference in 2005.

  Mr. Hancock
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make it his policy to affirm negative security assurances given at the 1995 Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference; and if he will make a statement. [136701]

  Mr. MacShane
  The UK remains fully committed to the negative security assurance we gave in 1995. This negative security assurance was noted by the UN Security Council in its Resolution 984.

  Pakistan
  Norman Baker
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has received from the Pakistan authorities in respect of recent security operations involving their premises; and if he will make a statement. [138583]

  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  [holding answer 13 November 2003]The Pakistani authorities have raised with us both in London and in Islamabad the contents of an article in the sunday Times on 2 November. We have explained that it is the long-standing practice of successive governments not to confirm or deny allegations concerning the activities of the intelligence and security agencies.

  People Trafficking
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the Government's estimate is of the number of children that were trafficked in(a) the world, (b) Europe and (c) the UK in each of the last 10 years; and what plans he has to reduce this number. [137978]

  Mr. Rammell
  We are committed to doing all we can to combat human trafficking. I refer my hon. Friend to the Written Statement made on 5 March 2003,Official Report, column 1085W, by my hon. Friend the Minister of State at the Home Office (Beverley Hughes) which sets out the actions we are taking.

  The nature of trafficking means that it is a hidden crime and there are no reliable figures about children being trafficked into or out of the UK. There have been a few high profile instances of children being trafficked into and through the UK, but there is insufficient information to say if this is a growing problem. However, the very nature of the crime demands that is treated very seriously, which is why the Government have introduced criminal sanctions covering child traffickers and has tasked the Reflex group with co-ordinating intelligence on the problem.

  Performance Monitoring
  Mr. Flight
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the total cost was of(a) setting, (b) monitoring and (c) measuring the performance targets for his Department in 2002–03; and how many and what grades of civil servants monitor these targets. [137957]

  Mr. Rammell
  Performance targets for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office were agreed as part of Spending Review 2002. The monitoring and measurement of PSA targets forms part of departmental performance management. Performance management is an integral part of the day to day running of the Department, and as such it is not possible to separate the specific costs out. The monitoring of progress towards, and performance against, the Department's PSA targets is undertaken by a wide variety of staff at all levels of the organisation.

  Religious Freedom (Egypt)
  Bob Spink
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will raise the issue of the Christians arrested in Egypt for their faith with the Egyptian Government and urge them to stop their action against Muslim converts to Christianity. [135500]

  Mr. Rammell
  We are looking into the reports to which the hon. Member refers. The Egyptian Constitution provides for equal public rights and duties without discrimination on the basis of religion or creed. Although we have received a number of letters on this subject from concerned people in the United Kingdom, we have seen no evidence of systematic official targeting of converts to Christianity. Where there is evidence of violation of human rights, we of course make our views known to the Egyptian authorities.

  Sudan
  John Barrett
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the progress of the peace process between the Government of Sudan and the Darfur rebel group. [136764]

  Mr. Mullin
  There has been a joint communiqué by the Government of Sudan (GoS) and the Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM)agreeing to return to Abeche in one month to discuss the political and wealth sharing annexes. The parties have also reached agreement on humanitarian access, which will be under the supervision of the Humanitarian Aid Commission, with the Tri-Partite Committee (GoS, Government of Chad and the SLM) being informed of developments.

  We are not directly involved in the Abeche talks and it is difficult at this stage to make an assessment of progress. There have been allegations that the GoS have resumed military activities near SLM areas, and some indication that the SLM are disappointed that some of their proposals have been rejected.

  However, we remain hopeful that both parties will adhere to the terms of the communiqué and resume the talks on time.

  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what the main points were of the ceasefire agreement of 15 October 2002 between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army; what assessment his Department has made of the Sudanese bombings in Darfur on 2 November and their impact on the on-going negotiations in that region; and if he will make a statement. [136905]

  Mr. Mullin
  The main points of the Memorandum of Understanding on Cessation of Hostilities signed on 15 October 2002 in Kenya between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) are as follows:the parties agree to create and maintain a conducive atmosphere throughout the negotiations; to cease hostilities in all areas and ensure military stand down for all forces; to freeze media wars and allow unimpeded humanitarian access to all areas.

  The negotiations between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM) in Chad, with the Chadian Government as mediators, are

  661W
  separate. We are aware of reports that the Government of Sudan have resumed military activities close to Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM) areas. The Government of Sudan has stated that it had bombed areas controlled by other militias who rejected the cease-fire. We are seeking corroboration of the reports including by visits by members of our embassy to the area.

  The parties have now signed a joint communiqué resolving to meet in one month to discuss the political and wealth sharing annexes of the draft agreement. There has also been agreement on humanitarian access. We view these as positive steps.

  Angus Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment his Department has made of the progress made in negotiations between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army since the signing of the ceasefire agreement of 15 October 2002; what help his Department has(a) offered and (b) delivered to facilitate the process; and if he will make a statement. [136906]

  Mr. Mullin
  The Memorandum of Understanding on Cessation of Hostilities between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army has continued to hold. The parties have made substantial progress in the past year. A Framework Agreement on Security Arrangements during the Interim Period, signed on 25 September 2003, is a further indication of the commitment of both parties to peace. The talks have adjourned for Ramadan and will resume on 30 November. We remain hopeful that a comprehensive peace agreement will be signed in the new year.

  The UK observer team has consisted of an official based in Nairobi who can attend every session of the talks and handle local co-ordination between sessions, and the UK Special Representative for Sudan and the Head of the joint FCO/DFID Sudan Unit from London. In addition to financial contributions to the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), the Government have provided experts on legal and security issues. We also contribute funding and personnel to the missions monitoring the agreements already reached.

  Tariq Aziz
  Mr. Dalyell
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what(a) medical help and (b) legal help and advice has been given to Mr. Tariq Aziz. [137730]

  Mr. Rammell
  [holding answer 10 November 2003]Tariq Aziz is in US custody. As the detaining power, these questions are a matter for the US authorities, who have said that they do not comment on the cases of individual detainees.

  UKvisas
  David Winnick
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will take steps to ensure that calls to UKvisas on 020 7008 8446 are answered by officials. [139034]
  662W
  Mr. Mullin
  I am sorry that officials did not answer UKvisas telephone number 0207 008 8446. Officials in UKvisas are expected to respond to all telephone calls and to use the voicemail facility. Unfortunately, on this occasion, this voicemail facility had not been updated to show that the official was out of the office, and did not give an alternative point of contact. Guidance has been re-issued to ensure that officials are aware of these procedures.

  A full list of contact numbers for the Visa Correspondence Section has been circulated to MPs' offices and is also available on the parliamentary internet. UKvisas recently introduced a dedicated telephone hotline for Members of Parliament to deal with urgent cases and inquiries. This is manned throughout office hours. UKvisas has now resent a copy of this list to my hon. Friend's office.

  United Nations Compensation Commission
  Harry Cohen
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list payments from the United Nations Compensation Commission to(a) the UK Government and (b) other UK beneficiaries broken down by (i) amount and (ii) date; what disbursements have been made by the UK Government; to whom; for what amount; on what dates; and if he will make a statement. [137433]

  Mr. Mullin
  From 1996 to date, the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC) has paid a total of US$286,028,428.89 to the UK Government for distribution to individuals, companies and Government Departments. US$100,595,509.28 has been paid to individuals, US$180,329,020.61 to companies, and US$5,103,899.00 to Government Departments. All payments are routed through the UK Government. Details of the 420 payments to companies and six payments to Government Departments can be found on the UNCC website at www.uncc.ch. Details of payments to individuals cannot be disclosed for reasons of confidentiality.

  Uzbekistan
  Mr. Hammond
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the human rights situation in Uzbekistan. [137432]

  Mr. Rammell
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Truro and St. Austell (Matthew Taylor) on 20 June 2003,Official Report, column 437W, and the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Portsmouth, South (Mr. Hancock) on 21 October 2003, Official Report, column 536W.

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether Uzbekistan has agreed to BBC World Service re-broadcasting from within Uzbekistan. [138166]

  Mr. Rammell
  Uzbekistan has not agreed to BBC World Service re-broadcasting effectively from within Uzbekistan despite representations made to the Uzbek authorities by our embassy in Tashkent. We shall continue to lobby the Uzbek authorities on this issue.
  663W
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what funding other than that provided for the translating and printing of his Department's publications in Uzbek will be provided for assistance to Uzbekistan in judicial reform. [138167]

  Mr. Rammell
  In 2002, the Global Conflict Prevention Pool (GCPP) funded a £71,000 pilot electronic court reporting project in Uzbekistan. As part of the project, new electronic court reporting equipment was installed in four criminal courts in the Ferghana Region. Sadly, while receiving some positive reports from defence lawyers, this assistance has had its limitations; the equipment was abused or not used in practice and court reports were not made available when cases were appealed. Further plans to install the equipment in over 150 courts nation wide have been suspended until we receive firm evidence that the equipment provided thus far is being used effectively.

  We shall continue to look for viable opportunities to assist Uzbekistan in reforming its judiciary and improving its human rights record in conjunction with EU, OSCE and other partners. We believe that lessening the dependence on often doubtful confessions and improving the focus on material and forensic evidence is the key to reducing levels of brutality and improving fairness in the judicial process. Through engagement with the authorities on development of an action plan to combat torture, we are also pressing for the political will for such reforms. Regionally we are organising a training workshop in Almaty in December to train judges and prosecutors in the judicial control of the practice of torture. Members of the Uzbek judiciary and procuracy will be invited to attend.

  Western Sahara
  Mr. Drew
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions he has had with representatives of the oil industry which are active in the Western Sahara. [130573]

  Mr. Rammell
  None.

  Work-related Stress
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many cases of work related stress have been reported in his Department in each of the last three years; how much compensation has been paid to employees; how many work days have been lost due to work related stress, and at what cost, what procedures have been put in place to reduce work related stress, and at what cost; and if he will make a statement. [136851]

  Mr. Mike O'Brien
  The Foreign and Commonwealth Office does not currently keep statistics on work-related stress as a sickness absence type. No compensation has been paid to employees because of work-related stress in the last three years. All FCO staff (and dependants overseas) can discuss work-related (and personal) concerns in confidence with a trained welfare officer.

  Since March 2002 the FCO has also provided a counselling and advice service to staff in the UK, and for staff and dependants overseas, via an Employee
  664W
  Assistance Programme. Stress, whether or not related to work, is one of the areas covered. The cost is approximately £50,000 pa.

  Zimbabwe
  Mr. Best
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what contacts his Department has had with the Daily News in Zimbabwe. [137635]

  Mr. Mullin
  Our High Commission in Harare maintains regular contact with media organisations in Zimbabwe, including the Daily News, as part of its routine duties. High Commission representatives also attended the court hearings that followed the Daily News closure on 12 September 2003. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has since issued two press statements on 15 and 20 September condemning the Government of Zimbabwe for its harassment of the free and independent media in Zimbabwe. Copies of the press release are available on the FCO website: www.fco.gov.uk/policy/news/press-releases.

  Representatives from the Daily News were in London recently to raise awareness of the plight of the newspaper. I met them on 6 November.

  Mr. Best
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he last met President Mbeki to discuss the situation in Zimbabwe. [137638]

  Mr. Mullin
  My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary last met President Mbeki in the margins of the United Nations General Assembly on 24 September. They discussed Zimbabwe.

  Mr. Robathan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make it his policy to urge the Commonwealth to expel Zimbabwe. [138407]

  Mr. Mullin
  Commonwealth decisions are made by consensus. The issue will be discussed at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting next month.

  The Commonwealth Secretary General has listed five benchmarks where there would have to be progress before Zimbabwe could be re-admitted to the Councils of the Commonwealth:

  Achieving national reconciliation and dialogue;

  Repealing legislation that prejudices freedom of speech, of the press and of peaceful assembly;

  Stopping harassment of the political opposition and civil society;

  Addressing the recommendations of the two Commonwealth election observer group reports;

  Engaging the Commonwealth Secretariat and UN Development Programme on a proper land reform programme.

  We see no case for readmitting Zimbabwe to the Councils of the Commonwealth while it remains in breach of these benchmarks and of the Harare Principles.

  Mr. Robathan
  To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make it his policy to press the United Nations(a) to impose sanctions on Zimbabwe and (b) to debate the issue of Zimbabwe. [138408]
  665W
  Mr. Mullin
  We maintain regular contact with the UN Secretary General, the UN Development Programme and the World Food Programme about Zimbabwe. We supported EU resolutions at the UN Human Rights Commission in 2002 and 2003. Regrettably these resolutions fell to `No Action' motions.

  As my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary made clear to the House on 10 June 2003, Official Report, column 524, we would only go to the United Nations Security Council for a resolution when we believed that we would win one. Tabling a resolution on UN sanctions would be certain to fail and would only hand Mugabe a gratuitous victory.

  We will continue to encourage the UN to focus on the crisis in Zimbabwe.

HOME DEPARTMENT

  Asylum Seekers
  Diana Organ
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people from the People's Republic of China sought asylum in the UK in(a) 2001, (b) 2002 and (c) 2003 to date. [134202]

  Beverley Hughes
  The table shows the number of asylum applications, excluding dependants, lodged in the UK by nationals of the People's Republic of China in 2001, 2002 and from January to June 2003. The next publication on asylum applications and other asylum statistics covering the third quarter of 2003 (July-September) will be available on 27 November 2003 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http: //www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigrationl.html.

  Applications1 lodged in the UK by nationals of the People's Republic of China, excluding dependants

  Asylum applications lodged in UK

  2001

  2,390

  20022

  3,675

  2003—January to June2

  1,620

  1 All data are rounded to the nearest five.

  2 Provisional data.

  Mr. Best
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the states regarded by his Department for the purposes of fast-tracking asylum applications as democratic. [132233]

  Beverley Hughes
  Applications are considered suitable for fast tracking if, upon initial screening, they are believed to be straightforward and capable of being decided within about seven to 10 days, and the applicant is from a country on the Fast Track Processes Suitability List (previously referred to as the "Oakington List"). A country will be added to the list only if we consider that it produces some types of claim which are capable of being decided quickly. There are no other specific requirements.

  The countries (or part countries) presently appearing on the list are:
  Afghanistan, Albania, Bangladesh, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, China, Congo, Cyprus, Czech
  666W
  Republic, Djibouti, Ecuador, Estonia, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Hungary, Iraq, Ivory Coast, India, Jamaica, Kenya, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malaysia, Malawi, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Moldova, Mongolia, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Pakistan, Poland, Romania, St. Lucia, Serbia and Montenegro, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Somaliland, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

  Not all applications from the countries listed above are considered suitable for fast tracking. We are keeping under review the basis on which we consider an application suitable for special fast-tracking arrangements.

  Mr. Keith Bradley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what resources have been allocated to citizen advice bureaux specifically for their work with asylum seekers in each of the last five years. [132690]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 20 October 2003]The National Asylum Support Service grant funds six voluntary sector organisations to provide reception assistance and one stop services to asylum seekers. The citizens advice bureaux are not one of the organisations funded to assist asylum seekers.

  Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department(a) on what basis and (b) when decision making on Iraqi asylum applications resumed. [133595]

  Beverley Hughes
  On 16 June I announced the resumption with immediate effect of decision making on Iraqi asylum applications. I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, North-West (Mr. Best) on 15 July 2003,Official Report, column 266W.

  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on his Department's policy regarding travel arrangements for asylum seekers to visit relatives in the UK. [133955]

  Beverley Hughes
  The provision of support to eligible asylum seekers applying for asylum in the UK is intended to meet essential living needs. Regulation 9(4) of the Asylum Support Regulations 2000 provides that costs of travel are not to be regarded as an essential living need. National Asylum Support Service (NASS) does not provide funding for asylum seekers to travel by taxi to visit family or friends.

  NASS does not make arrangements for supported asylum seekers to visit relatives living elsewhere in the UK. Neither does it make arrangements for those seeking asylum outside the country to travel to the UK to see relatives.

  David Davis
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers there were in(a) Hull and (b) the East Riding of Yorkshire in each month in the last two quarters for which figures are available; how long each application took to process; and how many applications were successful. [134052]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 23 October 2003]: The information is not available in the form requested.

  The availability of information on the location of asylum seekers in the UK is currently linked to the support the asylum seeker receives. Asylum seekers in the UK either receive support from the National
  667W
  Asylum Support Service (NASS), local authorities or the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), or are supporting themselves.

  Information on outstanding asylum cases, initial decision outcomes and asylum case processing times relating to persons in particular areas of the UK is unavailable, as are statistics regarding the location of asylum seekers not in receipt of support.

  NASS does not disperse asylum seekers to any areas in the East Riding of Yorkshire. The following table shows the number of asylum seekers (including dependants) accommodated by NASS and receiving subsistence only support in Hull as at the end of the last two quarters for which figures are available.

  As at end of quarter

  Number of asylum seekers (including dependants supported in NASS accommodation in Hull1

  Number of asylum seekers (including dependants) receiving subsistence only support in Hull

  March 2003

  940

  50

  June 2003

  75

  60

  From grant claims sent to the Home Office by local authorities, as at the end of March 2003, there were the following additional number2 of asylum seekers being supported by the local authorities in Hull and East Riding of Yorkshire:

  1Figures are rounded to the nearest 5 and may not sum due to rounding.

  2Asylum seekers are not necessarily resident in the local authority that supports them due to the voluntary dispersal programme which operated prior to NASS.

  Local authority

  Number of singles supported as at end March 2003

  Number of families supported as at end of March 2003

  East Riding

  5

  0

  Hull

  20

  5

  Statistics on the number of asylum seekers supported by NASS in each region are available on the Home Office's Immigration and Asylum Statistics website: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html

  Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers, broken down by country of origin, applied in the(a) fourth quarter of 2002, (b) first quarter of 2003 and (c) second quarter of 2003. [1340901

  Beverley Hughes
  The table shows the number of asylum applicants, by nationality, for the last three published quarters. This data is not available by country of origin.

  Information on asylum applications and other asylum statistics is published quarterly. The next publication covering the third quarter of 2003 (July—September2003) will be available on the 27 November 2003 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate web site at http: //www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration I.html.
  668W

  Applications1 for asylum, received in the UK, excluding dependants, by nationality

  Quarter4

  Quater1

  Quarter2

  2002

  2003

  2003

  Europe

  Albania

  250

  230

  140

  Czech Republic

  120

  20

  20

  SAM2

  365

  345

  175

  Poland

  235

  35

  20

  Romania

  360

  245

  95

  Russia

  85

  70

  65

  Turkey

  805

  645

  585

  Ukraine

  100

  95

  65

  Other Former USSR

  675

  360

  210

  OTHER Former Yugo

  80

  60

  20

  others

  50

  20

  20

  Total:

  3,125

  2,152

  1,415

  Americas

  Colombia

  110

  90

  60

  Ecuador

  90

  65

  40

  Others

  585

  470

  275

  TOTAL:

  785

  625

  370

  Middle East

  Iran

  820

  655

  625

  Iraq

  4,275

  2,135

  635

  Others

  350

  265

  230

  Total:

  5,445

  3,055

  1,490

  Africa

  Algeria

  245

  210

  100

  Angola

  340

  300

  165

  Democratic Republic of Congo

  690

  460

  300

  Ethiopia

  225

  145

  120

  Gambia

  45

  15

  30

  Ghana

  80

  70

  80

  Ivory Coast

  195

  205

  90

  Kenya

  115

  85

  60

  Nigeria

  320

  350

  250

  Rwanda

  145

  120

  70

  Sierra Leone

  220

  165

  85

  Somalia

  1,805

  1,515

  900

  Sudan

  270

  95

  135

  Tanzania

  270

  95

  135

  Uganda

  225

  225

  165

  Zimbabwe

  2740

  1,075

  815

  Others

  1,350

  1,200

  825

  Total:

  9,020

  6,255

  4,200

  Asia

  Afghanistan

  1,315

  950

  485

  Bangladesh

  235

  205

  190

  China

  890

  915

  705

  India

  425

  490

  645

  Pakistan

  555

  460

  645

  Sri Lanka

  420

  560

  440

  Others

  4,335

  3,910

  3,090

  Other and unknown nationalities

  50

  30

  15

  Grand Total

  22,760

  16,000

  10,585

  1Provisional data rounded to the nearest five.

  2Serbia and Montenegro (SAM) replaced Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) from 5 February 2003. SAM comprises of the Republic of Serbia, the Republic of Montenegro, and the province of Kosovo (administered by the UN on an interim basis, since 1999.

  Mr. Colman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what consideration is given by the National Asylum Support Service to the health of an asylum seeker when a decision to disperse that asylum seeker is made. [134261]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 23 October 2003]NASS will consider all the information known to it when deciding whether dispersal is appropriate. Where it is known this will include consideration of an asylum seeker's, or a dependant's, current medical condition.
  669W
  Mr. Flook
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers the National Asylum Support Service has placed in(a) Somerset, (b) Devon, (c) Plymouth, (d) Bristol, (e) Bath, (f) Swindon, (g) Wiltshire and (h) Dorset in each month since January. [134551]

  Beverley Hughes
  The information is not available in the form requested.

  Figures in respect of asylum seekers in receipt of accommodation support from the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) are published at the end of each quarter.

  Figures for the areas requested as at the end of each quarter since January 2003 are shown in the table.

  Statistics on the number of asylum seekers supported by NASS in each region are available on the Home Office's Immigration and Asylum Statistics website: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigrationl. html

  Area

  Asylum seekers in receipt of MASS accommodation support (at end March 2003)

  Asylum seekers in receipt of MASS accommodation support (at end June 2003)

  Bristol

  460

  445

  Bath

  0

  0

  Somerset (other)

  0

  0

  Plymouth

  360

  415

  Exeter

  65

  55

  Devon (other)

  0

  0

  Swindon

  15

  55

  Wiltshire (other)

  0

  0

  Dorset

  0

  0

  Mr. Laurence Robertson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on his intended use of zones of protection to(a) house asylum seekers and (b) process their claims. [134593]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 27 October 2003]The UK ideas were designed to stimulate a debate on improving the international asylum system. Our thinking continues to evolve. But we remain focused on the provision of better protection in asylum seekers' own regions to reduce the motivation to cross continents to make a claim; and to reduce the burden on the asylum system from those misusing it to gain entry to the UK for economic or other reasons. This is not about shifting the burden to poorer regions.

  The majority of the world's refugees are already unable to access asylum systems in the European Union. It is therefore essential to strengthen protection in their region of origin, close to their homes, in order to ensure accessible and effective protection for people fleeing persecution and conflict. We have been working closely with UNHCR, the ED and others on this.

  Annabelle Ewing
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to establish regional protection zones for asylum seekers outside the UK; and what recent discussions he has had with EU Governments on this matter. [134659]
  670W
  Beverley Hughes
  The UK's proposals were designed to stimulate a debate on improving the international asylum system. Our thinking continues to evolve and we are engaged in dialogue with the UNHCR, the European Commission and others to consider how we might put these ideas into practice. We are thinking less in terms of specific protection areas or 'zones' and more in terms of strengthening capacity in regions of origin. The aim would be to reduce the motivation to cross continents to make a claim; and to reduce the burden on the asylum system from those misusing it to gain entry to the UK for economic or other reasons.

  Mr. David Marshall
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people who have applied for asylum in the UK were resident in each constituency in the UK in the last period for which figures are available. [134729]

  Beverley Hughes
  I regret that the requested information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Information is held on the location of all asylum seekers supported by NASS and figures are published at local authority level in the regular quarterly asylum statistics on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http://www. homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigrationl.html, and from the Library of the House. More detailed data on those supported by NASS, at parliamentary constituency level, is available on request.

  Mr. Betts
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers are waiting to have their cases finally determined(a) 12 to 18 months, (b) 18 to 24 months, (c) two to three years and (d) three or more years after it was lodged. [135084]

  Beverley Hughes
  Information on final decisions is not readily available and complete information could only be obtained by examination of individual case files to obtain information on the outcomes of initial decisions, of subsequent appeals to the Immigration Appellate Authority and the Tribunal, and of cases which have been reconsidered. This would incur disproportionate cost. 31,800 cases were awaiting an initial decision at the end of June 2003 (the latest date for which published figures are available); of these 8,900 cases were work in progress ie the application had been outstanding for six months or less.

  As at 30 June 2003, there were an estimated 20,000 appeals lodged with the Immigration and Nationality Directorate which had not been sent to the Immigration Appellate Authority (IAA); a proportion of appeals lodged do not result in appeal bundles being sent to the IAA. The total asylum work in progress in the IAA as at 30 June 2003, was 29,500 (19,900 at the Adjudicator Tier, 5,000 applications for permission to appeal to the Tribunal, and 4,700 Tribunal Appeals).

  Provisional data show that 74 per cent. of applications (excluding withdrawals and third country cases1) received in 2002–were decided and served within two months. This exceeded the Government's target of 65 per cent. for 2002–03, and was a significant increase on the corresponding figure of 61 per cent. for 2001–02.
  671W
  Information on the number of asylum applications awaiting initial decision and the timeliness of initial decisions is published quarterly on the Home Office website at http://wvvw.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigrationl.html.
  1 Cases which may be the responsibility of other EU member states under the Dublin Convention.

  Ms Drown
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans the Government has to establish an independent country documentation centre in relation to asylum applications. [135337]

  Beverley Hughes
  There are no plans to establish an independent documentation centre. We recently established the independent Advisory Panel on Country Information under the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 to make recommendations on the country information material produced by the Home Office and help to ensure that it is as accurate, objective and up to date as possible. The Panel is chaired by Prof. Stephen Castles of Oxford University and held its first meeting on 2 September 2003.

  Mr. Gerrard
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is taking to increase the financial support to local authorities responsible for the care of asylum seeker children as a result of the judgment of the Administrative Court in the case of Behre and Others v Hillingdon London Borough Council. [135453]

  Beverley Hughes
  Officials across Government are working together to resolve issues arising from the recent Court judgment. An announcement about the rate of grant will be made as soon as practicable after these decisions have been concluded.

  The grant paid by the Home office to local social services departments is intended to cover the direct and immediate costs arising from the placement of children.

  Dr. Tonge
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to ensure that children of asylum seekers receive education. [136785]

  Beverley Hughes
  It is Government policy that children of compulsory school age here as part of an asylum seeking family should receive education. This applies to all children, not just those whose parents are in receipt of support. Currently, with the exception of the small number of families who are detained, children are entitled to attend mainstream schools. For those who are detained a modular programme of education is provided at the relevant removal centre if detention is expected to last for more than a very short period. In the vast majority of cases, the detention of families with children will last for no more than a very short period, usually less than 14 days and often for only a few hours or days prior to removal.

  In respect of children placed in accommodation centres, the operators of the centres will be required to provide education to children which mirrors that provided in mainstream schools.

  Mr. Caton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many mistaken asylum removals there were in the latest period for which figures are available. [137103]
  672W
  Beverley Hughes
  The information requested is not available and could be obtained only by examination of individual case files at disproportionate cost.

  Mr. Caton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to assign National Asylum Seekers Service hard case support to failed asylum seekers in Wales. [137104]

  Beverley Hughes
  There is nothing to prevent the majority of asylum seekers who have received a final negative decision on their claim from leaving the country immediately. Failed asylum seekers unable to leave due to circumstances entirely beyond their control may seek the short-term provision of accommodation under section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, as amended. NASS has entered into an arrangement with the west London YMCA to provide accommodation in these circumstances. Accommodation will be in one of a number of YMCAs across England.

  Mr. Caton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is taking to reinstate embarkation controls at United Kingdom borders. [137105]

  Beverley Hughes
  My hon. Friend will be aware from my written answer of 10 July that we are keeping the option for embarkation controls under review while exploring the extent to which new technology which were removed by the previous conservative administration could offer us more efficient ways of checking those leaving the country. Short term embarkation exercises continue and during October a number of such exercises took place at airports throughout the United Kingdom.

  Mr. Caton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum applicants have become homeless after their claims for asylum have failed since 1 May. [137106]

  Beverley Hughes
  This information is not available. The legislation requires that, with the exception of families including children under the age of 18, support must be terminated 21 days after the receipt of the final negative decision on the asylum claim. NASS does not have information on the whereabouts of asylum seekers evicted from NASS properties.

  Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his answer of 10 June 2003,Official Report, column 808W, on asylum seekers, if he will make a statement on (a) the proportion of failed asylum seekers who notified a new address after their final refusal and (b) the proportion of those visited by the UK Immigration Service who were found living at the recorded address in the last 12 months. [137713]

  Beverley Hughes
  The Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) maintains databases containing address details for asylum seekers which are also recorded in the individuals' Home Office file. All applicants and their representatives are told of their obligation to notify the Home Office of any subsequent change of address. This may be done, either in person at one of 11 designated Reporting Centres or by post to the Change of Address Team (CoAT), based in Croydon.
  673W
  The Casework Information Database (CID) is the main information technology (IT) system used by IND and allows information to be updated upon receipt throughout the asylum process. There is no link within CID between a change of address and the stage in the asylum process at which it occurred, e.g. before or after final refusal, and therefore the information requested is not available and could be obtained only by examination of individual case files at disproportionate cost.

  UK Immigration Service visits to asylum seekers' home addresses are not routinely recorded on the national CID database. Again, the information requested is not available and could be obtained only by examination of individual case files at disproportionate cost.

  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the reasons are for his policy not to allow asylum seekers to work while they await a decision on their case. [138269]

  Beverley Hughes
  We are determined to maintain a robust asylum process which helps those fleeing persecution and not those who wish to come to the United Kingdom to work.

  We believe that allowing new asylum applicants to work could act as a pull factor for those with unfounded asylum claims. Those migrants who wish to come here for the purpose of employment have a range of schemes open to them and we continue to develop more routes to allow people to come here and work legally in ways which boost our economy.

  Until 23 July 2002 there was a concession which allowed asylum seekers to seek permission to take employment if no decision had been made on their application within six months of it being lodged.

  By the time we abolished the concession in July last year it had become largely irrelevant and only applicable to a minority of applicants. This was due to the increased speed with which we delivered initial decisions on applications.

  Those who were given permission as part of the concession will retain their permission to work until they receive a final decision on their application for asylum. We have also maintained a discretion to grant permission to work in exceptional cases.

  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on European Union asylum policies; what progress has been made with the creation of a common European asylum system; and what measures need to be put into place before this can be established. [138270]

  Beverley Hughes
  The Tampere European Council on 15–16 October 1999 set out that the Common European Asylum System should, in its first phase, include the following: a clear and workable determination of the State responsible for the examination of an asylum application; common standards for a fair and efficient asylum procedure; common minimum conditions of reception of asylum seekers; and the approximation of rules on the recognition and content of refugee status. The Tampere European Council also called for an agreement on the issue of temporary protection for 674W
  displaced persons and the completion of work on the system for the identification of asylum seekers (Eurodac).

  Of the measures described above, the Council of Ministers have adopted the following: the Council Regulation of 18 February 2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national (known as "Dublin II"); the Council Regulation of 11 December 2000 concerning the establishment of "Eurodac" for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of the Dublin Convention; the Council Directive of 20 July 2001 on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a 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; and the Council Directive of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers.

  Negotiations are ongoing on the proposal for a Council Directive on minimum standards for the qualification and the status of third-country nationals and stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the proposal for a Council Directive on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status.

  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much asylum seekers cost public funds in the last 12 months, per head of tax paying population. [138283]

  Beverley Hughes
  I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave on 30 October 2003,Official Report, column 320W.

  Mr. Salmond
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the Government will change its policy of deporting persons from the UK who come from countries which will accede to EU membership in May 2004; and what the reasons are for refusing leave to remain to people from accession countries. [138466]

  Beverley Hughes
  Nationals of the new member states will have full free movement rights from accession.

  We currently intend to maintain full immigration control towards nationals of the new member states until accession. This means that we will continue to remove nationals from the new member states in the same circumstances as we do at present. The Government considers that, as a matter of policy, this approach is necessary in order to maintain an effective immigration control. In addition, the United Kingdom is under no legal obligation to grant free movement rights to nationals from the new member states before 1 May 2004.

  Mr. Oaten
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he is taking to monitor the whereabouts of asylum seekers affected by Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002; and if he will make a statement. [138479]
  675W
  Beverley Hughes
  As part of the initial screening process asylum seekers, including those affected by Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 (NIA Act 2002), are required to provide proof of residence at a particular address. Residence at that address is then made a condition of their temporary admission into the United Kingdom, to which other conditions may be added, principally a requirement that the asylum seeker reports regularly to the Immigration Service (IS). The Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) maintains databases containing the information supplied, which is also recorded in the individual Home Office(HO)file.

  All applicants, and their representatives, are informed of their obligation to notify the Home Office of any subsequent change of address. This may be done either, in writing to the Change of Address Team (CoAT) in Croydon or, in person to the nearest IS Reporting Centre or Local Enforcement Office (LEO).

  The IS has 11 designated Reporting Centres managing reporting regimes and in addition a person may be required to report to mobile IS staff at a police station near their address. The reporting network will be further expanded by the planned introduction of both Accommodation and Induction Centres.

  Mr. Oaten
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent representations he has received from faith groups concerning Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. [139231]

  Beverley Hughes
  There is no record of any representations from faith groups about Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when it became his Department's policy not to enforce removals of people refused asylum to(a) Iraq, (b) Zimbabwe and
  (c) Somalia; and what the reasons are for this policy in each case. [124239]

  Beverley Hughes
  I refer my hon. Friend to the answer
  I gave on 11 July 2003,Official Report, column 1065.

  Mr. Malins
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proportion of asylum applications within the last 12 months for which figures are available were given initial decisions(a) within two weeks, (b) within two months, (c) within six months and (d) after a period of more than six months. [135429]

  Beverley Hughes
  In the 12 months from April 2002 to March 2003 (the latest period for which published figures are available), 74 per cent. of substantive applications (excluding withdrawals and third country cases1) were decided and served within two months and 9 per cent. were decided and served within two weeks. This compares to an average of 20 months when the right hon. Member for Folkstone and Hythe was Home Secretary. The two months figure of 74 per cent. exceeded the Government's target of 65 per cent. for 2002–03 and performance is on track to meet the target for 2003–04 of 75 per cent. The corresponding data requested for initial decisions decided and served within six months will be published in the next quarterly asylum statistics, data for initial decisions decided and served after a period of six months are not available.
  676W
  Information on the timeliness of initial decisions is published quarterly on the Home Office website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.

  1 Cases which may be the responsibility of other EU member states under the Dublin Convention.

  Mr. Sarwar
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to have determined and finalised asylum cases which qualify under the asylum amnesty he announced recently. [137829]

  Beverley Hughes
  It is expected to take about six months to assess the bulk of those who may be eligible.

  Bob Spink
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) which service providers are supplying housing for asylum seekers in Essex; and in which towns those homes are provided; [135458]

  (2) how many service providers are providing accommodation for asylum seekers; [135460]

  (3) if he will make a statement on the current service provider contracts for housing asylum seekers; and when they will expire. [135462]

  Beverley Hughes
  The Immigration and Nationality Directorate has 22 contracts with providers for the supply of accommodation to eligible asylum seekers. Eight of these contracts are with the private sector, 12 with the public sector, one with a registered social landlord and one with a charity. The majority of these contracts are due to expire in 2005. There are no contracts providing accommodation in Essex.

  In addition some asylum seekers are supported by local authorities under the interim regulations. No information is held centrally on contracts between individual authorities and their suppliers of accommodation.

  Mr. Austin Mitchell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seeker families in North East Lincolnshire are eligible to remain in the UK under the recently announced amnesty. [135631]

  Beverley Hughes
  Families who may qualify will be asked to complete a questionnaire. On the basis of the responses and other information on our files decisions will be made about whether they qualify or not.

  The number of families in North East Lincolnshire who will be eligible for a grant of indefinite leave will therefore only be known once the responses are in and the cases have been processed.

  Coroners Courts (Welsh Language)
  Mr. Simon Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many coroners courts in Wales have the resources for simultaneous language translation. [132347]

  Paul Goggins
  The information requested is not available centrally. However, I understand that the Court Service is normally able to provide suitable facilities for use by other courts and tribunals in Wales on request.
  677W
  Mr. Simon Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what action he is taking to ensure that, in inquests, the principles laid down in the Welsh Language Act 1993 are upheld; [132348]

  (2) what discussions he has had with the Welsh Language Board and the Welsh Assembly on the adequacy of only providing sequential translation as an option for those wanting a Welsh language inquest. [132355]

  Paul Goggins
  Coroners in Wales are expected to comply with the requirements of the 1993 Act and take responsibility for making any necessary arrangements for translation services.

  The Home Office assists by providing Welsh language versions of our public information leaflets for distribution. Neither the Welsh Language Board nor the Welsh Assembly has raised any concerns with us about these arrangements.

  Mr. Simon Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many Welsh language inquests have used(a) sequential and (b) simultaneous translation in each year since 1997. [132349]

  (2) how many applications for a Welsh language inquest have been (a) made and (b) refused in each county in Wales since 1997. [132356]

  Paul Goggins
  The information requested is not held centrally.

  Headstones
  Ms Walley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his answer of 27 January,Official Report, column 622W, on headstones, when he expects to issue guidance following the report of the Burial and Cemeteries Advisory Group. [131991]

  Paul Goggins
  The issues surrounding memorial safety are currently being considered by a working group made up of representatives from the burial industry and other organisations. Although it has taken slightly longer than we had anticipated, work is progressing well, and we hope to issue appropriate guidance on memorial safety to local burial authorities early next year.

  Speeding Fines
  Mr. Paul Marsden
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many fixed penalty notices were issued in relation to speeding offences captured by(a) mobile speed cameras and (b) fixed speed cameras in each year since 1997. [138358]

  Caroline Flint
  Available data on the number of fixed penalty notices issued for speeding offences detected by camera in England and Wales from 1997 to 2001 (latest available) are given in the table. 2002 data will be available in the New Year. Data by type of camera device used are not collected centrally.
  678W

  Fixed penalties1 for speeding offences detected by camera2 England and Wales, 1997 to 2001

  Year

  Number

  1997

  288,600

  1998

  338,800

  1999

  423,000

  2000

  599,200

  2001

  877,500

  1 Paid, i.e. no further action

  2 Automatic cameras until 1998, all camera types from 1999

  Work Permits
  Mr. Donaldson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many work permits have been issued to foreign nationals to work in the UK in each of the past five years. [133520]

  Beverley Hughes
  The total number of work permit approvals for each of the past five years in the United Kingdom is as follows:

  1998—53,962

  1999—60,743

  2000—88,651

  2001—120,823

  2002—136,151 (including NI figures from 1 September);

  and in Northern Ireland:

  1998—347 (1 May to 31 December)

  1999—549

  2000—863

  2001—1,173

  2002—1,410 (1 January to 31 August).

  Asylum Reform Consultation
  Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will extend the three week consultation period on new legislative proposals on asylum reform to the minimum stipulated by Criterion 5 of Cabinet Office Guidelines on written consultations. [137245]

  Beverley Hughes
  As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary first announced on 22 May this year, the Government are intending to introduce further legislative measures to address the specific problems of abusive appeals and undocumented applicants in the asylum system which continue to undermine the credibility of the system. As stated in the letter we sent to stakeholders, we consider that these are urgent measures and are therefore seeking to introduce them as soon as parliamentary time allows. While we are seeking the views of key stakeholders on the new provisions we believe that further reform is needed quickly if we are to capitalise on the success of our measures to date. Further dialogue is taking place with stakeholders on specific measures and a copy of the letter to stakeholders has been placed on the website of the Immigration and Nationality Directorate so that it is available to the public.
  679W

  Administrative Court
  Mr. Gerrard
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the estimated costs are of cases dealt with by the Administrative Court relating to section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002; and how many cases these costs cover. [135451]

  Mr. Lammy
  One thousand and ninety six cases have been dealt with at an estimated cost to the Court Service of £120,320; the costs of solicitors and counsel representing the claimants and defendants are not included in this figure.

  Police Code of Conduct (Anonymity of Suspects)
  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions a police officer has breached the Police Code of Conduct through unauthorised disclosure of information on a suspect since 1973. [138280]

  Ms Blears
  Information concerning the number of occasions a police officer has breached the Police Code of Conduct through unauthorised disclosure of information on a suspect since 1973 is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the amendments by the Association of Chief Police Officers to their media and disciplinary guidelines on the subject of anonymity for suspects will be completed. [138281]

  Ms Blears
  The amendments by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to their media and disciplinary guidelines have been completed. They give greater prominence to the issue of anonymity and underline that suspects should not be named before charge. They go on to highlight the possible dangers of doing so in that not only is there the risk of causing irreparable damage to a suspect's reputation, but also because unwarranted disclosure could leave a force open to civil proceedings. ACPO promulgated these guidelines to all forces in mid-October 2003.

  Antisocial Behaviour
  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how he plans to keep(a) the police, (b) environmental health and housing officers and (c) the community informed of new powers resulting from legislation concerning anti-social behaviour; and how he will monitor the implementation of the new legislation; [137823]

  (2) how he proposes to improve the efficiency of the administration of the implementation of anti-social behaviour legislation and orders; [137825]

  (3) what measures are in place to hold local authorities to account for their role in the implementation of antisocial behaviour policies. [138368]

  Ms Blears
  All Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships will be required to set out their strategy for tackling anti-social behaviour as part of their three-year Crime and Disorder Reduction Strategy. This includes setting out the tools that they intend to use, available 680W
  through new or existing legislation. It is the role of Government Offices to monitor the success of the Partnership against this strategy.

  In addition "Together: Tackling Anti-Social Behaviour" the Government's Action Plan sets out our strategy to ensure that all available powers are understood, that they are used effectively and that all agencies support their local communities. We will be setting up the together Actionline and website to provide accurate and high quality information on a full range of interventions and access to innovative solutions. The together Academy will bring together practitioners to provide advice and training on specific issues, and to share knowledge about new solutions to tackle anti-social behaviour.

  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make additional funds available to local councils for the establishment of antisocial behaviour teams with(a) legal support and (b) people trained in taking witness statements. [138174]

  Ms Blears
  The Home Department has set aside £75 million for the next three years to tackle anti-social behaviour. The Home Office, through this money, will fund local authorities for work to tackle anti-social behaviour; however, it will be for individual local authorities to decide how they invest funding.

  In addition through the together campaign the Anti-Social Behaviour Unit will improve performance across England and Wales by providing funding to support every Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP); establishing a together Academy, providing training to practitioners; and establishing a together Action Line, offering advice and information on all antisocial behaviour related matters.

  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if the Minister for Crime Reduction, Policing and Community Safety will meet the hon. Member for Crosby to discuss anti-social behaviour. [138278]

  Ms Blears
  I would be happy to meet with my hon. Friend the Member for Crosby (Mrs. Curtis-Thomas). If she would contact my office a meeting can be arranged.

  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how he intends to tackle the problem of binge drinking and associated anti-social behaviour. [138365]

  Ms Blears
  The answer I gave my hon. Friend on 16 September 2003,Official Report, column 659W, set out a number of legislative measures that are already in place to help tackle anti-social behaviour associated with drinking alcohol.

  The Interim Analytical Report published by the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit in September highlighted the scale of alcohol misuse in England. The final report setting out the Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy for England will be published in time for implementation to begin in 2004 and will contain measures to tackle the range of harms associated with alcohol misuse, including binge drinking and alcohol related crime and disorder.
  681W
  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on how powers of the police have been strengthened since 1997 to deal with antisocial behaviour. [138366]

  Ms Blears
  The Anti-social Behaviour Bill provides a number of new powers for the police:

  Powers to close premises that are being used for drug dealing or use and causing disorder or serious nuisance.

  The ability to issue penalty notices for truancy, for use when conducting truancy sweeps with the education welfare service

  A power to designate areas with a history of anti-social behaviour where they can disperse groups causing intimidation and take children home who are out on the streets late at night.

  New controls to tackle the misuse of air weapons and replica guns.

  Improved powers for dealing. with public assemblies and trespassers. This will help the police to deal with problems caused by intimidating protestors and illegal raves. There is a new power to move on trespassing encampments where there is a relevant site available.

  New powers for local authorities to intervene in neighbourly disputes regarding high hedges.

  Extension of the power to issue penalty notices for disorder to 16 and 17 year olds.

  The Criminal Justice Bill will extend police stop and search powers to circumstances where they have reasonable suspicion that articles made, adapted or intended for use in offences of criminal damage are being carried.

  Mr. Wray
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department who will make up the nuisance neighbours panels; when they will be set up; how they will be able to be contacted; what powers they will have; and what measures will be put in place to ensure complainants are protected. [136271]

  Ms Blears
  Nuisance neighbour panels will be going live in early 2004. Work is currently being undertaken on the composition of the panels, and finalising their core functions. Once up and running the panels will be contactable through the Anti-Social Behaviour Unit in my Department. All complainants will be anonymised.

  Bechtel
  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the contracts for consultancy and other work carried out by Bechtel for agencies responsible to his Department and its predecessor in each year since 1997, stating in each case(a) the nature of the work, (b) the value of the contract and (c) the duration of the contract; and if he will make a statement. [137887]

  Fiona Mactaggart
  I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on the 27 October,Official Report, column 109W. This answer included information provided by the agencies responsible to the Home Office.

  Biometrics
  Mr. Oaten
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what research projects his Department has funded on the use of biometrics as a secure form of identification. [139225]
  682W
  Beverley Hughes
  We have funded a study by the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) on the use of iris, fingerprint and face biometrics in an identity card scheme, the results of which are on the Home Office website.

  We have funded research into fingerprints through the Police Information Technology Organisation (PITO) and its predecessors, from the 1970s, chiefly through periodic 'benchmark' tests of fingerprint matching systems to ensure accuracy and security.

  We have also used biometrics in several operational programmes such as the Immigration and Nationality Directorate's ARC scheme.

  Bomfords/Pontrilas Sawmills
  Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department following the raids last month on two employers in the Midlands, how many of the people detained were people who had claimed asylum, had been refused but could not be returned to their country of origin because it was not safe; how many, after investigation, were found to have the right to remain but had not obtained national insurance numbers; how many were found to have the right to work and a national insurance number; of the other employees working at Bomfords and Pontrilas sawmills who were interviewed, how many were found to have the right to remain but had not obtained national insurance numbers; and how many who had the right to work were being paid below the minimum wage. [137712]

  Beverley Hughes
  A total of 44 individuals were detained during the course of the operations at Bomfords and Pontrilas sawmills. None fitted the above criteria. The individuals were detained because they were removable from the United Kingdom.

  The operations were aimed at the detection and removal of immigration offenders. Once an individual's immigration status was established, no further inquiries were conducted on site. It is not possible therefore to give details relating to the possession of national insurance numbers.

  Once an employee established to an immigration officer that he or she had the right to remain in the United Kingdom, no further inquiries were required.

  Inquiries were not made into exact pay levels at Pontrilas, but it is believed that there were no staff being paid less than the minimum wage. At Bomfords the majority of labour had been provided by agencies and were employed on a piece work basis.

  Child Abuse (Investigations)
  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will make a statement on the outcome of discussions with the Association of Chief Police Officers regarding mandatory audio and visual recording of police interviews with(a) complainants and (b) other significant witnesses in investigations of past cases of abuse in children's homes; [138473]

  (2) if he will make a statement on discussions with the Association of Chief Police Officers regarding the safeguards in investigations of past cases of abuse in children's homes. [138472]
  683W
  Ms Blears
  I am corresponding with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) regarding the investigation of past cases of child abuse in children's homes.

  I wrote to the hon. member on 4 November offering a meeting to discuss these matters.

  Citizenship Applications
  Keith Vaz
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how long it has taken to deal with citizenship applications in the last 12 months for which figures are available; how many citizenship certificates were issued in each year since 1993; and what the total income from citizenship applications has been since 1993. [133463]

  Beverley Hughes
  There are no data published on actual decision times to determine applications for British citizenship. Information on expected waiting times for citizenship applications are available on the IND website; www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk and is periodically updated. As at September 2003 the expected average processing times were:

  Naturalisation

  7.7 months

  Adult registrations

  1.7 months

  Minor registrations

  7.9 months

  Other registrations

  1.3 months

  Delays arise in part because applications are not always accompanied by complete documentation. Thus, the time taken for a particular individual application may be significantly less than the average if all relevant documentation has been sent with the application form. Statistics on the applications for British citizenship granted since 1993 are shown in the table below:

  Year

  Applications granted

  1993

  45,795

  1994

  44,035

  1995

  40,515

  1996

  43,070

  1997

  37,010

  1998

  53,935

  1999

  54,900

  2000

  82,210

  2001

  90,295

  2002

  120,145

  Information on total income from citizenship applications before 1996 is unavailable. Information for 2000–01 is also unavailable. Total income from citizenship applications from 1996–2000 and after 2001 are shown in the table.

  £000s

  Year

  Nationality applications

  ROA applications

  1996–97

  800,000

  Not shown separately

  1997–98

  869,000

  Not shown separately

  1998–99

  6,491,068

  56,656

  1999–2000

  7,146,783

  63,248

  2000–01

  2001–02

  10,691,823

  115,281

  2002–03

  18,155,419

  62,731

  1.4.03–30.9.03

  6,478,410

  48,917

  Community Support Officers
  Mr. Simmonds
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Community Support Officers there are in Lincolnshire constabulary. [138227]

  Ms Blears
  There are currently 43 Community Support Officers on patrol within Lincolnshire police force and one vacancy.

  The Home Office funds or part funds 42 of these posts. The other two, deployed within caravan sites in East Division's (Skegness), are wholly locally funded.

  Mr. Simmonds
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Community Support Officers(a) there are in 2002–03 and (b) there will be in 2003–04 in each police authority in England and Wales. [138228]

  Ms Blears
  The table shows the number of Community Support Officers (CSOs) recruited by each force by 1 April 2003 and the Home Office estimate for the number of CSOs in each force on 1 April 2004.
  The figures given include both Home Office funded CSOs and those CSOs funded by local arrangements who have already been recruited. I anticipate that the total numbers for April 2004 will be larger for some forces as they are working to recruit additional locally funded CSOs.

  Force

  CSOs recruited 1 April 2003

  Estimate CSOs recruited 1 April 2004

  Avon and Somerset

  12

  46

  Bedfordshire

  0

  12

  Cambridgeshire

  6

  47

  Cheshire

  6

  21

  Cleveland

  40

  60

  Devon and Cornwall

  20

  55

  Dorset

  7

  Durham

  10

  35

  Dyfed-Powys

  0

  5

  Essex

  10

  55

  Gloucestershire

  0

  60

  Greater Manchester

  160

  185

  Gwent

  30

  50

  Hertfordshire

  14

  38

  Kent

  18

  63

  Lancashire

  74

  111

  Leicestershire

  28

  45

  Lincolnshire

  32

  44

  Merseyside

  40

  100

  Metropolitan Police

  604

  1,034

  Norfolk

  12

  30

  Northamptonshire

  12

  12

  North Wales

  0

  8

  North Yorkshire

  0

  37

  Northumbria

  0

  45

  Nottinghamshire

  10

  45

  South Wales

  0

  50

  South Yorkshire

  14

  42

  Staffordshire

  0

  10

  Suffolk

  0

  15

  Surrey

  52

  63

  Sussex

  22

  72

  Thames Valley

  0

  8

  Warwickshire

  11

  24

  West Mercia

  10

  40

  West Midlands

  0

  56

  West Yorkshire

  70

  170

  Wiltshire

  15

  25

  Total

  1,339

  2,825

  685W
  Mr. Stevenson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many community support officers are deployed in each local authority area in Staffordshire. [137772]

  Ms Blears
  In May 2003 my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary allocated funding for 10 Community Support Officers (CSOs) to Staffordshire police force. The table shows the deployment of these CSOs in the local authorities of Staffordshire.

  Local authority

  Number of CSOs

  Cannock Chase

  0

  East Staffordshire

  2

  Lichfield

  2

  Newcastle under Lyme

  2

  South Staffordshire

  2

  Stafford

  0

  Staffordshire Moorlands

  1

  Stoke on Trent

  0

  Tamworth

  1

  Correspondence
  Mr. Kaufman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he will reply to the letter to him dated 9 September from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton, with regard to Mr. Farooq Ahmed. [133837]

  Mr. Blunkett
  I wrote to my right hon. Friend on 13 November 2003.

  Mr. Kaufman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he will reply to the letter to him dated 8 September from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton with regard to Mr.Yacob Yunis. [133846]

  Mr. Blunkett
  I wrote to my right hon. Friend on 13 November 2003.

  Mr. Kaufman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for what reason he has not replied to the letter to him of 8 September from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton with regard to Mr.Yacob Yonis. [135309]

  Beverley Hughes
  The reply is incorporated in 133846.SV 28.10.03.

  Number of offence recorded by Lincolshire police from 1995 to 2002–03

  19951

  1996

  1997

  1998–992.3

  1999–2000

  2000–01

  2001–024

  2002–034

  Total crime

  48,015

  47,069

  43,381

  46,670

  46,170

  44,884

  49,797

  61,949

  Violence against the person

  2,514

  2,701

  3,051

  4,239

  3,866

  3,743

  4,812

  9,238

  Sexual offences

  367

  293

  329

  393

  325

  281

  414

  583

  Robbery

  128

  138

  107

  149

  178

  191

  251

  307

  All burglary

  12,243

  12,819

  10,551

  10,257

  10,719

  9,583

  9,592

  10,831

  Theft and handling

  22,774

  21,085

  20,085

  19,328

  19,551

  18,938

  19,728

  22,745

  Fraud and forgery

  1,163

  1,148

  1,382

  2,723

  1,641

  1,662

  1,968

  2,580

  Criminal damage

  8,138

  8,289

  7,145

  7,728

  8,391

  9,078

  11,282

  13,694

  Drug offfences3

  —

  —

  —

  1,229

  975

  906

  1,116

  1,060

  Other offences

  688

  596

  731

  624

  524

  502

  634

  911

  Theft from a vehicle

  5,661

  6,568

  5,511

  4,838

  4,873

  4,830

  4,897

  5,756

  Theft of a vehicle

  3,538

  3,388

  2,804

  2,106

  1,998

  1,797

  1,885

  2,101

  686W
  Mr. Kaufman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department why he has not yet replied to the letter to him dated 18 August from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton with regard to Mr. Syed Ahstesham Qaisa. [136984]

  Mr. Blunkett
  I responded to my right hon. Friend on 30 October 2003.

  Ian Lucas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will direct the Immigration and Nationality Department to reply to the letters from the hon. Member for Wrexham dated 2 June and 24 July in respect of Mr. Hamad Hamadimin Ahmed. [129612]

  Beverley Hughes
  The Immigration and Nationality Directorate wrote to my hon. Friend on 29 September 2003.

  Ian Lucas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will direct the Immigration and Nationality Department to reply to the letters from the hon. Member for Wrexham dated 9 December 2002, 4 February 2003 and 24 July 2003 in respect of Mrs. Clementina (Ikekwoaba) Samuels. [129614]

  Beverley Hughes
  The Immigration and Nationality Directorate replied to my hon. Friend's letters of 9 December 2002 and 4 February 2003 on 26 March 2003. My hon. Friend's letter of 24 July 2003 was replied to on 29 September 2003.

  Crime Statistics (Lincolnshire)
  Mr. Simmonds
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many offences were recorded by Lincolnshire police force in each year since 1995, broken down by category. [138226]

  Ms Blears
  The requested information is given in the table.

  There was a change of counting rules for recorded crime on 1 April 1998, which had the effect of increasing the number of crimes counted. Numbers of offences for years before and after this date are therefore not directly comparable.

  The National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS) was introduced across England and Wales in April 2002. Lincolnshire Police Force introduced the Standard in March 2002. Broadly, the NCRS had the effect of increasing the number of crimes recorded by the police. Therefore, following the introduction of the Standard, numbers of recorded crimes are not comparable with previous years.
  687W
  1 Crimes were recorded on a calendar year basis until 1997, and on a financial year basis thereafter.

  fp2 The number of crimes recorded in that financial year using the expanded offence coverage and revised counting rules which came into effect on 1 April 1998.

  3 Up until April 1998, the existing drug offences were recorded within 'Other offences'.

  4 Lincolnshire police implemented the NCRS in March 2002. Numbers of recorded crimes after this date are not comparable with previous years.

  Discrimination (Catholic Subjects)
  Mr. Gummer
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what restrictions upon Her Majesty's Catholic subjects are contained in legislation for which his Department is responsible; and whether he intends to introduce legislation to repeal them as part of the new legislation against religious discrimination. [137816]

  (2) whether he intends to introduce legislation to remove discrimination against Catholic subjects of the Crown; and if he will make a statement; [137817]

  (3) if he will make a statement on his policy towards the enforcement of laws that discriminate against Her Majesty's Catholic subjects. [137818]

  Fiona Mactaggart
  I will write to the right hon. Member about the matters he has raised.

  Donald Russell McLachlin
  Mr. Chope
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the application by Donald Russell McLachlin (Ref: M525305) for indefinite leave to remain in the UK will be determined; and what the reasons for the delay are. [133567]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 21 October 2003]Mr. McLachlin's application was lodged in April. It could not be decided on initial consideration. Cases that cannot be initially decided are dealt with in order of receipt. The majority of these are expected to be decided within six months although particularly complex cases can take longer.

  Applications received on or after 1 August attract a fee and we intend that decisions will be reached on these within 13 weeks. Mr. McLachlin's application was determined on 1 October and he has been informed of this decision.

  I wrote to the hon. Member on 15 October to set out the position and suggest how Mr. McLachlin might proceed with an application.

  Dungavel Immigration Removal Centre
  Mr. Peter Duncan
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the annual running cost of Dungavel Immigration Removal Centre was in the most recent year for which figures are available. [131553]

  Beverley Hughes
  The most recent year in which there are figures available for the annual running cost of Dungavel Immigration Removal Centre is 2002–03. The annual running cost for this year was £4,778,287.

  Mr. Peter Duncan
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to visit Dungavel. [131554]
  688W
  Beverley Hughes
  As Minister for Immigration I visited Dungavel Immigration Removal Centre in September last year. I currently have no plans to make a return visit.

  Mr. Peter Duncan
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what procedures are in place to maintain teaching standards at Dungavel in circumstances where there has been a large admission of children. [131555]

  Beverley Hughes
  There is limited family accommodation at Dungavel Removal Centre and the number of families at the centre fluctuates from day-to-day. For example, during September there were, on any one day, as few as two school age children at Dungavel and never more than 15. The nature of immigration detention is such that there is never a large admission of children as might be the case in local schools and special arrangements do not therefore need to be made for such an eventuality.

  Simon Hughes
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost per week is of detaining(a) a single adult asylum seeker in Dungavel, (b) a child of an asylum seeker in Dungavel, (c) a single asylum seeker in Tinsley House and (d) a child of an asylum seeker in Tinsley House. [131654]

  Beverley Hughes
  The average cost per place per week for detaining a person is £655 for Dungavel and £762 for Tinsley House for 2003/04.

  These figures are an average cost per head. It would incur disproportionate cost to break the figures down for adults and children.

  Mr. Peter Duncan
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on arrangements for the welfare of children being kept at Dungavel Immigration Removal Centre. [131557]

  Beverley Hughes
  Families with children who are detained at Dungavel Removal Centre are accommodated in a separate family unit within the centre. Each family room has en-suite facilities. There is a separate family canteen that provides three meals a day as well as a milk kitchen with facilities for younger children. There is a cr1/2che for babies and younger children. There is education provision for all school-aged children. The curriculum includes maths, English, art and history. Science is also included and outside contacts have been set up with various agencies to facilitate the science programme. Children also have access to a library, televisions and videos and a variety of games. There is a multi-faith room at Dungavel which children are able to access with their parents.

  Children have access to the open air throughout the day. There is an outdoor play facility for the younger children and separate gym time is made available for children each day.
  689W
  There are health care facilities for both children and adults, with 24 hours, seven days a week on site nursing care and a GP available for surgery throughout the week.

  Mrs. Geraldine Merchant
  Mr. Dhanda
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take action to ensure that the passport of Mrs. Geraldine Merchant, Ref: M1012795, is returned to her as soon as possible. [135319]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 30 October 2003]My hon. Friend is aware that the circumstances of this case required a full investigation. However, Mrs. Merchant's application should be decided within the next two months. Her passport can be returned to her before then if she wishes but will not be endorsed with leave to remain.

  Ethnic Minorities
  Mr. Oaten
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many staff were employed by the Prison Service in England and Wales as(a) governor grade, (b) prison officers and (c) other staff on the latest date for which figures are available; and how many in each category were (i) black and (ii) Asian. [138396]

  Paul Goggins
  Information on the recorded ethnicity of Prison Service staff at 31 October 2003 is contained in the table.

  Ethnic group

  Senior operational managers1

  Officers2

  Other staff

  Total

  White

  1,170

  20,790

  18,562

  40,522

  Asian

  6

  199

  456

  661

  Black

  10

  432

  768

  1,210

  Other Minority Ethnic

  21

  315

  330

  666

  No Data

  85

  2,189

  1,914

  4,188

  Total

  1,292

  23,925

  22,030

  47,247

  1 Refers to Governor grades

  2 Includes prison officers, senior officers and principal officers

  Mr. Oaten
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were stopped and searched by each police force in England and Wales in each of the last 10 years; and how many of the people stopped were(a) black and (b) Asian. [138401]

  Ms Blears
  Information on the number of stops and searches under section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and other legislation for the years 1991 to 1996, broken down by police force area, are given in Table 1 which has been placed in the Library. These figures include stops and searches of persons and vehicles. During this period there was no information collected giving the required breakdown on the ethnic group of persons stopped and searched.

  Information on stops and searches of individuals from 1996–97 to 2001–02 is presented in Table 2 which has been placed in the Library, and includes a breakdown by the specific ethnic group groups requested.
  690W
  Mr. Oaten
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police officers in England and Wales were in post on the latest date for which figures are available, broken down by rank; and how many in each rank were(a) black and (b) Asian. [138482]

  Ms Blears
  The total number of officers in post at 31 March 2003 is contained in Table 4 of Home Office Statistical Bulletin 11/03. Information on the number of minority ethnic officers by rank is contained in Table 9. A copy of the publication including Tables 4 and 9 is available in the Library.

  Mr. Oaten
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many new police officers were appointed during 2002; and how many of those newly appointed were(a) black and (b) Asian. [138483]

  Ms Blears
  The number of full time equivalent officers joining the police service in the 12 months to 31 March 2003 was 13,126. Of these, 679 (5.2 per cent.) were minority ethnic officers. There is no breakdown available for Black and Asian officers.

  EU Enlargement (Migration)
  Mr. Djanogly
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what estimate he has made of the number of people from countries acceding to the EU who will take up jobs in the UK in each of the three years following accession. [135080]

  Beverley Hughes
  Research conducted by University College London for the Home Office, published in June this year ("The impact of EU enlargement on migration flows", Home Office On-Line Report 25/03), estimates that the numbers of people who will migrate to the UK from the new member states in the years following enlargement will not be significant. The research corroborates a number of other independent studies which have been summarised in reports by the European Commission in 2000 and the former Department for Education and Employment in 1999. The estimates for those expected to migrate comprise both those coming for purposes of work and those coming for other reasons such as education.

  We will monitor the situation and the UK has the right to reintroduce restrictions in the event of an unexpected impact on the standard of living or level of employment in a particular region or occupation.

  Fireworks
  Mr. Woodward
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what the estimated cost was of the misuse of fireworks not sold in retail outlets and not used in organised displays in each of the last four years; [138002]

  (2) what estimate she has made of the criminal damage caused by Chinese bomb fireworks in each of the last three years. [137976]

  Ms Blears
  This information is not held centrally. However, Merseyside Police estimate they have spent £500,000 dealing with fireworks incidents so far this year. The recent use of fireworks as improvised explosive devices in the North-West is of particular concern.
  691W
  Fireworks misuse is a nuisance and can be a danger to the public. That is why, on 5 November 2003, we announced our intention to introduce a package of measures banning possession of fireworks by under 18s, banning possession of display fireworks by members of the public and increasing penalties for throwing fireworks in the street. Further measures tackling fireworks nuisance will be taken forward in the New, Year.

  Forensic Science
  Mr. McNamara
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many pathologists on the Home Office Register of Forensic Pathology have been removed from the list since its creation; [84279]

  (2) how many years each member of the Police Advisory Board for Forensic Pathology has served; and how many members have retired; [84278]

  (3) by what means a coroner may alert the appropriate authorities of perceived professional shortcomings of a forensic pathologist; [84281]

  (4) by what means he monitors the performance of forensic pathologists; [84280]M

  (5) for what reason the Police Advisory Board for Forensic Pathology's Disciplinary Tribunal recused itself before the completion of its hearing on the one occasion in the last 10 years on which it has met; what the consequences were of its recusal; and what subsequent professional activity has been undertaken by the pathologist who was the object of the complaint; [84275]

  (6) if he will place the terms of reference of the Police Advisory Board for Forensic Pathology, the list of current members and a copy of the Board's Complaints and Disciplinary Procedures in the Library; [84274]

  (7) to whom the Police Advisory Board for Forensic Pathology reports; and if he will place the most recent report of the Board in the Library; [84277]

  (8) how many times the Police Advisory Board for Forensic Pathology has met since its creation; and if he will place minutes of its meetings in the Library. [84276]

  Ms Blears
  The issues raised have been dealt with in a letter from my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-East (Mr. Ainsworth) on 11 June.

  Dr. Kumar
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many representations he has received(a) in favour of and (b) opposed to the privatisation of the Forensic Science Service. [137531]

  Ms Blears
  In his statement of 17 July 2003, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary explained the reasons for the proposal that the Forensic Science Service should become a public-private partnership. To date, there have been(a) no representations in favour of the proposal, and (b) 120 representations expressing concern about the future status of the organisation.

  Fraudulent Passport Applications
  Mr. Win Griffiths
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department who is responsible for investigating fraudulent passport applications. [139057]
  692W
  Beverley Hughes
  It is one of the UK Passport Service's (UKPS) primary responsibilities to ensure that UK passports are issued only to those people who are entitled to them. UKPS are responsible for identifying fraudulent applications for passports and for mounting investigations into such applications. Once initiated, these investigations are progressed in partnership with police, Immigration Service, and other law enforcement agencies.

  Haslar Removal Centre
  Mr. Viggers
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what briefings have been given to prison staff at Haslar Removal Centre relating to(a) the extension of the centre, (b) its transfer to the Immigration Service and (c) its possible privatisation. [135596]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 4 November 2003]A project team has been set up to look at proposals to transfer operational responsibility for the centre from the Prison Service to IND. Staff and Trade Unions have been informed of this by means of a letter. The project team will continue to keep them informed throughout the process. The centre manager and his senior management team at Haslar were involved in a feasibility study to look at options to extend Haslar. The options did not prove to be cost effective and therefore there are no plans at present to develop the removal centre at Haslar.

  Mr. Viggers
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans other than those proposed by his Department have been put forward for the extension of the Haslar Removal Centre; and what the planned new accommodation total is in the proposals put forward by(a) his Department and (b) other bodies. [135597]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 4 November 2003]Indicative plans were prepared which looked at a number of options to extend Haslar. However, these were simply architectural sketch plans and no detailed plans have been prepared. No plans have been submitted for planning approval and at this time there is no intention of doing so. There are currently no plans to expand the Removal Centre at Haslar.

  Mr. Viggers
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans for the extension of Haslar Removal Centre have been produced by Capita. [133065]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 20 October 2003]Indicative plans were prepared by Capita for some expansion and improvement to Haslar Removal Centre, but we have no plans at present to take this forward.

  Entitlement Cards/Identity Fraud
  Lynne Jones
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he will publish a summary of the responses to the consultation paper on Entitlement Cards and Identity Fraud. [138663]

  Beverley Hughes
  On 11 November 2003, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary made a Statement to the House announcing the publication of "Identity Cards—A Summary of Findings from the Consultation
  693W
  Exercise on Entitlement Cards and Identity Fraud". This followed a lengthy public consultation under Cabinet Office guidelines.

  The publication summarises the responses and the results of surveys and polling which demonstrated substantial commitment to some form of identity card, a term the public preferred to the term "entitlement card".

  The Government has decided to begin the process of building a base for a national compulsory identity cards scheme. The scheme is a key part of a comprehensive strategy to contain threats from illegal migration and working, organised crime and terrorism, identity theft and fraud and fraudulent access to public services, for example by illegal immigrants who have no entitlement to them.

  Imams (Entry Clearance)
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Imams have been given clearance to enter and remain in the United Kingdom in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement. [136104]

  Beverley Hughes
  Information on the number of Imams given clearance to enter and remain in the United Kingdom in each of the last five years is not available except by examination of individual case-files at disproportionate cost.

  Immigration
  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what criteria are used by immigration officers, who release a person from immigration detention, to determine whether an address is suitable as one where the person will be required to live under the terms of the temporary admission; and what checks immigration officers are expected to carry out before releasing a person from detention to ensure an address meets these criteria. [124238]

  Beverley Hughes
  I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave on 11 July 2003,Official Report, column 1068.

  Mr. Best
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what actions he is taking to ensure that UK immigration rules are fully compliant with the Human Rights Act 1998. [132234]

  Beverley Hughes
  Paragraph 2 of the Immigration Rules states that all immigration staff will carry out their duties in compliance with the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998. In preparing changes to the Immigration Rules, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary takes detailed advice as part of his consideration of questions of compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights from the Immigration and Nationality Directorate officials and Home Office lawyers. Judgments in individual immigration appeal cases raising human rights issues are also carefully examined for any wider potential implications for the Rules.

  Mr. Malins
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will set out his(a) proposals and (b) targets for improving the speed and quality of service for those who seek to enter the United Kingdom lawfully under the immigration rules. [134049]
  694W
  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 23 October 2003]The UK Immigration Service is committed to processing bona fide passengers with minimal delay, and has signed up to international standards for passenger processing times. These are embedded in the UK Immigration Service's annual business objectives, and are kept under review.

  The International Air Transport Association (IATA) standards for processing passengers are:

  45 minutes for non-EEA passengers, with minimal delay for EEA passengers.

  The UK Immigration Service's performance is also measured independently against the British Airports Authority (BAA) quality of service management figures, which includes queuing times. The Immigration Service continues to score well against this measure.

  The Immigration Service is currently drawing up service level agreements with a number of port operators to monitor passenger processing times.

  Mr. Lyons
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the benefits to the UK economy of authorised immigration. [134136]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 27 October 2003]In 2001 the Home Office published a wide ranging review of the effects of migration on the UK Economy, and in 2002 its Research Directorate published four separate research reports on migrants' fiscal effects and their labour market outcomes and impacts. The studies considered various aspects of immigrants' characteristics and contribution to the UK economy.

  The overall impact is positive—migrants have no significant adverse impact on non-migrants' employment and, if anything, had a positive impact on wages, suggesting they bring complementary skills. The evidence demonstrates that migrants contribute to economic growth, productivity, innovation and public finances. The fiscal study estimated that immigrants made a net £2.5 billion contribution to the economy in 1999–2000. Immigrants also help fill jobs that companies have been unable to fill from the domestic labour force.

  Mr. Simon
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will amend paragraph 302 of the Immigration Rules to permit an accompanying child to be granted a two year visa. [134555]

  Beverley Hughes
  The Immigration Rules will be changed shortly so that children qualifying under paragraph 302 of the rules may be granted limited leave to enter for up to two years.

  Mr. Dhanda
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department under what circumstances the Department may retain for up to three years the passport of an individual applying for(a) SET (M) and (b) SET (F). [135318]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 30 October 2003]In both cases a passport is normally held while the application is being considered. It is unusual for documents to be held for three years as non-asylum applications are normally considered within a 12-month
  695W
  period. However, only in exceptional circumstances where, for example, a further investigation is required by the Immigration Service might this time be exceeded.

  Documents can be returned on request at any time before a decision has been made although they may not be endorsed.

  Immigration Checks (Northern Ireland)
  Rev. Martin Smyth
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what immigration checks are in place at airports and ferry terminals in Northern Ireland; and under what legislation they are operating. [133296]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 21 October 2003]Permanent immigration controls operate on passengers arriving in Northern Ireland from outside the Common Travel Area (i.e. the United Kingdom (UK), Channel Islands, Isle of Man and the Republic of Ireland) under powers contained in the Immigration Act 1971 which allows immigration officers to examine passengers for the purpose of determining whether they qualify for entry, and to refuse entry to those who do not.

  Permanent facilities exist for examination of such passengers at Belfast International airport and temporary facilities operate at other airports within Northern Ireland as required. No permanent control facilities exist at any ferry port as there are no regular international ferry services.

  In addition to the above arrangements, UK Immigration Service has a responsibility for detecting immigration offenders within the UK, including Northern Ireland.

  Separate powers exist within the 1971 Act which enable Immigration Officers to arrest those reasonably suspected of being in the UK unlawfully and for the detention, pending removal from the UK, of those found to be here unlawfully.

  UK Immigration Service staff periodically conduct exercises at the main air and ferry ports in Northern Ireland to identify immigration offenders travelling between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. Offenders so identified are arrested or detained under the powers referred to above.

  Rev. Martin Smyth
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what restrictions there are upon immigration checks at airports and ferry terminals within Nothern Ireland in relation to the Common Travel Area; and on what basis immigration officers distinguish between those travelling within the CTA and those outside it. [133297]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 21 October 2003]The Immigration Act 1971 places statutory obligations upon airlines and ferry companies to ensure that passengers arriving from outside the Common Travel Area (CTA) are presented to an immigration officer, who has the power to examine them for the purpose of determining whether they qualify for entry, and to refuse those who do not. At Belfast International airport a separate pier exists for international passengers. At other airports, and when necessary at ferry ports, ad hoc arrangements are made to ensure that international passengers are similarly segregated from those on journeys within the CTA.
  696W
  No immigration controls operate on passengers travelling on journeys within the CTA. However, if identified by a police officer or by other sources of intelligence, Immigration Officers may arrest or detain immigration offenders travelling on flights within the CTA or indeed anywhere in the UK, with a view to their removal from the UK. In doing this they use separate powers of arrest and detention contained within the 1971 Act.

  Immigration Statistics
  Mr. Viggers
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent estimate he has made of the number of people in the UK who are not recorded in official statistics as authorised immigrants. [135594]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 4 November 2003]There is currently no official estimate of the number of people in the UK who are not recorded in official statistics as authorised immigrants.

  Independent Police Complaints Commission
  Dr. Kumar
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement about the(a) cost and (b) remit of the Independent Police Complaints Commission. [137533]

  Ms Blears
  This current financial year is the Independent Police Complaint Commission's (IPCC) set up year. It has been allocated £15 million for revenue expenditure and £11.5 million for capital expenditure. The funding for future years has not yet been established.

  The IPCC's remit will be as set out in section 10 of the Police Reform Act 2002. From 1 April 2004, it will be tasked with maintaining effective and efficient arrangements for recording, handling and investigating complaints about conduct and internal conduct matters relating to persons serving with the police (regular officers, police staff, special constables and contracted escort and detention officers). It will also have the function of securing that public confidence is established and maintained in those arrangements and that they manifest an appropriate degree of independence.

  Managed Migration
  Malcolm Bruce
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on how his Department's managed migration policies are attracting immigrants to Scotland. [132982]

  Beverley Hughes
  The Government are responsible for migration to the United Kingdom. Our managed migration policies provide legal routes of entry that will attract migrants to all parts of the UK where this will contribute to our economy and society. The Scottish Executive is complementing these policies by developing the Fresh Talent Initiative to attract migrants to Scotland.

  Mrs. Kaladura Nimali Mason
  John Cryer
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he will make a decision on
  697W
  the application of Mrs. Kaladura Nimali Mason (reference M2013611/3) for naturalisation as a British citizen. [135912]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 4 November 2003]Mrs. Mason's application has been approved. She was sent an oath of allegiance form on 31 October 2003. Once she has sworn the oath and returned the form to the Immigration and Nationality Directorate, they will be able to issue a certificate of British citizenship.

  National Asylum Support Service
  Mr. Oaten
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what date the report of the independent review of the National Asylum Support Service was submitted to ministers. [133964]

  Beverley Hughes
  The independent team established to review the operation of the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) submitted its report on 30 May 2003.

  Mr. Digby Griffith was appointed as Secretary to the independent NASS Review Team during the first week in March 2003 and took up post on 10 March. Following a national open competition he was offered the post of Head of Accommodation in NASS on 24 April. He took up post on 30 June.

  Mr. Waterson
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the implications of the decision of the Court of Appeal in Regina versus National Asylum Support Service. [136706]

  Beverley Hughes
  We welcome the findings of the Court in this case. The judgment provides valuable clarification of the extent of the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND)'s responsibilities for accommodating asylum seekers who have children who are sick or have disabilities. As the judgment made clear IND has always accepted that it had a duty to provide adequate accommodation for the applicant and her family, taking account of the situation of the children. Work is on-going to obtain more suitable accommodation in the area for the family.

  Nationality Applications
  Miss McIntosh
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average time taken was to process an application for British nationality in the last five years was; and if he(a) has taken and (b) intends to take action to reduce that waiting time. [137072]

  Beverley Hughes
  There are no data published on actual decision times to determine applications for British citizenship. Information on expected waiting times for citizenship applications are available on the IND website; www.ind.homeoffice.gov.uk and is periodically updated. As at the end of October 2003 the expected average processing times were:

  Applications

  Months

  Naturalisation

  6.2

  Adult

  2.0

  Minor

  6.9

  Other

  1.4

  698W
  However, this time may be significantly reduced if all relevant documents are sent with the application form.

  The casework consideration process has been extensively reviewed by the Nationality Group to minimise delays. This has resulted in a reduction to waiting times during this financial year; over 25 per cent. of cases are now decided within one month of receipt. In addition to this, a review of Nationality Group processes was commissioned to focus on ways of reducing the backlog of work and cutting waiting times further. The review report was accepted by the Minister in October. An action plan is now being formulated to take forward its recommendations.

  Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act
  Mr. Malins
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in relation to sections(a) 96, (b) 97 and (c) 98 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, how many cases have been certified by the Secretary of State in accordance with that section; how many cases so certified have been challenged (i) by judicial review and (ii) otherwise; how many challenges were successful; and what the grounds were in each case of challenge. [135430]

  Beverley Hughes
  I regret that the information requested is unavailable and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Statistics on the numbers of certified refusals at asylum initial decisions and the outcomes of any subsequent appeals or judicial reviews are not separately available in relation to sections 96, 97 and 98 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

  Statistics on the outcomes of initial asylum decisions and appeals are published quarterly. The next publication will be available from the 27 November 2003 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/ rds/immigration1.html.

  Mr. Malins
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cases certified as clearly unfounded under Section 94(3) of the Nationality and Immigration Asylum Act 2002 have been(a) challenged successfully and (b) challenged unsuccessfully by judicial review; and, in each case where the challenge was successful, what the grounds of the challenge were. [135431]

  Beverley Hughes
  Section 94(3) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2003 relate to nationalities subject to non-suspensive appeal (NSA). NSA provisions have been applied since 7 November 2002. The number of applications received from such nationalities has fallen significantly.

  I regret that the information requested is not available and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

  Information on asylum initial decisions is published quarterly. The next publication will be available on 27 November 2003 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate web site at http: //www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1. html.
  699W
  Mr. Malins
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) in how many cases considered under section 94(3) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 he decided that the claim was not clearly unfounded, broken down by country of origin of claimants; [135433]

  (2) how many (a) asylum and (b) human rights claims were certified by the Secretary of State as clearly unfounded under Section 94(3) of the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, broken down by country of origin of claimant. [135434]

  Beverley Hughes
  I regret that the information requested is not available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  Information on asylum initial decisions is published quarterly. The next publication will be available on 27 November 2003 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http: //www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.

  Overseas Students (Visa Charges)
  Mr. Brady
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made of the number of overseas pupils attending boarding schools in the United Kingdom who will be required to pay visa charges under new regulations. [133935]

  Beverley Hughes
  No figures are available for the number of boarding school children who will be required to pay for applications for leave to remain in the United Kingdom following the introduction of charging for leave to remain which was introduced on 1 August 2003.

  The cost of an application for leave to remain in the United Kingdom is £155 if sent by post or £250 if lodged in person.

  Mr. Brady
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made of the number of overseas pupils attending boarding schools in the United Kingdom who will miss a period of school due to delays in granting visas. [133936]

  Beverley Hughes
  Student entry clearance applications do not allow us to differentiate those attending boarding schools from others. Globally, over 90 per cent. of all straightforward applications were processed within 24 hours in the financial year 2002–03. By their nature applications from boarding school students are straightforward in most cases.

  UK visas has not received any complaints that students have missed school due to delays in processing entry clearance applications.

  Mr. Cousins
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the additional charges for overseas student visas contain an element for cost recovery for the past costs of administering such visas in accordance with Treasury guidance. [136540]

  Beverley Hughes
  The fees are set under Treasury rules to recover the full administrative cost entailed in considering applications and no more. This is calculated taking the overall costs of processing applications for one year divided by the number of decisions we expect to make.
  700W
  Treasury guidelines state that the only actual costs may be recovered.

  The costs of dealing with applications which do not attract a fee cannot be recovered from fee paid for applications.

  Treasury rules require the Immigration and Nationality Directorate to carry out an annual fee review.

  Mr. Brady
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the statement by the Under-Secretary of State of 22 October 2003,Official Report, column 311 WH, on visa charges, what discretion his Department has in interpreting Treasury rules on the setting of charges for visas for overseas students. [134907]

  Beverley Hughes
  There are no plans to increase student visa fees at this time. However, visa fees are kept under review and may be increased in order to ensure that the entry clearance operation recovers its full costs.

  The fees for leave to remain applications are set under Treasury rules to recover the full administrative cost entailed in considering applications and no more. This is calculated by taking the overall costs of processing applications divided by the number of decisions we expect to make. This is the same method used to calculate the costs of entry clearance/visa fees. There is a scale of fees for entry clearance depending on the type of visa being applied for. We were unable to introduce differential charging for leave to remain applications, as our current accounting structure does not allow for this. Consultation would not have changed this. However, this is not to close off the potential for differential charging in the future and we will again consider this when charges are reviewed.

  Fees and charges for statutory services are set in accordance with Treasury guidelines.

  Mr. Lansley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the Minister of State will reply to the letter of 17 September from the General Secretary of the Independent Schools Council concerning visa charges for school pupils. [133070]

  Beverley Hughes
  A reply to Alistair Cooke's letter of 17 September was sent on 20 October.

  Mr. Lansley
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when, and by what means, he advertised the introduction of visa charges for overseas pupils attending United Kingdom schools. [133071]

  Beverley Hughes
  [holding answer 20 October 2003]Theconcept of charging has been in the public domain for some time since it was debated during the passage of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary further stated his intention to charge in the White Paper: "Secure Borders, Safe Haven: Integration with Diversity in Modern Britain" published on 7 February 2000.

  The day the regulations were laid (10 July) there was a public announcement by way of a Press Release; information was available on the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) Website and a leaflet `Information about New Charges' was available to customers by post and in the Public Enquiry Offices. The leaflet was also sent to IND stakeholders.

  Passports
  Mr. Goodman
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what research he has carried out into the effects on those on low incomes of introducing fees for(a) applications for variation of leave and (b) endorsing passports. [136962]

  Beverley Hughes
  We have not carried out any research into the effects to those on low incomes by the introduction of charging for leave to remain applications but the Immigration Rules require a person applying for leave to remain to be able to maintain and accommodate themselves and any dependants without recourse to public funds

  Police Authorities
  Mr. Key
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the members of the Wiltshire Police Authority indicating(a) who nominated them, (b) who appointed them and (c) their political affiliation. [137348]

  Ms Blears
  There are 17 members of Witshire police authority made up of nine councillors, three magistrates and five independent members, as shown in the table:

  Wiltshire Police Authority

  Members

  Political affiliation

  Councillors

  Mrs. C. Arkell

  Conservative

  Mr. B. Ford

  Conservative

  Mrs. M. Groom

  Conservative

  Mrs. C. Soden

  Conservative

  Mr. W. Spiers

  Conservative

  Mr. D. Benfield

  Labour

  Mrs. M. Taylor

  Labour

  Mrs. M. Boulton

  Liberal Democratic

  Mr. P Sample

  Liberal Democratic

  Magistrates

  —

  Mr. G. Baskerville

  —

  Mr. F. Palmer

  —

  Mrs. M. Sitaram

  —

  Independent Members

  Mr. W. Fishlock

  —

  Mr. C. Hoare

  —

  Mr. I. Johnston

  —

  Miss A. Scofield

  —

  Mr. H. Woolnough

  —

  Councillors and magistrate members are nominated locally. The final decision on independent members is also taken locally but from a short list provided by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. Members are appointed under the terms of Schedule 2 of the Police Act 1996

  The political affiliations of magistrate and independent members are not relevant to the appointment to the police authority and are not known.

  Mr. Hoyle
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what guidance he issues on the range of organisations to be represented on police authorities, with particular reference to the number of representatives from(a) district and (b) county councils. [137508]
  702W
  Ms Blears
  The standard membership of a police authority outside London under section 4(1) of the Police Act 1996 is 17 members, of whom nine will be councillors appointed from relevant councils, three will be magistrates appointed by the local Magistrates Courts Committee and five will be appointed from local people (independent members) who mainly live or work in the police area. The Home Office and Association of Police Authorities published joint guidance on the selection and appointment of independent members of police authorities in England and Wales on 20 September 2002. This guidance reflects the intention in the Act that the independent membership should, as far as practical, represent the interests of a wide range of people in the community and be appropriately skilled. It does not specify organisations.

  Where there is a single relevant council in a police area, it selects from its membership the nine councillor members of the police authority according to political balance. If there is more than one relevant council, then a Joint Committee of those councils makes the appointments on the balance of parties prevailing among the members of the relevant councils taken as a whole. The apportionment between relevant councils is a matter for the Joint Committee. This is set out in Schedule 2 of the Police Act 1996 as amended.

  Rural Policing
  Mr. Simmonds
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much funding has been made to each police authority in England and Wales since 1995 under the Rural Sparsity Grant. [138232]

  Ms Blears
  The Rural Policing Fund was introduced in 2000–01. Allocations to the end of this financial year are set out in the table.

  Rural Policing Fund—allocations 2000–01 to 2003–04

  £

  Police authority

  2000–01

  2001–02

  2002–03

  2003–04

  Avon and Somerset

  494,892

  992,875

  993,718

  978,223

  Bedfordshire

  81,390

  163,540

  163,555

  164,272

  Cambridgeshire

  561,585

  1,125,169

  1,126,395

  1,098,821

  Cheshire

  115,058

  228,487

  227,493

  228,073

  Cumbria

  690,613

  1,370,910

  1,360,324

  1,355,658

  Derbyshire

  208,347

  416,190

  415,196

  407,488

  Devon and Cornwall

  1,554,673

  3,114,489

  3,128,806

  3,122,895

  Dorset

  221,858

  442,209

  443,158

  441,478

  Durham

  124,270

  246,803

  245,259

  239,908

  Dyfed Powys

  1,297,570

  2,588,337

  2,583,979

  2,612899

  Essex

  251,315

  503,710

  504,105

  501,773

  Gloucestershire

  387,093

  776,548

  775,749

  778,455

  Gwent

  102,985

  204,476

  203,489

  202,360

  Hampshire

  110,175

  220,430

  219,680

  219,421

  Humberside

  357,640

  710,250

  705,395

  698,109

  Kent

  298,863

  599,342

  599,700

  595,161

  Lancashire

  32,228

  64,054

  63,835

  63,419

  Leicestershire

  216,758

  433,988

  433,164

  428,056

  Lincolnshire

  985,951

  1,978,690

  1,984,449

  2,032,554

  Norfolk

  1,036,848

  2,078,830

  2,085,509

  2,076,414

  Northamptonshire

  350,892

  704,141

  705,137

  712,539

  North Wales

  770,617

  1,533,723

  1,530,130

  1,542,644

  North Yorkshire

  1,005,224

  2,013,806

  2,018,359

  2,018,029

  Staffordshire

  138,358

  275,072

  273,147

  270,884

  Suffolk

  711,533

  1,422,627

  1,424,923

  1,407,313

  703W

  Rural Policing Fund—allocations 2000–01 to 2003–04

  £

  Police authority

  2000–01

  2001–02

  2002–03

  2003–04

  Surrey

  5,463

  11,048

  11,006

  10,825

  Sussex

  273,834

  550,563

  549,849

  541,847

  Thames Valley

  629,559

  1,262,860

  1,261,933

  1,245,238

  Warwickshire

  282,108

  562,546

  561,338

  558,987

  West Mercia

  1,157,670

  2,311,653

  2,309,690

  2,341,925

  Wiltshire

  544,900

  1,092,634

  1,091,530

  1,095,332

  Totals

  15,000,000

  30,000,000

  30,000,000

  30,000,000

  Mar1995

  Mar1996

  Mar1997

  Mar1998

  Mar1999

  Mar2000

  Mar2001

  Mar2002

  Mar20032

  Avon and Somerset

  3,000

  2,981

  2,989

  2,976

  2,999

  2,934

  2,994

  3,096

  3,149

  Bedfordshire

  1,126

  1,128

  1,094

  1,079

  1,041

  1,028

  1,036

  1,069

  1,106

  Cambridgeshire

  1,261

  1,238

  1,302

  1,291

  1,274

  1,237

  1,296

  1,362

  1,384

  Cheshire

  1,932

  1,998

  2,046

  2,042

  2,071

  2,011

  2,002

  2,059

  2,119

  Cleveland

  1,438

  1,420

  1,459

  1,483

  1,416

  1,404

  1,407

  1,461

  1,582

  Cumbria

  1,167

  1,115

  1,144

  1,164

  1,126

  1,084

  1,048

  1,100

  1,140

  Derbyshire

  1,797

  1,763

  1,791

  1,772

  1,759

  1,777

  1,823

  1,848

  2,003

  Devon and Cornwall

  2,877

  2,899

  2,865

  2,962

  2,887

  2,841

  2,934

  3,053

  3,202

  Dorset

  1,288

  1,263

  1,284

  1,310

  1,279

  1,306

  1,354

  1,381

  1,416

  Durham

  1,353

  1,401

  1,461

  1,515

  1,568

  1,558

  1,595

  1,614

  1,651

  Essex

  2,921

  2,884

  2,961

  2,928

  2,891

  2,806

  2,897

  2,946

  2,989

  Gloucestershire

  1,163

  1,133

  1,133

  1,104

  1,104

  1,114

  1,173

  1,183

  1,227

  Greater Manchester

  7,037

  6,938

  6,922

  6,949

  6,810

  6,795

  6,909

  7,217

  7,343

  Hampshire

  3,256

  3,347

  3,452

  3,490

  3,473

  3,419

  3,438

  3,480

  3,668

  Hertfordshire

  1,703

  1,712

  1,759

  1,740

  1,724

  1,767

  1,922

  1,825

  1,957

  Humberside

  2,029

  2,041

  2,045

  2,021

  1,974

  1,932

  1,917

  2,058

  2,105

  Kent

  .3,117

  3,120

  3,260

  3,251

  3,201

  3,204

  3,319

  3,355

  3,487

  Lancashire

  3,212

  3,171

  3,247

  3,257

  3,245

  3,179

  3,255

  3,304

  3,339

  Leicestershire

  1,839

  1,908

  1,949

  1,983

  1,993

  1,993

  2,032

  2,100

  2,114

  Lincolnshire

  1,199

  1,145

  1,196

  1,191

  1,140

  1,115

  1,202

  1,198

  1,221

  City of London

  885

  869

  859

  825

  778

  732

  703

  764

  808

  Merseyside

  4,659

  4,411

  4,230

  4,216

  4,211

  4,085

  4,081

  4,125

  4,099

  Metropolitan police

  27,480

  27,343

  26,677

  26,094

  26,073

  25,485

  24,878

  26,223

  27,984

  Norfolk

  1,395

  1,401

  1,432

  1,430

  1,381

  1,381

  1,420

  1,468

  1,499

  Northamptonshire

  1,156

  1,153

  1,177

  1,169

  1,137

  1,117

  1,157

  1,214

  1,210

  Northumbria

  3,606

  3,668

  3,677

  3,769

  3,840

  3,788

  3,857

  3,929

  3,943

  North Yorkshire

  1,300

  1,324

  1,338

  1,367

  1,337

  1,283

  1,305

  1,417

  1,444

  Nottinghamshire

  2,319

  2,318

  2,323

  2,323

  2,225

  2,204

  2,275

  2,330

  2,411

  South Yorkshire

  3,040

  3,073

  3,159

  3,182

  3,168

  3,163

  3,197

  3,199

  3,183

  Staffordshire

  2,231

  2,209

  2,211

  2,292

  2,238

  2,170

  2,129

  2,133

  2,202

  Suffolk

  1,191

  1,138

  1,180

  1,186

  1,190

  1,145

  1,133

  1,203

  1,253

  Surrey

  1,676

  1,644

  1,620

  1,608

  1,662

  1,785

  2,066

  1,992

  1,906

  Sussex

  2,931

  3,074

  3,085

  2,996

  2,847

  2,822

  2,855

  2,893

  2,989

  Thames Valley

  3,854

  3,674

  3,695

  3,776

  3,748

  3,740

  3,703

  3,762

  3,833

  Warwickshire

  1,013

  979

  926

  924

  908

  900

  926

  969

  997

  West Mercia

  2,046

  2,017

  2,040

  2,010

  2,025

  1,887

  1,951

  2,018

  2,256

  West Midlands

  7,019

  7,145

  7,113

  7,156

  7,321

  7,194

  7,423

  7,681

  7,751

  West Yorkshire

  5,050

  5,142

  5,209

  5,155

  4,982

  4,822

  4,815

  4,889

  5,029

  Wiltshire

  1,261

  1,218

  1,154

  1,156

  1,151

  1,118

  1,120

  1,157

  1,158

  Dyfed-Powys

  976

  991

  1,005

  1,002

  1,026

  1,040

  1,055

  1,132

  1,149

  Gwent

  997

  1,044

  1,243

  1,233

  1,247

  1,264

  1,274

  1,333

  1,341

  North Wales

  1,366

  1,378

  1,369

  1,396

  1,391

  1,403

  1,444

  1,506

  1,539

  South Wales

  3,014

  3,027

  2,976

  2,986

  2,981

  2,926

  3,154

  3,222

  3,239

  Total

  125,180

  124,844

  125,051

  124,756

  123,841

  121,956

  123,476

  127,267

  131,426

  1 Full-time equivalents.

  2 Comparable strength.

  Civilian staff strength1

  Civilian staff strength

  Mar 1996

  Mar 1997

  Mar 1998

  Mar 1999

  Mar 2000

  Mar 2001

  Mar 2002

  Mar 2003

  Avon and Somerset

  1,213

  1,438

  1,393

  1,424

  1,436

  1,452

  1,611

  1,785

  Bedfordshire

  472

  484

  523

  483

  490

  491

  524

  595

  Cambridgeshire

  530

  607

  574

  586

  503

  614

  733

  786

  Cheshire

  690

  735

  781

  785

  823

  833

  884

  1,008

  Cleveland

  553

  609

  586

  552

  595

  586

  626

  694

  Cumbria

  408

  451

  451

  442

  469

  588

  631

  676

  Derbyshire

  656

  723

  787

  818

  826

  875

  953

  1,061

  Devon and Cornwall

  1,121

  1,159

  1,186

  1,215

  1,343

  1,453

  1,639

  1,834

  704W

  Police Strength
  Mr. Simmonds
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many(a) police officers and (b) police civilian staff each police authority in England and Wales had in each year since 1995. [138234]

  Ms Blears
  The following tables show the number of police officers from 1995 to 2003 and police staff from 1996 to 2003 (1995 data not available) for each police force area in England and Wales.
  705W

  Civilian staff strength1

  Mar 1996

  Mar 1997

  Mar 1998

  Mar 1999

  Mar 2000

  Mar 2001

  Mar 2002

  Mar 2003

  Dorset

  621

  615

  651

  702

  686

  682

  74.1

  793

  Durham

  531

  583

  557

  559

  590

  566

  660

  602

  Essex

  1,130

  1,199

  1,252

  1,273

  1,348

  1,447

  1,571

  1,682

  Gloucestershire

  415

  435

  423

  504

  484

  506

  545

  590

  Greater Manchester

  2,749

  2,612

  2,661

  2,623

  2,822

  2,858

  3,135

  3,173

  Hampshire

  1,323

  1,316

  1,331

  1,381

  1,443

  1,424

  1,597

  1,720

  Hertfordshire

  754

  818

  831

  835

  890

  935

  1,121

  1,299

  Humberside

  683

  718

  789

  840

  840

  808

  816

  880

  Kent

  1,141

  1,384

  1,470

  1,582

  1,647

  1,796

  1,958

  2,095

  Lancashire

  1,349

  1,126

  1,143

  1,198

  1,422

  1,369

  1,442

  1,489

  Leicestershire

  667

  755

  774

  802

  805

  806

  816

  934

  Lincolnshire

  442

  521

  541

  517

  516

  561

  600

  641

  City of London

  324

  347

  334

  314

  285

  233

  247.

  268

  Merseyside

  1,560

  1,343

  1,502

  1,356

  1,458

  1,418

  1,532

  1,752

  Metropolitan police

  14,372

  13,493

  12,432

  11,257

  10,605

  10,040

  10,459

  11,358

  Norfolk

  529

  603

  646

  648

  655

  694

  819

  924

  Northamptonshire

  511

  554

  577

  587

  599

  694

  742

  812

  Northumbria

  1,319

  1,365

  1,362

  1,443

  1,417

  1,344

  1,403

  1,457

  North Yorkshire

  520

  519

  543

  541

  492

  591

  743

  723

  Nottinghamshire

  979

  1,003

  987

  1,039

  1,024

  1,039

  1,087

  1,180

  South Yorkshire

  1,418

  1,291

  1,243

  1,273

  1,391

  1,312

  1,352

  1,510

  Staffordshire

  754

  763

  866

  1,004

  858

  935

  1,030

  1,146

  Suffolk

  485

  522

  583

  594

  600

  621

  692

  713

  Surrey

  754

  727

  743

  733

  762

  897

  1,043

  1,245

  Sussex

  1,131

  1,149

  1,185

  1,393

  1,328

  1,454

  1,507

  1,578

  Thames Valley

  1,738

  1,825

  1,827

  1,799

  1,786

  1,891

  2,061

  .2,412

  Warwickshire

  376

  376

  398

  406

  394

  412

  459

  503

  West Mercia

  964

  942

  975

  975

  1,043

  1,095

  1,116

  1,233

  West Midlands

  2,780

  2,739

  2,817

  2,652

  2,695

  2,819

  3,007

  3,012

  West Yorkshire

  2,037

  2,234

  2,304

  2,216

  2,199

  2,228

  2,364

  2,538

  Wiltshire

  453

  475

  519

  555

  563

  622

  649

  703

  Dyfed-Powys

  310.

  322

  341

  341

  359

  401

  459

  502

  Gwent

  378

  452

  477

  487

  498

  537

  570

  607

  North Wales

  512

  476

  479

  508

  519

  498

  645

  703

  South Wales

  1,287

  1,206

  1,132

  1,223

  1,081

  1,270

  1,435

  1,366

  England and Wales

  52,933

  53,011

  52,975

  52,465

  52,588

  53,693

  58,022

  62,581

  1 Full-time equivalents.

  Police Reorganisation
  Mr. Gordon Prentice
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to reorganise the Police Service in England. [137851]

  Ms Blears
  A major consultation exercise on the future direction of police reform was launched on 4 November 2003 with the publication of "Policing: Building Safer Communities Together". Among other things, this paper opens the debate on whether the current 43 force structure in England and Wales is the right one for today's and tomorrow's policing needs.

  We are clear that any structural change will need to deliver improvements in police performance and delivery of service.

  Deportations
  Denzil Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many individuals who had been refused political asylum were deported in each of the last three years for which figures are available. [137060]

  Beverley Hughes
  Deportations are a just one type of removal; others include: persons subject to administrative removal, removal due to illegal entry action or those refused entry at port and subsequently removed.
  706W
  The table shows the number of asylum seekers who were removed from the United Kingdom between 2000 and 2002. These are steadily being increased.

  Removals and voluntary departures1 of asylum applicants, 2000 to 20022

  2000

  2001

  32002

  Principal Applicants

  8,980

  9,285

  10,740

  Dependants4

  N/a

  1,495

  3,170

  1 Figures have been rounded to the nearest live.

  2 Includes persons departing "voluntarily" after enforcement action has been initiated against them and persons leaving under the Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes run by the International Organisation for Migration, and removals on safe third country grounds.

  3 Provisional data subject to change.

  4 Data on dependants removed have been collected only since April 2001 onwards.

  N/A—Not available

  Information on asylum removals is published quarterly. The next publication will cover the third quarter (July to September) of 2003 and will be available from 27 November 2002 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.
  707W
  Denzil Davies
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many individuals lost their appeals to the adjudicator against the refusal of political asylum in the last three years for which figures are available. [137061]

  Beverley Hughes
  The latest available data is given in the following tables. The tables show the outcomes of appeals determined by adjudicators of the Immigration Appellate Authority (IAA), further appeals to the

  Asylum appeals determined by adjudicators of the Immigration Appellate Authority, excluding dependants12

  Number of principal appellants

  Allowed4

  Dismissed4

  Withdrawn4

  Total determined3

  Total

  Aspercentage of total determined

  Total

  Aspercentage of total determined

  Total

  As percentage of total determined

  2000

  19,395

  3,340

  17

  15,580

  80

  475

  2

  2001

  43,415

  8,155

  19

  34,440

  79

  825

  2

  2002

  64,405

  13,875

  22

  48,845

  76

  1,685

  3

  2003

  Q1

  20,595

  3,480

  17

  16,445

  80

  670

  3

  Q2

  19,345

  4,060

  21

  14,875

  77

  415

  2

  1Figures, other than percentages, rounded to the nearest 5. Numbers might not add up due to rounding.

  2 Data for 2002 and 2003 are provisional.

  3 Based on information supplied by the Department for Constitutional Affairs. Determinations do not necessarily relate to appeals received in the same period.

  4 Based on data supplied from the Presenting Officers Unit within the Home Office.

  Note:

  Estimate. Figures rounded to the nearest hundred, and subject to later revision.

  Further appeals to the Tribunal, decisions, and the outcome of tribunal hearings, excluding dependants, 2000 to 20021

  Number of principal appellants

  Applications for leave to appeal to the tribunal2

  Appeal to the tribunal2

  Applications

  Decisions

  Received

  Determined

  2000

  6,020

  5,490

  1,615

  2,635

  2001

  15,540

  13,540

  3,860

  3,190

  2002(P)

  25,600

  22,825

  6,920

  5,565

  Number of principal appellants

  Outcome of Tribunal Hearings3

  Appellant

  Secretary of State

  Allowed

  Dismissed

  Withdrawn

  Allowed

  Dismissed

  Withdrawn

  2000

  650

  1,225

  185

  170

  165

  35

  2001

  315

  1,020

  25

  160

  120

  25

  20024

  410

  1,880

  210

  215

  130

  15

  1 Figures rounded to the nearest 5. Numbers might not add up due to rounding.

  2 Figures based on data supplied by the Department for Constitutional Affairs. Decisions and determinations do not necessarily
  correspond to applications and appeals received in any given year.

  3 Figures supplied by the Presenting Officers Unit. Figures for October—December 1999 are based on data for November-December.

  4 Provisional figures.

  Note:

  Revised figures.

  708W
  tribunal (including those brought by the Secretary of State), and applications for judicial review in the last three years. Only a proportion of those that are refused asylum lodge appeals, and the majority of appeals are dismissed.

  Cases are determined according to their individual merits. The figures relate to numbers of cases; appeals determined by the IAA may relate to initial decisions made in previous years, and appeals determined by the IAT may relate to cases determined at the IAA made in previous years.

  Number of principal appellants

  Outcome of tribunal hearings3

  Allowed

  Dismissed

  Withdrawn

  Remitted to adjudicators for further consideration

  2000

  815

  1,385

  220

  215

  2001

  475

  1,140

  150

  1,430

  20024

  620

  2,015

  225

  2,700

  709W

  Applications for judicial review, and outcomes, excluding dependants, 1994 to 2002

  Applications for leave to move for judicial review1

  Applications

  Decisions2

  of which granted leave to move

  Percentage of applicants granted leave to move3

  Total

  20006

  1,920

  2,095

  555

  (26)

  365

  20016

  2,210

  2,300

  290

  (13)

  260

  20027

  3,075

  2,980

  260

  (9)

  25

  The outcome of judicial review hearings1

  Allowed4

  Dismissed6

  Withdrawn

  As percentage of total determined

  Total

  As percentage of total determined

  Total

  As percentage of total determined

  20006

  (48)

  300

  (40)

  95

  (12)

  20016

  (68)

  60

  (16)

  60

  (16)

  20027

  (30)

  60

  (67)

  5

  (3)

  1 Figures based on Administrative Court data. Figures (other than
  percentages) rounded to the nearest 5 with. = 1 or 2.

  2 Decisions do not relate to applications in any given period.

  3 The number of which granted leave to move as a percentage of decisions.

  4 The decision of the respondent (in this case, the Home Office or the Department for Constitutional Affairs) was quashed. These figures include consent orders where the JR was conceded by the respondent.

  5 The decision of the respondent was upheld.

  6 Figures exclude judicial reviews brought in cases relating to asylum support (NASS).

  7 Provisional figures.

  Figures on asylum appeals are published quarterly and are available on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate web site at
  http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1. html

  Prisoner Transfers
  Bob Russell
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many vehicles he has had available on average on each day in the last three months for the transfer of prisoners(a) between prisons and (b) between court and prison; and how many vehicles are operated by the private sector; [137482]

  (2) how many prisoners on average were transferred each day between prisons and between court and prison in the last three months. [137483]

  Paul Goggins
  There were around 1,600 prisoner movements between courts and prisons and around 300 prisoners transferred between prisons by private sector contractors on average, each day, in the last three months. No central record is kept of prisoners transferred by the Prison Service.

  On average, 760 vehicles were available each day in the last three months for the transfer of prisoners, 706 of which were operated by private sector contractors. 54 vehicles are owned by and are available to the Prison Service.

  Prison Reception Areas
  Mr. Caton
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list those of Her Majesty's Prisons that have no covered reception area for visitors. [138152]
  710W
  Paul Goggins
  The procedures for managing visitors awaiting entry to a prison varies at each establishment and is not recorded centrally.

  The provision of a covered area immediately outside the gates is often dependent on the structural design of the prison building. However, around 109 establishments provide a visitors' centre which offers visitors both shelter and, in most cases, support services that are available before and immediately after the visit is due to take place.

  Many of those who do not have a centre provide basic facilities such as a waiting area. Recent enquiries suggest that around 10 prisons appear to have no current plans for a visitors' centre and we are exploring with them their intentions in terms of assisting visitors.

  Prison Suicides
  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what measures are being introduced to reduce the suicide rate in prisons apart from the installation of safe cells. [138369]

  Paul Goggins
  The Prison Service is in the final year of a three-year programme to develop policies and practices to reduce prisoner suicide in prisons. Over the next few months the outcome of this programme will be reviewed taking into account pilot project evaluations and emerging research findings. The next steps and approaches will be resolved in consultation with partner agencies such as the Youth Justice Board and outside organisations such as Samaritans.

  As part of this close partnership with other agencies and organisations, there has been a targeting of efforts where the risks are highest. A particular focus, and an investment of over £21 million over the three year programme, has been on physical improvements at six pilot sites. These improvements have been in reception, first night and induction areas, installing more first night centres, and by having more crisis suites and gated cells that enable staff to watch at-risk prisoners closely.

  Dedicated drug detoxification units and mental health in-reach support have also been established, along with a series of inter-related projects to develop improved suicide prevention and self-harm management policies, concentrating on pre-reception, reception and induction arrangements; inter-agency information exchange; prisoner care and peer support, and learning from investigations into deaths in custody.

  Prison Service Suicide Prevention Co-ordinators have been trained and are now operating in the majority of prisons. Additionally, the Samaritans are recruiting and training more prisoner peer supporters (known as Listeners) in high-risk establishments. Listeners are prisoner volunteers who are selected, trained and supported by Samaritans to offer confidential support to their fellow prisoners who may be at risk of suicide, otherwise in crisis, or simply in need of someone to talk to. 1,241 new Listeners were recruited between 1 October 2001 and 31 March 2003 with further recruitment and training continuing. The scheme's objectives are to assist in preventing suicide, reducing self-harm and to help alleviate the feelings of those in distress.
  711W

  Race Equality
  Vera Baird
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the impact of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 in promoting race equality; and what criteria he applied in carrying out the assessment. [137059]

  Fiona Mactaggart
  The Government work closely with the Commission for Racial Equality, (CRE) which has statutory responsibility for enforcing the duty to promote race equality under the Race Relations Act 1976 (as amended by the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000).

  The CRE commissioned Schneider-Ross, a firm of diversity consultants to evaluate the response of public authorities to the statutory duty to promote race equality. The research had two main elements, quantitative and qualitative, covering two core stages. The first of these was a questionnaire based survey of 3,338 public authorities and educational institutions, using two questionnaires designed to address the different elements of the general and specific duties that apply to the two broad categories. The second was an analysis of a random sample of 143 race equality schemes and policies from the main sectors covered by the duty, assessed against the recommendations of CRE Code of Practice and CRE guidance materials.

  The Schneider-Ross report found that overall local government was the highest achieving sector. Around a third of local authorities were on track; a third had good foundations to respond well to the duty to promote, and, a third needed to carry out more work in order to comply. The criminal justice service was strong, especially in the police and probation services. The weakest sector was schools.

  The Home Office has initiated a Race Relations (Amendment) Act Strategic Sectoral Audit.

  The audit is a sector by sector analysis of whether the key ingredients for success are present or not in each sector. The work on mapping the landscape of current sector activity builds on the findings of the Schneider-Ross survey. We are working closely with the CRE to take this forward quickly so that necessary support and attention can be made available to those public bodies who need it.

  Hendon Police College (Racism)
  Mr. Dismore
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps are being taken to deal with the issue of racism at the Peel Centre Police College, Hendon; and if he will make a statement. [136824]

  Ms Blears
  The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis tells me that the Department of Professional Standards and senior managers at Hendon Training College have already taken action on recently reported cases. One student at Hendon has resigned as a result of making racist comments; two fellow students have been suspended as a result of failing to report the above incident; one student has resigned as a result of making a sexist comment.
  712W
  The Commissioner has recently established a working group to bring together work already undertaken by the Metropolitan Police Service in relation to race and diversity. Part of this work includes a review of Hendon Training School.

  Rape
  Vera Baird
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many convictions for rape involving the use of drugs there were in(a) 2001, (b) 2002 and (c) the first half of 2003. [129669]

  Paul Goggins
  The statistics collected centrally do not enable convictions for rape involving the use of drugs to be identified.

  Staff Training (Non-departmental Public Bodies)
  Mrs Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it is compulsory for his Department's staff to undertake training on the Home Office/non-departmental public body relationship as soon as they begin dealing with NDPBs. [138244]

  Fiona Mactaggart
  For each Non Departmental Public Body (NDPB), there is a corresponding Sponsor Team who are the first point of contact in the Home Office, and are responsible for managing the relationship. These Sponsor Teams are collectively supported by an Advisory Team, offering specialist knowledge, and a network of contacts across the Home Office and in other Government Departments.

  Individual Home Office members of staff agree personal development and training plans annually with their managers. This would be undertaken immediately they join a Sponsor Team or the Central Advisory Team. In either of these teams training is not mandatory but is tailored to the individuals according to theirs and the Department's need.

  Mrs Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department under what circumstances training is given to his Department's staff who deal with non-departmental public bodies. [138245]
  Fiona Mactaggart: For each Non Departmental Public Body (NDPB), there is a corresponding Sponsor Team who are the first point of contact in the Home Office, and are responsible for managing the relationship. These Sponsor Teams are collectively supported by an Advisory Team, offerin specialist knowledge, and a network of contacts across the Home Office and in Other Government Departments.

  Individual Home Office members of staff agree personal development and training plans annually with their managers. This would be undertaken immediately they join a Sponsor Team or the Central Advisory Team.

  Street Crime Initiative
  Mrs. Curtis-Thomas
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what aspects of the Street Crime Initiative he intends to implement in all areas. [138367]

  Ms Blears
  Police forces not involved in the Street Crime Initiative will benefit from best practice circulated by the Association of Chief Police Officers
  713W
  and the Home Office's Police Standards Unit, including a CD Rom, Tactical Options from the Street Crime Initiative, which has been distributed to all police forces. Lessons are also being learnt from the Street Crime Initiative 'relating to the handling of street crime cases through the Criminal Justice System by the police, Crown Prosecution Service and the courts. These lessons, about getting the case right from the start, providing better support for victims and witnesses, and managing cases robustly in court, are being applied more widely as part of the work on bringing more offences to justice and improving public confidence in the criminal justice system.

  Terrorism Act 2000
  Mr. Oaten
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for authorisations under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 received in the last three years have been(a) successful and (b) unsuccessful. [138506]

  Mr. Blunkett
  Home Office records show that since the Terrorism Act came into force on 19 February 2001, 678 stop and search authorisations under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2001 have been confirmed. Of these there have been two instances where the powers have not been confirmed by the Secretary of State.

  Each authorisation is given full consideration. They are confirmed only if the Secretary of State is satisfied that their use is necessary to prevent acts of terrorism as set against the background of the current threat level.

  Work-related Stress
  Dr. Cable
  To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cases of work-related stress have 714W
  been reported in his Department in each of the last three years; how much compensation has been paid to employees; how many work days have been lost due to work-related stress; and at what cost; what procedures have been put in place to reduce work-related stress, and at what cost; and if he will make a statement. [136841]

  Fiona Mactaggart
  Information on sickness absence and compensation payments due to 'work-related' stress are not collected centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

  The Department does, however, monitor factors relating to workplace stress including workload and working conditions through its staff surveys. The Department has taken action to address some of the main identified factors, including filling vacancies, recognition of good performance and improving technology. The Home Office is committed to supporting staff in achieving a balance between their work and home responsibilities and has a range of flexible working patterns to help staff achieve this.

  A welfare service is available and offers personal support for staff suffering from any form of stress. In addition, stress awareness courses are available and information on how to recognise stress and suggested coping strategies, is accessible via the Home Office Intranet. The aim of these resources is to help staff recognise the early signs of stress and take appropriate action.

  The Department is aware of its legal obligation to provide a safe working environment for employees and is committed to meeting targets for reducing the number of working days lost generally due to work related injuries and illness arising from the government's Revitalising Health and Safety initiative.

EDUCATION AND SKILLS

  Examinations System
  The Secretary of State for Education and Skills (Mr. Charles Clarke)
  I am grateful to the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), the other regulatory authorities and the examination boards for their hard work in ensuring that the exam system ran smoothly this year. It is nonetheless a system under strain. QCA has therefore developed proposals to ensure we have an examinations system fit for the 21st century which will support rising standards in schools and colleges.

  I am announcing today that I shall be making some £50 million available to QCA in each of 2004–05 and 2005–06 by reprioritising from within my existing resources. In doing so, I remain committed to ensuring that schools are properly funded. The resources released for modernisation will not impact on the money available for school funding.

  The overall programme will include improving the supply and quality of examiners; upgrading examinations offices in schools and colleges and supporting the work of examinations officers; improving the system for the transfer of information between schools, colleges and awarding bodies; and streamlining and making more secure the movement of examination papers and scripts between awarding bodies, schools and colleges, and examiners. It will also cover some developmental work on increased use of ICT in the examinations system, including some piloting of e-marking. The programme will also cover some short-term work aimed at reducing the assessment load and complexity.

  QCA are also proposing to establish a new National Assessment Agency. This body would still be accountable to QCA's Chief Executive and Board.
  26WS
  It would work with the examination boards to secure the long-term viability of the examination system and lead the way in modernising it through the five strands of work which I have announced today, including through the use of its own ring-fenced budget. It would also be responsible for administering the tests that take place at the end of each key stage, but not for the regulatory functions which would remain with the main QCA. The establishment of the new agency would thus ensure that these two potentially conflicting responsibilities are kept apart.

  This programme of work represents a considerable investment in the examinations system. I believe it will make for an efficient, robust and modern examinations system such that our young people deserve.

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

  Homeless Households
  The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Yvette Cooper)
  I am pleased to announce today that in the light of positive responses to the public consultation on the Government's proposals to improve standards of temporary accommodation for homeless households we intend to:Make an Order under s.210 of the 1996 Housing Act to come into force on 1 April 2004 to end the long-term (defined as more than six weeks) use of Bed and Breakfast (B&B) accommodation as temporary accommodation for homeless families with children or where a member of the household is pregnant;
  Issue statutory guidance to bring together and re-state existing minimum standards for all temporary accommodation used by housing authorities to accommodate homeless families and individuals under the legislation;
  Issue statutory guidance on additional standards that should apply to B&B accommodation where this is used by housing authorities to accommodate homeless families and individuals under the legislation: and
  Issue statutory guidance on the arrangements that should be put in place to ensure that all households placed in temporary accommodation by housing authorities under the legislation receive support to ensure that their health, education and welfare needs are met.

  A summary of responses to the consultation will be made available on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website http://www.odpm.gov.uk/.

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

The Lord Chancellor: Leave of Absence
The Lord Chancellor (Lord Falconer of Thoroton): My Lords, before business begins, may I take the opportunity to inform the House that I will be attending a Cabinet meeting on Wednesday, 19th November? Accordingly, I trust that the House will grant me leave of absence.

RNIB: Right to Read Charter
2.36 p.m.
Baroness Gardner of Parkes Baroness Gardner of Parkes asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they support the aims of the Right to Read Charter championed by the Royal National Institute of the Blind.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Education and Skills (Baroness Ashton of Upholland): My Lords, we fully support the charter's aim of tackling discrimination against people with visual impairment. To that end, we have extended the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to education and provided more than £600 million to improve access to education for disabled students.
We have worked with the Royal National Institute of the Blind and with copyright owners to reduce delays in gaining copyright clearance when making accessible copies of printed materials. We have supported the establishment of the Reveal database, which provides information about accessible resources.
Baroness Gardner of Parkes: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that encouraging reply. However, is she aware that two difficulties remain? One is that the problem seems to bridge several government departments—those dealing with disability, social care and education. For that reason, the people who want to improve those things cannot find a particular government person to deal with.
Is the Minister also aware that books with large print are expensive to produce and are not used very often by the children for whom they are developed, although older people use them as well? Would it be possible to develop some sort of central system? At the moment, the matter is devolved to education authorities. That does not work well, as those authorities do not work with one another. If there were a centralised way in which it could be made known that
1766
such books were available to children who needed them, it would bring a financial saving and a benefit to those children.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, the fact that the subject bridges different departments can be a strength, rather than a problem. In preparing for the Question, I talked to my colleagues in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Department of Trade and Industry in particular. A great deal of work continues to be done through the library service and with publishers to support the initiative. I hope that, in future, the noble Baroness will see that as positive.
The noble Baroness suggested a central system giving access to information. Part of what, we hope, the Reveal database will do is enable educationists to find the information. This month, we go live with a link between our websites and the database. I will pursue the point made by the noble Baroness.
Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, the Government have done well on the issue but not well enough. One striking figure is that no fewer than one in three blind and partially sighted pupils do not have books and exam papers in the preferred format. I find that utterly incomprehensible. Will my noble friend address that point? The Government have given out lots of money, and that should be appreciated, but we cannot have children hampered by having no books or exam papers. We need a guarantee from the Government that those children will get books and exam papers in the preferred format.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I say to my noble friend that I am sorry that we have not yet done well enough. However, we have made available £220 million specifically for the School Access Initiative, which is designed to enable children and young people with disabilities to have access not only to premises but to the curriculum, as my noble friend pointed out.
All end of key stage test papers have been available in different formats for some time. All other national test papers are produced in different formats. It is for schools and LEAs to ensure that curriculum materials are available as appropriate and in good time for children with visual impairment. With good strategic planning, that can be achieved. I take my noble friend's point, and I will pursue it.
Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, given the noble Baroness's earlier Answer to my noble friend, does she offer it as a general proposition that the more departments that are responsible for a particular matter, the better it is managed?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: No, my Lords. I offer the proposition that many of the issues that affect our people span the whole of government and that we need to work effectively together. The Government believe in being joined-up, and we are.
Lord Addington: My Lords, we are talking about joined-up government on this matter. Have the Government made any progress towards having VAT removed from audio books? I remind the Government that access to literature is an important aspect of our cultural life, not only of education. By not taking action, we are excluding a large number of people.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I remind the noble Lord that there is no VAT on books, journals, newspapers or periodicals; nor is there VAT on equipment specifically designed to support those with visual impairment. There is VAT on audio tapes, which are available to the general population. Obviously, we listen to representations, but the noble Lord will know that, under EC law, that would be incompatible with the direction in which we are travelling.
Earl Howe: My Lords, do the Government have accurate statistics on the number of visually impaired and other disabled children throughout the country, so as better to establish what their information needs are and what sector they fall into? If they do—I do not believe that they do—it would be valuable information for planning purposes.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, it is true that, traditionally, governments have not collected information. However, I can say to the noble Earl that, in the next few months, we will, for the first time, have information about children with special educational needs throughout the school sector that will, as he suggested, enable us to plan more efficiently and effectively to support those children in schools.
Baroness Wilkins: My Lords, would the Minister agree to consider setting up a national repository of electronic versions of texts—which could be used as a source for the production of accessible information and to speed up the production of accessible texts for students—as quickly as possible?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I am not entirely sure that it would be appropriate for the Government to do that. However, it is critical that we work closely with publishers to enable access to literature of all kinds to be made available as quickly as possible.

Disabled Students
2.43 p.m.
Baroness Sharp of Guildford Baroness Sharp of Guildford asked Her Majesty's Government:
Why students who become disabled during their period of study are denied access to disability benefits available to students who are disabled at the outset of their studies.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Baroness Hollis of Heigham): My Lords, it is not the case that students who become disabled during their period of study are treated differently from those who are disabled at the outset.
Baroness Sharp of Guildford: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply, but can she explain the catch-22 situation that arises for some students? For example, a student who gets a bad sports injury and is out of studies for a year, or perhaps a little longer, is not eligible to claim student benefit because he is not studying. Equally, he is not eligible to claim income support; he is still classed as a student because he wishes to return to study. He is not eligible to claim job seeker's allowance because he is not in a position to seek work; nor is he eligible to claim incapacity benefit because he has no contribution record. The student is eligible to claim disability living allowance but, due to the assessment process in such situations, it may take a year before he is assessed. Therefore, there is a real problem about on what the student should live in the mean time.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, the noble Baroness is right to say that the source of funding for students who become disabled while at university will change. Certainly, for the first 60 days of their temporary withdrawal from university, they would be eligible for their student support to continue to roll over. For the next 60 to 195 days, they would be eligible for discretionary or hardship funding from local authorities and may be able to tap disability living allowance. After six months, they are eligible for income support and housing benefit if they meet the qualifying means tests.
Lord Campbell of Croy: My Lords, would not the situation be improved or rectified if assessment for disabilities was made at the earliest opportunity after disablement occurs?
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: Yes, my Lords, there is no dispute about that. At present, a student who becomes disabled while at university can qualify for funding from disability living allowance, disabled student allowances and so forth. Perhaps one half of all disabled students are able to benefit from additional funding, which is about £20,000 a year beyond student educational loan support.
The difference between disability and sickness is that there is a longer period of dependency on forms of support, whether financial, physical or personal help. That is why, inevitably, there is—in my view, properly—a period of assessment in order to make that distinction.
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, as I understand the problem, disabled full-time students can claim income support only if they qualify for disability premium or severe disability premium when they have been incapable of working for 28 weeks, as the noble

1769
Baroness said; or—this is odd—they qualify for disabled student allowance because they are deaf. Why are the deaf especially singled out? I repeat, deaf.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, the noble Lord has made his point well. Students generally look to the educational system, not the social security system, for financial support while at university. However, in addition, there is a range of financial allowances for disabled students, which include DLA at £100 a week, disabled student allowances that can go up to £15,000 per year, as well as travel funds and additional hardship funds. The point about deafness is that an immediate assessment can be made, particularly if it is a permanent disability.
The problem remains that students meet the same criteria for assessment for disability as all other disabled people. Students are discriminated against neither positively nor negatively, whether before or after university, or within or outside university. All are asked to meet the same rules of eligibility for disability living allowance and income support.
Lord Addington: My Lords, is it true that students who are over the age of 25 who become disabled have no rights to incapacity benefit if they have not paid two full years of National Insurance contributions? That must be very difficult for those late entrants who move straight on from undergraduate to postgraduate studies.
Baroness Hollis of Heigham: My Lords, as the noble Lord will know, to be eligible for incapacity benefit, a person must have the appropriate National Insurance credits. When your Lordships discussed these issues a couple of years ago, we decided—encouraged by the noble Lord, Lord Rix—to ensure that people starting university with a long-standing disability would receive youth incapacity benefit rather than the old SDA; that is, if the disability was incurred before the ages of 16 or 18. That was regarded as very helpful for young people.
If someone has never qualified for incapacity benefit by virtue of having no National Insurance credits, he or she would be entitled to income support in the usual way.

Nuclear Energy
2.48 p.m.
Lord Peyton of Yeovil Lord Peyton of Yeovil asked Her Majesty's Government:
What they mean by "keeping the nuclear energy option open" and what is the cost of so doing.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the Government recognise that nuclear power is an important source of carbon-free electricity. The possibility of new nuclear build at some point in the future is not ruled out. The costs of new nuclear generation were examined during the analysis for the energy White Paper.
Lord Peyton of Yeovil: My Lords, that Answer is a bit thin. On the next occasion that he visits the Department of Trade and Industry, will the noble Lord try to catch someone's attention and explain that time is not on their side, that it is a valuable commodity and that at present it is being wasted? If the words quoted in my Question, spoken in your Lordships' House by the noble Lord, Lord Sainsbury of Turville, are to mean anything, then both security of supply and the retention of skills which are fast disappearing require that plans should be made as a matter of urgency for building one or more nuclear power stations before the existing ones come to the end of their useful lives.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, it will be a considerable time before our current nuclear power stations come to the end of their useful lives. However, the noble Lord has a point: it is important that we pursue a strategy—as we are doing—which guarantees that skills continue to be developed in the nuclear industry. It is also important to support further research, and resources are being diverted towards that effort. Of course in the circumstance where the Government quite rightly say that the issue of new nuclear build is not ruled out, these kinds of support must be maintained and we intend to do that.
Lord Maclennan of Rogart: My Lords—
Lord Marsh: My Lords—
The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Amos): My Lords, there is sufficient time for both questions.
Lord Maclennan of Rogart: My Lords, since the influence of public opinion plays such an important part in determining the Government's approach to energy provision, in particular as regards concerns about the environmental impact of nuclear power, what steps are the Government taking to test public opinion and to inform it about the extent of the blanket coverage that would be required if we had to rely on windmills to supplant the energy currently being generated by nuclear power?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the public are well informed on the question of wind farms because public inquiries preceding planning permission frequently take place when extensive farms are proposed. Of course there is lively debate both here and in the other place about the Government's energy policy and the way in which it is intended to meet the targets set out in the White Paper.
Lord Marsh: My Lords, does the Minister agree that the lead time before any new nuclear capacity could come on stream is very long indeed? We are talking of periods of 15 to 20 years. To hear the Government say that at some time in the future, if they think it really

1771
important, they will get down to thinking seriously about what will be done as a contingency does not engender confidence.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the noble Lord is right to point out that the lead time for a new-build nuclear power station is long, but under the present proposals the last of our current nuclear power stations will not cease energy production until 2035, so we are still discussing these issues within a realistic time-frame.
Lord Tomlinson: My Lords, would my noble friend note that this is one of the rare occasions when I substantially agree with the noble Lord, Lord Peyton, who has spoken with great wisdom this afternoon? Can he inform the House how many windmills we would need to replace our nuclear industry? Further, does he agree that it is important that nothing is done to reduce our capacity for nuclear fuel unless and until the alternatives are actually producing the requisite amount of electricity, including that which is needed for economic growth?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, wise Ministers quake in the face of an alliance such as that between my noble friend and the noble Lord, Lord Peyton. I cannot give my noble friend a figure for the actual number of windmills, as he refers to them. However, I can indicate clearly that the Government have a target for the contribution of renewable energy resources to the National Grid, in which wind farms are to play their part. By the same token, the contribution of nuclear energy up to 2020 and beyond is also identified.
Baroness Oppenheim-Barnes: My Lords, will the noble Lord ask those responsible to inform themselves about what happened in the state of California when it completely ran out of power supplies because it had not in fact made any plans for new resources? The old sources were dying out and the state reached a crisis point. That situation came about because the planning that is being asked for had not been done.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, it is music to my ears to hear the other side advocate the merits of planning. Many noble Lords on this side of the House will have looked at the Californian situation and would agree that there were indeed issues to be learned from that experience. We have taken careful note of the crucial role that planning plays in guaranteeing our energy supplies. That is why the Government are identifying exactly the sources from which we expect to derive energy for the foreseeable future and why we have indicated that nuclear energy has its part to play.
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords—
Lord Ezra: My Lords—
Lord Craig of Radley: My Lords—
Noble Lords: The Cross Benches.
Lord Craig of Radley: My Lords, does the Minister agree that one aspect of keeping the nuclear option open is to have in place effective and reliable arrangements for the long-term storage and disposal of nuclear waste when power stations are decommissioned? What is the present position for the safe management and long-term storage of nuclear waste?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, those are very important considerations. Of course the noble and gallant Lord will recognise that the White Paper paid due regard to them. I reiterate a point I made earlier: we have no intention of allowing the skills which are necessary to guarantee that we can produce nuclear energy and process its waste products successfully to be lost. Our investment in skills and in the necessary research to ensure that this work can be carried out is guaranteed by the Government.
Lord Ezra: My Lords, if the Government should decide not to go ahead with further nuclear plant, how would the resultant electricity generation gap be filled, bearing in mind that, in addition to the progressive withdrawal of nuclear plant, some of the ageing coal-fired power stations might also have to be withdrawn? Do the Government have a Plan B?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I should like to reassure the noble Lord that the Government plan well beyond Plan B on such an important issue. He will recognise that intensive efforts are being made to ensure that the supply and new development of gas resources guarantees more than just our present supplies. Further, the development of liquid nitrogen gas to ensure that our energy needs are met through fresh sources is being pursued. These issues are all being examined. However, the noble Lord is right to point out that it is important that we look at the energy needs of the country and to consider all the sources from which they will be derived. I shall reiterate an earlier point: for the foreseeable future, nuclear energy has its part to play in these plans.
Baroness O'Cathain: My Lords, can I gently draw the Minister's attention to the Question on the Order Paper and ask him if he realises that my noble friend Lord Peyton asked not only what the Government mean by,
"keeping the nuclear energy option open",
but also what is the cost of so doing? The Minister has made no mention of costs. He must have some idea of the cost of maintaining the skills base and the costs surrounding alternative sources. However, what are the long-term costs?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the Government are making resources available to ensure that sector skills for the nuclear industry are developed. Turning to research costs, for example, we have made available £5 million towards research into sustainable energy sources, directed in particular towards the investigation of nuclear fission research. However,

1773
when the noble Baroness asks what are the costs of the whole training programme for the nuclear power industry, she will recognise that the Government are not in a position to put a precise figure on that. We are putting in place the structure and making available the resources to guarantee that structure in order that people can be trained in nuclear skills.
Baroness Miller of Hendon: My Lords, does the Minister accept the estimates set out in the current edition of The Engineer? Those estimates suggest that within the next six years, the safety cushion of excess energy capacity will drop to as low as 3 per cent. Is it not therefore essential for the Government finally to make up their mind and so ensure that we do not face a terrible catastrophe over energy supplies in this country?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, it is important that some aspects of the industry should call attention to the needs of the future. As the noble: Baroness will recognise, we are operating within the framework of a market where intelligence about the future is of the greatest significance, particularly where such intelligence is projected not only over years but over decades. When there is a narrowing of the gap between need and provision, that is a signal to the industry to bring more resources on stream. We have seen that during the course of the past few months in regard to electricity generation. We therefore welcome all informed sources to the general debate on our future energy needs.

Mutual Life Offices: FSA Proposals
3 p.m.
Lord Newby Lord Newby asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they support the Financial Services Authority's proposals to regulate the with-profits funds of mutual life offices.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Lord McIntosh of Haringey): My Lords, the Government support the work of the Financial Services Authority as the independent body that regulates the financial services industry in the United Kingdom. The FSA published a discussion paper in February of this year on the issues for with-profits business arising from the Sandier review. Responses were requested by 16th May. The FSA has not yet published its consultation paper on these issues and so it is not possible for me to comment further.
Lord Newby: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the FSA proposals appear designed exclusively for companies—plcs—not mutuals, and if carried into effect would have the effect of ending mutuality in the long-term savings industry? Therefore, will the Treasury ensure that revised proposals are made which
1774
will enable the financial services mutuals to continue to provide a very valuable alternative range of savings products?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I should preface any further comment by saying that this is of course a matter for the regulator. I am aware of the concerns to which the noble Lord, Lord Newby, refers. They have been expressed to the FSA. The consultation paper that I mentioned will be published after the FSA board meeting on the 20th of this month. It is my understanding that the mutuals will be asked to set out what they are doing to achieve the Sandier objectives of transparency, with which I am sure the noble Lord, Lord Newby, agrees. It is recognised that the problem for mutuals, which have only a single fund, is different from that for other insurance companies.

Taxation (Information) Bill [H.L.]
Read a third time, and passed, and sent to the Commons.

Criminal Justice Bill
3.3 p.m.
Read a third time.
Clause 3 [Arrestable offences]:
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal)The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal) moved Amendment No. 1:
Page 2, line 13, leave out "a Class C drug" and insert "cannabis or cannabis resin"
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I have tabled Amendment No. 1 to fulfil the undertaking that I gave to the House on Report to table an amendment to Clause 3(3) at Third Reading. Its acceptance would mean that, following the reclassification of cannabis to class C under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, t he police would have a power of arrest under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 for the offence of possession of cannabis or cannabis resin but not for other class C drugs.
The amendment reflects the Government's consideration of the views expressed in this House and another place as to the scope of the provisions set out in subsection (3) and our decision to agree to amendment of the clause by applying the power of arrest in respect of class C drugs only to offences of possession of cannabis and cannabis resin following their proposed reclassification.
It also reflects the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, and the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, on Report in this House. Their amendment, which has the same purpose as this one, we accepted in principle. However, it sought to delete the words "within the meaning of that Act" which, from a drafting perspective, we would wish to retain. The amendment I am now moving addresses this point.
On Report I also undertook to bring forward appropriate amendments to Clause 7 which would clarify the position on keeping records of a detained person's property. Amendment No. 2 reflects the principle of Amendments Nos. 11Aand 11C, tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, and the noble Baroness, Lady Harris. It would explicitly indicate the ability to record a detained person's property but that the officer has a discretion as to whether or not this should be carried out in every case. It would also enable the custody officer to determine if such a record should be kept as part of the custody record elsewhere. Amendment No. 124 would insert a new Schedule 35 which would amend Section 54(1) of PACE to effect the proposals in Clause 7.
I should like to put on record that during Report stage in your Lordships' House, when I said that the Government would accept Amendments Nos. 11A and 11B, I meant Amendments Nos. 11A and 11C. I hope that that was clear from the content of what I said because I was of course referring to the previous numbering allocated to those amendments. I have written to both the noble Baroness and the noble Lord to apologise for any confusion and to set the record straight. We resisted Amendment No. 11B because imposing an absolute requirement to record property when requested would open the door to deliberately obstructive requests.
With that rather lengthy explanation, I beg to move.
Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, I rise to put on record the first of what I hope will be a series of thanks to the Government for responding to points made at an earlier stage, particularly in regard to Amendment No. 1. We fully accept that there was a technical drafting deficiency in our amendment and we prefer the Government's amendment.
As regards Amendment No. 2—to which, no doubt, the noble Baroness, Lady Harris of Richmond, will speak in a moment—we also welcome the fact that it reflects very fairly the request made by my noble friend Lord Hunt of Wirral in Committee on 30th June.
Baroness Harris of Richmond: My Lords, as the Minister predicted, I rise to speak to Amendment No. 2. I thank her very warmly for her letter of explanation and for the amendments that she has accepted. She will, of course, understand that I am still rather disappointed that she has not been able to accept Amendment No. 11B, which sought to impose the absolute requirement, because she feels that,
"it may encourage deliberately obstructive requests".
So there will not be a requirement on police officers to record a person's property if they ask for that to be done.
1776
Can the Minister assure the House that any reasonable request from a person to have his or her property recorded will not be ignored? That is the real thrust of what I wanted to say and I hope that she can reassure me on that point.
Baroness Walmsley: My Lords, in rising to speak to Amendment No. 1, I hope that the Minister will forgive me for returning to some of the points that I made last Wednesday in the debate on the order. The noble Baroness, understandably, did not have time to address some of my concerns on that occasion.
I should like to ask four questions in regard to the amendment. First, on the advice of which expert body are the Government bringing forward the amendment? Is it the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs; the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee; or the Runciman committee? I do not believe that any of those bodies, having looked in detail at all the latest evidence about the use of cannabis, advised that in reclassifying cannabis as class C the power of arrest should be newly introduced for a drug in that class. If the Government have committed themselves to basing their drugs policy on expert advice and evidence, can the Minister say on what evidence this measure needs to be taken? If in the move from class B to class C cannabis is treated on the street in roughly the same way as it is treated now, what difference do the Government believe the reclassification will make?
Secondly, is the Minister satisfied that the ACPO guidelines on the presumption in favour of arrest treat all citizens equally? She will be aware from my speech on the order to reclassify in the debate last Wednesday of my concern about people with mental disabilities being treated differently from other adults and inappropriately in my opinion.
Can she say how that can possibly be in the interests of their welfare? Are not the guidelines contradictory in that respect? Can she also say how the under-18s would be treated under this new power, as she did not have time to answer my questions on that matter last Wednesday? Is she convinced that it is appropriate to arrest and take to the police station for questioning young or vulnerable people in the terms of the ACPO guidelines for the simple offence of personal possession of cannabis, without any other aggravating factors?
Thirdly, how will the police treat someone who has been discovered growing a few cannabis plants for their own use when there is no suggestion that any of the aggravating factors are present that appear in the ACPO guidelines and that would give a presumption in favour of arrest? Finally, how is it expected that the powers introduced by the amendment will cut the link between those who choose to smoke cannabis and the organised criminals who sell hard drugs and whose main objective is to lure cannabis users into using drugs such as heroin and crack cocaine?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I shall deal with the question asked by the noble Baroness, Lady Harris. I am relatively confident that, when

1777
considering the amendments that we have made to the Bill, reasonable requests made in relation to the retention of material will be honoured. I made it clear in resisting the amendment tabled by the noble Baroness that we saw an opportunity for a frivolous and vexatious use of those provisions. The other two amendments give ample scope for reasonable matters to be taken into account, not least because the police will be anxious to ensure that all proper evidence is before the court and to obviate a wrongful suggestion made by defendants that in some way they had been disadvantaged because of police behaviour. There will be nothing to prevent the defendant making the point that a request was made with propriety and not acceded to. In practical terms, I believe that will do.
The noble Baroness, Lady Walmslsy, asked four questions. First, she asked upon whose advice we based the provisions, and listed four agencies that she believed might be the source. For the crafting of the advice, the Government considered the assessment of the public order needs based on the advice of the police and on what the Government believe to be the right and proper response. Noble Lords will know that government policy does not only rely on the advice of others, but derives from the analysis of what the Government themselves see as most pertinent and relevant.
The noble Baroness asked what difference the measure would make, and how under-18-year-olds would be treated. We would have to consider the underlying circumstances, which can be done only with regard to matters undertaken at the police station. We are sending out a clear message to young people under 18 that cannabis misuse remains illegal. Police enforcement will be consistent with the more structured framework for early juvenile offending, established under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, under which a young offender can receive a reprimand, a final warning or a charge, depending on the seriousness of the offence. Following one reprimand, any further offence will lead to a final warning or charge. Any further offence following a warning will normally result in a charge being brought. After a final warning, the young offender must be referred to the youth offending team to arrange a rehabilitation programme to prevent reoffending.
Those provisions are all within the framework in which we believe that young people should be dealt with. They are not being dealt with more strictly; they are likely to receive reprimands or warnings for a first offence of cannabis possession, but the process is more formal than for persons under 18. It is important that those cases should be dealt with at the police station so that any underlying problems with the young person can be identified. Young people under 18 who receive a final warning or who are reported to the court for possession of cannabis will be referred to the local youth offending team—YOT—and are likely to have their substance misuse assessed by the YOT drugs worker, who may arrange other support when it is needed.
1778
I have said those things on a number of occasions, although I may not have said them in direct response to the noble Baroness on the last occasion that I spoke. However, I pray in aid all that I have said before on innumerable occasions.
As for increasing class C penalties to 14 years, which will give a significant deterrent to class C dealing, I have tried to make it clear that there is a real distinction to be drawn from those who grow and/or distribute and seek to take adventitious advantage of the weakness in others by the use of cannabis. That distinction should be maintained. We have also said very clearly that we believe that a robust way of dealing with cannabis is important, because we accept that cannabis has pernicious side effects—something with which the noble Baroness may not entirely agree. We believe that our approach is a properly balanced one.
Growing cannabis is a dealing offence. Courts will have discretion in deciding what sentence to pass, depending on the circumstances. It would be quite improper for me to prescribe how the court within the framework would exercise that discretion. Of course, I take into account that mental disability is a real issue, and there are sufficient safeguards in the provisions to ensure that those who suffer from a mental disability are responded to in the most appropriate way.
I hope that I have answered the noble Baroness's questions.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 7 [Property of detained persons]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 2:
Page 6, line 8, leave out subsection (2) and insert—
"(2) For subsection (2) of that section (record of arrested person to be made as part of custody record) there is substituted—
"(2) The custody officer may record or cause to be recorded all or any of the things which he ascertains under subsection (1).
(2A) In the case of an arrested person, any such record may be made as part of his custody record.""
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 33 [Defence disclosure]:
3.15 p.m.
Lord Ackner Lord Ackner had given notice of his intention to move Amendment No.3:
Leave out Clause 33.
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I have heard it often said that time spent in reconnaissance is seldom wasted. Having inquired of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Opposition, I understand there to be no support for my amendments, no doubt for good political reasons. Therefore, I do not propose to take up the time of the House and will not move the amendments.
[Amendment No. 3 not moved.]
Clause 34 [Notification of intention to call defence witnesses]:
[Amendment No. 4 not moved.]
Clause 35 [Notification of names of experts instructed by defendant]:
Lord Thomas of Gresford Lord Thomas of Gresford moved Amendment No. 5:
Leave out Clause 35.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, although the noble and learned Lord, Lord Ackner, did not move his amendments relating to witnesses other than expert witnesses, we took the view on these Benches that the safeguards contained in the Bill deal with the problem. We are content that a defence statement should be rather fuller than it is at present, so long as it is not regarded as a pleading.
We have a different point of view about expert witnesses. If the Government's purpose is to find out whether the defence has instructed expert witnesses, there is really no problem, as in the generality of cases expert witnesses who are instructed by the defence have to co-operate with the expert witnesses of the prosecution. Generally speaking, the defence expert witnesses are examining material in the possession of the prosecution. For example, it will be necessary for a defence expert on fingerprints to have access to the fingerprints themselves, which will be in the possession of the police. Similarly, if an expert pathologist is called, he will without question consult the pathologist for the prosecution and will have access to his file and his findings. Very often, post mortems are carried out together. With DNA, too, it will be necessary for a DNA expert called by the defence to have access to material in the hands of the prosecution.
It is only in a rare case that an expert witness will not be known to the prosecution in any event. Therefore, I have no objection to the disclosure of the identity of expert witnesses to the prosecution, as it almost always happens anyway. I do, however, object to the possibility that the prosecution could in some way rely on a notice given under these provisions and should put before the jury the fact that the defence has consulted an expert whom it has not called. That would leave the jury completely open to speculation as to why the defence expert was not called. Perhaps he was not available on the day. Perhaps he agreed with the prosecution. He may not be called by the defence for all sorts of reasons. If it were possible for the prosecution in its final speech or the judge in summing up to say, "You know, members of the jury, that the defence has consulted experts, but you have not heard from them", that would be entirely wrong in principle. That is why I maintain my opposition to this clause. I beg to move.
Baroness Mallalieu: My Lords, I, too, am very concerned about this clause. One sometimes hears it said that the defence trawls around looking for an expert who will say what is wanted. That certainly is not my experience. Indeed, most defendants in criminal trials are legally aided and the legal aid authorities require considerable persuasion before they will grant legal aid for a second expert if one has already reported. I am concerned and should be grateful if the Minister could tell me what is proposed to be done with the details provided by these notices.
1780
Experts may be instructed for a variety of reasons, but not necessarily with a view to calling them. For example, counsel may want expert advice to deal with an aspect of the case that has not been raised by the defendant but which troubles counsel. Counsel may merely wish to be reassured that there is no possible line of defence in that avenue, or he may require further detailed examination of a prosecution expert's report in order to assist him with cross-examination. So there may be experts, perfectly properly instructed, who are not intended ultimately to be called at trial. Will the Minister please tell me what is proposed to be done with the details when they are handed to the prosecution?
Lord Renton: My Lords, I wish to support this amendment. I do so because in many cases the expert witness will be a medical man. I happen to be the son of a medical man, and I know what excessively hard and busy lives they lead. It is often difficult to get hold of a medical man who may have the necessary expert evidence to give until the last minute—from the point of view of the defence. It would be a travesty of justice if we prevented the accused relying on medical evidence that he finds late in the day simply because he is required by statute to give advance notice of the medical evidence by the expert which has to be given. I think that that would be unfair on the accused, so I support the amendment.
Lord Ackner: My Lords, I, too, should like to support the observations of the noble Lord. My recollection when summing up to a jury was to tell them not to speculate. This seems to me to invite speculation, and that surely must be wrong.
Lord Kingsland: My Lords, I rise to support the amendment moved by the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford. We have already spoken to it both in Committee and on Report; there is no difference between the noble Lord and ourselves on the issue that he raised. In our view, the crucial distinction is between, on the one hand, the provision of names in a notice and, on the other hand, the reference by a judge to those names in the course of the proceedings. I hope that the noble and learned Lord the Attorney-General will be able to reassure us on those grounds.
The Attorney-General (Lord Goldsmith): My Lords, as the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, said, this clause has been debated extensively—on no fewer than three occasions, I think; indeed, we had a Division on it in Committee. I hope that in the light of the concerns previously expressed about this, and those that have been expressed today, it might help the House if I set out what the clause does and does not do.
Clause 35 will insert a new Section 60 into the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996. It requires the defence to notify the court and the prosecutor in advance of the trial of any expert consulted by the defence but whom the defence does not intend to call as a witness. There is no requirement

1781
to disclose any report completed by the expert for the defence. That may reassure the noble Lord, Lord Renton.
Clause 39, which introduces a revised Section 11 of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, deals with faults in defence disclosure generally. However, in the case of the notification of defence experts not called as witnesses, the prosecution will not be able to invite the jury to draw an adverse inference or otherwise comment to the jury on either the failure of the defence to comply with this provision or the fact that an expert has been consulted and not used as a witness.
I hope that that clear statement gives the reassurance for which noble Lords were looking as to the limits to which this clause could be put and particularly what it could not be used to do. I would add only this. We accept that the problem to which this is directed would affect only a small number of cases where the defence is self-funded. I have accepted that proposition before—that legal aid acts as an inhibitor. However, there will be some self-funded defendants who are well financed—which, sadly, includes some who have accrued that wealth from criminal activity. In those cases this will be a modest but helpful provision to add to the defence disclosures.
I hope, therefore, in the light of that assurance, that the noble Lord will not feel it necessary to press his amendment.
Lord Thomas of Gresford: My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble and learned Lord the Attorney-General for that clear statement which can leave no one in any doubt about what this provision means. I know that there have been anxious deliberations about this clause following our earlier debates. I thank the noble and learned Lord for participating in those discussions. Having regard to that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 36 [Further provisions about defence disclosure]:
[Amendment No. 6 not moved.]
Clause 39 [Faults in defence disclosure]:
[Amendment No. 7 not moved.]
Clause 49 [Further provision about right of appeal mentioned in section 50(l)]:
Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith moved Amendment No. 8:
Leave out Clause 49.
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, this group of amendments refines the prosecution appeal rights already set out in the Bill. Before I go on to discuss the substance of this group, I should first like to thank the Opposition for allowing us to table these amendments again for the consideration of the House. That we are now doing so is the result of extensive discussions with the Opposition Front Bench. I am most grateful to them for their readiness to meet and go through these matters. I hope very much that in the intervening period we have been able to allay their concerns about the provisions.
While similar amendments were not approved by the House on Report I can confirm that it is entirely proper for the present amendments to be introduced at this stage. We do so on the basis that we discussed and addressed with the Opposition Front Bench their concerns about the overall scheme. They have confirmed that they did not have, and continue not to have, objections to these essentially refining amendments. The House authorities have confirmed that they also are content that we can proceed in these circumstances.
On the substance, I should note in passing that the rubric of Clauses 49 and 50 seems to have suffered an attack of the gremlins. I am assured by those responsible for these matters that the faulty wording will be rectified before the Bill progresses to its next stage.
Much of the substance of these amendments merely refines provisions that are already in the Bill. In a few instances substantive changes of detail are made, but I have already provided a full explanation of the changes in question in an earlier debate and I shall not detain your Lordships by tediously repeating explanations with which the House will already be familiar. My earlier comments still hold good. However, I shall draw your Lordships' attention to the new change in Amendment No. 44. The amendment specifies the conditions under which the Court of Appeal can overturn a judge's ruling under the Bill. The rule is a general one; it will apply whether the ruling is a formally terminating ruling, a de facto terminating ruling or an evidentiary ruling. It will prevent the Court of Appeal overturning a judge's ruling unless the ruling is wrong in law, involves an error of law or principle or is a ruling which it was not reasonable for the judge to have made.
Prior to this amendment the Bill was silent on the framework within which the Court of Appeal will operate—a feature of the provisions which attracted some criticism in Committee and on Report. We listened carefully to those concerns and this new clause now sets out a framework.
The vast majority of practitioners and commentators who have studied this area are firmly of the opinion that a prosecution appeal against the judge's terminating, or de facto terminating, ruling is just, equitable and long overdue. It is a matter of serious concern that defendants have had a right of appeal against their conviction for almost a century while the prosecution has had no right to challenge a judge-ordered acquittal, no matter how manifestly unjust such a ruling may be on rare occasions.
These provisions will significantly increase public confidence in the administration of justice. I am proud to have had the privilege of taking them through the House. I beg to move.
3.30 p.m.
Lord Kingsland: My Lords, I in turn should like to thank the noble and learned Lord for being prepared to engage in a number of discussions between Report and Third Reading, which I trust your Lordships will agree have led to a creative conclusion.
I accept the noble and learned Lord's view that in principle there is no difference between terminating rulings and evidentiary rulings and that, where appropriate, a right of prosecution appeal ought to be allowed. Our concerns about this were twofold: first, the likely volume of appeals that would ensue from such an initiative; and, secondly, the danger that some of those appeals would lead simply to the Court of Appeal second-guessing the proper exercise of discretion of the trial judge.
As the noble and learned Lord the Attorney-General rightly said, Amendment No. 44 resolves both those problems. It is a discipline on the volume of prosecution appeals to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division. At the same time, the defined circumstances which justify an appeal are wholly proper:
"that the ruling was wrong in law"
or,
"that the ruling involved an error of law or principle, or… that the ruling was a ruling that it was not reasonable for the judge to have made".
Those are plainly circumstances in which a prosecution appeal is appropriate. From these Opposition Benches I endorse the amendments proposed by the noble and learned Lord.
Lord Thomas of Gresford: My Lords, from these Benches I repeat that we are grateful to the noble and learned Lord for his discussions and for having listened to the concerns that we expressed in Committee and on Report. I think I said at the beginning that we were not opposed to prosecution appeals in principle; it was the practicalities that concerned us. Amendment No. 44 does a great deal to answer those concerns. It will limit the number of times that a prosecutor who has lost will, in a fit of pique, go to the Court of Appeal, and it will mean that the Court of Appeal will not have to read through reams and reams of material in order to second-guess the trial judge's decision. We welcome the provisions and endorse them.
Lord Goldsmith: My Lords, I am grateful for what both noble Lords have said. There is nothing more that I need to say at this stage. The noble Lord, Lord Thomas, may be holding out too rosy a promise to the Court of Appeal that there will not be occasions when it will have to read a lot of material, but now is not the occasion to go into that debate.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 50 [Further provision about right of appeal mentioned in section 50(3)]:
Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith moved Amendments Nos. 9 to 11:
Page 34, line 5, leave out subsections (1) to (4) and insert—

"(1) In relation to a trial on indictment, the prosecution is to have the rights of appeal for which provision is made by this Part.

(2) But the prosecution is to have no right of appeal under this Part in respect of—

(a) a ruling that a jury be discharged, or

(b) a ruling from which an appeal lies to the Court of Appeal by virtue of any other enactment."

Page 34, line 23, leave out "who made the ruling"
Page 34, line 25, leave out subsections (7) and (8).
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Clause 51 [Appeals against terminating rulings]:
Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith moved Amendments Nos. 12 to 19:
Page 34, line 35, leave out from "judge" to end of line 36 and insert "makes a ruling in relation to a trial on indictment at an applicable time and the ruling relates to one or more offences included in the indictment.
(1A) The prosecution may appeal in respect of the ruling in accordance with this section."
Page 35, line 1, leave out "it requests such an adjournment" and insert "such an adjournment is granted"
Page 35, line 4, leave out "must" and insert "may"
Page 35, line 9, at end insert— "

(5A) Where—

(a) the ruling is a ruling that there is no case to answer, and

(b) the prosecution, at the same time that it informs the court in accordance with subsection (3) that it intends to appeal, nominates one or more other rulings which have been made by a judge in relation to the trial on indictment at an applicable time and which relate to the offence or offences which are the subject of the appeal,

that other ruling, or those other rulings, are also to be treated as the subject of the appeal.

(5B) The prosecution may not inform the court in accordance with subsection (3) that it intends to appeal, unless, at or before that time, it informs the court that it agrees that, in respect of the offence or each offence which is the subject of the appeal, the defendant in relation to that offence should be acquitted of that offence if either of the conditions mentioned in subsection (5C) is fulfilled.

(5C) Those conditions are—

(a) that leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal is not obtained, and

(b) that the appeal is abandoned before it is determined by the Court of Appeal."

Page 35, line 11, after "ruling" insert "mentioned in subsection (1)"
Page 35, line 15, leave out "and"
Page 35, line 16, at end insert "and
(c) if he does so, any such steps are also to have no effect."
Page 35, line 16, at end insert—
"(8) Where the prosecution has informed the court of its agreement under subsection (5B) and either of the conditions mentioned in subsection (5C) is fulfilled, the judge or the Court of Appeal must order that the defendant in relation to the offence or each offence concerned be acquitted of that offence.
(9) In this section "applicable time", in relation to a trial on indictment, means any time (whether before or after the commencement of the trial) before the start of the judge's summing-up to the jury."
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Clause 52 [Appeals against certain other rulings]:
Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith moved Amendment No. 20:
Leave out Clause 52.
On Question, amendment agreed to
Clause 53 [Expedited and non-expedited appeals]:
Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith moved Amendments Nos. 21 and 22:
Page 36, line 2, leave out "or 52(2)"
Page 36, line 3, leave out "against a ruling"
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Clause 54 [Continuation of proceedings for offences not affected by ruling]:
Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith moved Amendments Nos. 23 and 24:
Page 36, line 15, leave out "or 52(2)"
Page 36, line 15, leave out "against a ruling"
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Clause 55 [Determination of appeal by Court of Appeal]:
Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith moved Amendments Nos. 25 to 38:
Page 36, line 19, leave out "this Part" and insert "section 51"
Page 36, leave out line 20 and insert "any ruling to which the appeal relates"
Page 36, line 20, at end insert—
"(1A) Subsections (2) to (4) apply where the appeal relates to a single ruling."
Page 36. line 21, leave out "a" and insert "the"
Page 36, line 23, leave out first "the" and insert "that"
Page 36, line 23, leave out second "the" and insert "that"
Page 36, line 24, leave out "a" and insert "the"
Page 36, line 27, leave out first "the" and insert "that"
Page 36, line 29, leave out "fresh proceedings may be instituted" and insert "a fresh trial may take place"
Page 36, line 30, leave out "the" and insert "that"
Page 36, line 31, leave out second "the" and insert "that"
Page 36, line 31, leave out third "the" and insert "that"
Page 36, line 35, at end insert—
"(4A) Subsections (4B) and (4C) apply where the appeal relates to a ruling that there is no case to answer and one or more other rulings.
(4B) Where the Court of Appeal confirms the ruling that there is no case to answer, it must, in respect of the offence or each offence which is the subject of the appeal, order that the defendant in relation to that offence be acquitted of that offence.
(4C) Where the Court of Appeal reverses or varies the ruling that there is no case to answer, it must in respect of the offence or each offence which is the subject of the appeal, make any of the orders mentioned in subsection (3)(a) to (c) (but subject to subsection (4)).
Page 36, line 36, leave out subsection (5).
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith moved Amendment No. 39:
After Clause 55, insert the following new clause—
"APPEALS IN RESPECT OF EVIDENTIARY RULINGS

(1) The prosecution may, in accordance with this section and section (Condition that evidentiary ruling significantly weakens prosecution case), appeal in respect of—

(a) a single qualifying evidentiary ruling, or

(b) two or more qualifying evidentiary rulings.

1786

(2) A "qualifying evidentiary ruling" is an evidentiary ruling of a judge in relation to a trial on indictment which is made at any time (whether before or after the commencement of the trial) before the opening of the case for the defence.

(3) The prosecution may not appeal in respect of a single qualifying evidentiary ruling unless the ruling relates to one or more qualifying offences (whether or not it relates to any other offence).

(4) The prosecution may not appeal in respect of two or more qualifying evidentiary rulings unless each ruling relates to one or more qualifying offences (whether or not it relates to any other offence).

(5) If the prosecution intends to appeal under this section, it must before the opening of the case for the defence inform the court—

(a) of its intention to do so, and

(b) of the ruling or rulings to which the appeal relates

(6) In respect of the ruling, or each ruling, to which the appeal relates—

(a) the qualifying offence, or at least one of the qualifying offences, to which the ruling relates must be the subject of the appeal, and

(b) any other offence to which the ruling relates may, but need not, be the subject of the appeal.

(7) The prosecution must, at the same time that it informs the court in accordance with subsection (5), inform the court of the offence or offences which are the subject of the appeal.

(8) For the purposes of this section, the case for the defence opens when, after the conclusion of the prosecution evidence, the earliest of the following events occurs—

(a) evidence begins to be adduced by or on behalf of a defendant,

(b) it is indicated to the court that no evidence will be adduced by or on behalf of a defendant,

(c) a defendant's case is opened, as permitted by section 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1865 (c. 18).

(9) In this section—

"evidentiary ruling" means a ruling which relates to the admissibility or exclusion of any prosecution evidence,

"qualifying offence" means an offence described in Part I of Schedule (Qualifying offences for the purposes of section (Appeals in respect of evidentiary rulings)).

(10) The Secretary of State may by order amend that Part by doing any one or more of the following—

(a) adding a description of offence,

(b) removing a description of offence for the lime being included,

(c) modifying a description of offence for the time being included.

(11) Nothing in this section affects the right of the prosecution to appeal in respect of an evidentiary ruling under section 51."

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, this second group of government amendments is closely connected with those that the House has just accepted. This is the set of amendments that introduces a prosecution right of appeal against a non-terminating evidentiary ruling or series of evidentiary rulings. Once again I am grateful to the Opposition for agreeing to the amendments being brought forward at this stage. In the summer I signalled that we had it in mind to bring them forward. They were tabled on Report but not in the event moved. In fact, they have been under consideration for some time. We are bringing them forward now because we believe that this additional right of appeal is an important part of the prosecution appeals package as a whole.
The Bill gives the prosecution a right of appeal against a terminating ruling. This right of appeal will not always be enough. There are situations in criminal trials where an evidentiary ruling has a significant impact for the worse on a prosecution case but is not fatal to it. As the House may well recall, the lack of a right of appeal against rulings of this kind attracted some adverse comment in Bishop Sentamu's report on the Damilola Taylor case. In our view whether a case is high profile or not, there is a clear need for arrangements to have such rulings reviewed by the Court of Appeal. In the absence of such a right, a perception of injustice may arise which cannot properly be allayed. The amendments will allow rulings of this kind to be tested where they cannot be at present and are in the interests of justice.
I should make the following comment as I have never previously put this on the record. It may be helpful and for the convenience of the House to do so. So far as numbers of cases are concerned, we have introduced a range of measures here to limit the number of appeals that there may be. I wish to identify them. First, an appeal against an evidentiary ruling or rulings in a series will be allowed only where the ruling or rulings are made before the defence case opens. That timing is more restrictive than that now applicable to appeals against a single terminating ruling. Secondly, an appeal against an evidentiary ruling will be available only in relation to a qualifying offence as set out in the schedule. That schedule has intentionally been constructed so as to include only serious offences. Thirdly, the prosecution must obtain leave to appeal from either the judge or the Court of Appeal before it can appeal. Fourthly, that leave may be granted only if the relevant condition is met. That relevant condition is that the evidentiary ruling or rulings,
"significantly weakens the prosecution case".
Fifthly, I anticipate that the guidance which the Director of Public Prosecutions will issue to prosecutors on the operation of the prosecution appeals regime as a whole will include specific guidance on evidentiary appeals. Finally—this matter arises from detailed discussions with the senior judiciary in the Court of Appeal—the evidentiary appeal regime will be implemented later than, and separately from, the terminating rulings appeals. That will give an opportunity to see how the terminating appeal works in practice and give us advance warning of any unexpected resource implications of the evidentiary regime.
I hope that your Lordships will agree that, taken together, those amendments represent a formidable battery of safeguards. The detail of the appeals is well set out in the amendments. I am happy to answer any questions which noble Lords may have but, subject to those questions, I hope that these provisions will commend themselves to the House. I beg to move.
Lord Kingsland: My Lords, once again I am most grateful to the noble and learned Lord the Attorney-General for the way in which he has introduced the
1788
new provisions, which, as he rightly said, were not tabled until Report. I entirely agree that the precautionary measures that he has introduced to make sure that we learn from the development of the law on terminating rulings first, before we move on to implement evidential rulings, are prudent. I do not need to speak to Amendment No. 44, because it covers both terminating and evidential rulings. In those circumstances, I can complete my observations.
Lord Thomas of Gresford: My Lords, I entirely agree with the views expressed by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, and have nothing to add.
Lord Goldsmith: My Lords, I am grateful to noble Lords who have spoken.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith moved Amendments Nos. 40 to 44:
After Clause 55. insert the following new clause—
"CONDITION THAT EVIDENTIARY RULING SIGNIFICANTLY WEAKENS PROSECUTION CASE

(1) Leave to appeal may not be given in relation to an appeal under section (Appeals in respect of evidentiary rulings) unless the judge or, as the case may be, the Court of Appeal is satisfied that the relevant condition is fulfilled.

(2) In relation to an appeal in respect of a single qualifying evidentiary ruling, the relevant condition is that the ruling significantly weakens the prosecution's case in relation to the offence or offences which are the subject of the appeal.

(3) In relation to an appeal in respect of two or more qualifying evidentiary rulings, the relevant condition is that the rulings taken together significantly weaken the prosecution's case in relation to the offence or offences which are the subject of the appeal."

After Clause 55, insert the following new clause—
"EXPEDITED AND NON-EXPEDITED APPEALS

(1) Where the prosecution informs the court in accordance with section (Appeals in respect of evidentiary rulings)(5), the judge must decide whether or not the appeal should be expedited.

(2) If the judge decides that the appeal should be expedited, he may order an adjournment.

(3) If the judge decides that the appeal should not be expedited, he may—

(a) order an adjournment, or

(b) discharge the jury (if one has been sworn).

(4) If he decides that the appeal should be expedited, he or the Court of Appeal may subsequently reverse that decision and. if it is reversed, the judge may act as mentioned in subsection (3)(a) or (b)."

After Clause 55, insert the following new clause—
"CONTINUATION OF PROCEEDINGS FOR OFFENCES NOT AFFECTED BY RULING

(1) This section applies where the prosecution informs the court in accordance with section (Appeals in respect of evidentiary rulings)(5).

(2) Proceedings may be continued in respect of any offence which is not the subject of the appeal."

After Clause 55, insert the following new clause—
"DETERMINATION OF APPEAL BY COURT OF APPEAL

(1) On an appeal under section (Appeals in respect of evidentiary rulings), the Court of Appeal may confirm, reverse or vary any ruling to which the appeal relates.

1789

(2) In addition, the Court of Appeal must, in respect of the offence or each offence which is the subject of the appeal, do any of the following—

(a) order that proceedings for that offence be resumed in the Crown Court,

(b) order that a fresh trial may take place in the Crown Court for that offence,

(c) order that the defendant in relation to that offence be acquitted of that offence.

(3) But no order may be made under subsection (2)(c) in respect of an offence unless the prosecution has indicated that it does not intend to continue with the prosecution of that offence."

After Clause 55, insert the following new clause—
"REVERSAL OF RULINGS
The Court of Appeal may not reverse a ruling on an appeal under this Part unless it is satisfied—

(a) that the ruling was wrong in law,

(b) that the ruling involved an error of law or principle, or

(c) that the ruling was a ruling that it was not reasonable for the judge to have made."

On Question, amendments agreed to.
Clause 59 [Restrictions on reporting]:
Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith moved Amendments Nos. 45 to 57:
Page 37, line 29, leave out "52 or"
Page 37, line 29, at end insert "(Appeals in respect of evidentiary rulings), (Condition that evidentiary ruling significantly weakens prosecution case) or (Expedited and non-expedited appeals),"
Page 37, line 30, leave out "in relation to a ruling"
Page 37, line 30, leave out from first "Part" to end of line and insert—
"(ba) an appeal under Part 2 of the 1968 Act in relation to an appeal under this Part,"
Page 37, line 32, leave out from second "to" tc end of line 33 and insert "an appeal mentioned in paragraph (b) or (ba)"
Page 37, line 34, leave out "who made the ruling"
Page 37, line 36, leave out "52 or"
Page 37, line 36, after "53," insert "(Appeals in respect of evidentiary rulings), (Condition that evidentiary ruling significantly weakens prosecution case) or (Expedited and non-expedited appeals),"
Page 38, line 24, leave out "52 or"
Page 38, line 24, at end insert "(Appeals in respect of evidentiary rulings), (Condition that evidentiary ruling significantly weakens prosecution case) or (Expedited and non-expedited appeals),"
Page 38, line 25, leave out "in relation to a ruling"
Page 38, line 25, leave out from first "Part" to end of line and insert—
"(ba) an appeal under Part 2 of the 1968 Act in relation to an appeal under this Part,"
Page 38, line 27, leave out from second "to" to end of line 28 and insert "an appeal mentioned in paragraph (b) or (ba)"
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Clause 62 [Interpretation of Part 8]:
Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith moved Amendments Nos. 58 to 61:
Page 40, line 26, at end insert—
""qualifying evidentiary ruling" is to be construed in accordance with section (Appeals in respect of evidentiary rulings)(2),
"the relevant condition" is to be construed in accordance with section (Condition that evidentiary ruling significantly weakens prosecution case)(2) and (3)."
Page 40, leave out line 28 and insert—
""ruling" includes a decision, determination, direction, finding, notice, order, refusal, rejection or requirement,"
Page 40, line 29, at end insert—
"(1A) Any reference in this Part (other than section (Rules of court)(2)(c)) to a judge is a reference to a judge of the Crown Court."
(1B) There is to be no right of appeal under this Part in respect of a ruling in relation to which the prosecution has previously informed the court of its intention to appeal under either section 51(3) or (Appeals in respect of evidentiary rulings)(5)."
Page 40, line 34, leave out subsection (3).
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Clause 72 [Retrial]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 62:
Page 47, line 22, at end insert—
"( ) all the parties to the trial agree otherwise,"
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, the purpose of the amendments is to enable a deposition or a trial transcript to be used as evidence in retrials when all the parties are agreed. They are small and technical amendments. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 84 [Application of Part 9 to Northern Ireland]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 63:
Page 56, line 14, leave out "the words from "unless" to the end" and insert "paragraphs (a) and (b)"
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 86 [Evidence of bad character]:
Lord Kingsland Lord Kingsland moved Amendment No. 64:
Page 64, leave out line 44 and insert "82A of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (c. 60)."
The noble Lord said: My Lords, this drafting amendment is consequential on the vote of your Lordships' House on Report upon the section of Part 10 that deals with bad character. I do not think that I need add anything further. It is a purely procedural matter. I beg to move.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, we have had extensive debates on the subject of bad character both in Committee and on Report, and it is obviously not the time to repeat those debates. I accept that the amendment is necessary to tidy up the scheme introduced by the House on Report and does not alter the substance of that scheme. On that basis, I do not intend to resist the amendment.
I would like to make it clear that the issue of bad character evidence will be considered further in another place when it considers the amendments made by this House. Our acceptance of this technical amendment does not mean that the Government are persuaded that the scheme adopted on Report is the appropriate scheme to regulate the admission of bad

1791
character evidence. However, as I have said, the debate will now be continued in another place, so I will not resist the amendment.
Lord Kingsland: My Lords, for once the noble Baroness's observations about bad character have not taken me by surprise.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
3.45 p.m.
Clause 93 [Multiple hearsay]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 65:
Leave out Clause 93 and insert the following new Clause—
"Additional requirement for admissibility of multiple hearsay

(1) A hearsay statement is not admissible to prove the fact that an earlier hearsay statement was made unless—

(a) either of the statements is admissible under section 89, 91 or 92,

(b) all parties to the proceedings so agree, or

(c) the court is satisfied that the value of the evidence in question, taking into account how reliable the statements appear to be, is so high that the interests of justice require the later statement to be admissible for that purpose.

(2) In this section "hearsay statement" means a statement, not made in oral evidence, that is relied on as evidence of a matter stated in it.".

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, we have debated the subject of multiple hearsay both in Committee and on Report, and a certain amount of concern has been raised about Clause 93, which regulates the admission of multiple hearsay. There was particular concern that the clause was not sufficiently clear about the circumstances in which multiple hearsay evidence should be admitted. On Report, I informed the House of our intention to bring an amended clause before the House at Third Reading, and that is what I now do.
We all agree that there are dangers in admitting multiple hearsay evidence generally and that it should be admitted only in certain limited circumstances. We are not advocating that rumour and so-called tittle-tattle should be admitted as evidence. However, we think it clear, as was acknowledged on Report by the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson, that there are circumstances where multiple hearsay should be admitted. We spoke on Report, for example, about how it is important that multiple hearsay contained in business documents should continue to be admissible, as is the case under the current law.
The new clause proposed in the amendment seeks to set out clearly the circumstances where multiple hearsay can be admitted. Its subsection (1)(a) provides for multiple hearsay to be admissible where one of the statements is admissible under Clauses 89, 91 or 92. That is where it includes a business statement and is therefore inherently reliable, and where it includes a previous statement of a witness who is giving evidence in court and can therefore be questioned about the statement. Subsection (1)(b) covers evidence where all
1792
parties agree that the evidence should be given. In those circumstances, there is of course no reason to think that the evidence should not properly be given.
However, there may also be cases not falling within those narrow circumstances where multiple hearsay should be admitted. In those circumstances where it is important for the evidence to be given, the hearsay rules should not preclude its admission. We therefore have retained a narrow discretion to admit multiple hearsay evidence that falls without proposed new subsection (l)(a) and (b) but should nevertheless be admissible.
Of course, such circumstances will be exceptional, and the test in proposed new subsection (l)(c) is therefore worded to reflect that a substantial threshold should be met before such evidence can be given. The test is worded so that such evidence can be given where the court is satisfied that the value of the evidence in question, taking into account how reliable the statement appears to be, is so high that the interests of justice require the later statement to be admissible.
It may assist the House if I outline an example of a situation where it may be appropriate to use the discretion to admit multiple hearsay evidence. Let us take the case involving rape of an 80 year-old lady who suffers a serious stroke shortly afterwards and cannot tell the police what has happened to her. However, let us say that before losing consciousness she told the doctor what happened to her, and that she could not identify her attacker. The doctor immediately writes that all down, but is working abroad by the time of the trial.
One key issue in the case is identity, on which the 80 year-old's evidence can shed no light. However, the prosecution has good independent evidence to establish identity, but no medical evidence showing injuries to establish that she was attacked. Her statement is, therefore, vital to establish another key issue—that she was raped. But it is multiple hearsay, being an out-of-court statement by the doctor of what she said. In such circumstances, it would be quite wrong for the rules of evidence to bar the courts from admitting that evidence.
That is not a far-fetched scenario, as the courts in New Zealand dealt with a similar situation involving an out-of-court statement in the case of Hovell. It highlights the need for some discretion to cover exceptional cases. One of the central criticisms of the hearsay rule under the current law is that it is inflexible and can in some circumstances prevent the court admitting evidence when it is clearly in the interests of justice to do so. The discretion will provide a degree of flexibility within the hearsay rules that is much needed and much called for.
In drawing up the revised clause, we have listened to concerns in the House on the subject that multiple hearsay should not generally be admissible. The revised clause will ensure that that is not the case. The proposed new clause strikes the right balance between admitting evidence where it is appropriate in exceptional cases to be given, and ensuring sufficient safeguards against the admission of unreliable

1793
evidence. The noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, and I have debated a number of other examples, but I hope that we will not have to entertain noble Lords with some of them from that discourse today. I have given one example to delight him.
In the light of my comments, I hope that the revised clause will be accepted by the House. I beg to move.
Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, it might be helpful if I make it clear that we support the amendment. The issue of multiple hearsay has a long history of debate in both Houses. When the Bill left another place, we made it clear that we thought that the clause had no place in the Bill. We have changed our position on the basis of very constructive work carried out over the past few weeks between those on the Government and Opposition Benches. I thank not only the Minister but the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, and his colleagues for the work that they have put in on the matter.
It is now the case that we accept that although the drafting could be improved—when could it not because, for example, it is difficult to know what the value of the evidence might be—we shall not cavil at that. We accept the Minister's point that this is a narrow discretion in subsection (l)(c). We are trying to narrow down the circumstances to exceptional circumstances in which the provision should come into operation, when paragraphs (a) and (b) have not been operative. On this occasion, we are content with the amendment.
Lord Thomas of Gresford: My Lords, the Minister delighted me with the example that she gave in circumstances where I had challenged her to try to find any situation in which multiple hearsay could be used. It was a fairly good example, if I may respectfully say so. I am equally delighted with the way in which the clause has been changed. It has been the subject of considerable anguish on this side of the House, and in the many discussions among all three of us we made a great deal of progress. In the narrow discretion that is now given to admit hearsay evidence, we believe that we have arrived at the correct solution.
Lord Renton: My Lords, I somewhat reluctantly support the clause, but I am bound to point out that in years to come much will depend on the interpretation that the courts give to it. It may be valuable, but I suggest that the Government keep a close watch on how it is used in practice.
I must confess that when I was in practice and sitting judicially from time to time, hearsay evidence was ruled out completely. However, when a few years ago it was made admissible in certain circumstances, I accepted that. But now when we an: dealing with multiple hearsay—hearsay upon hearsay—we must be extremely careful. Although I have looked at the drafting of the new clause and hope that it will work in a sensible way, I believe that it could be abused. I hope that the Government will keep a careful watch on the way that it works.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay of St Johns, and the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, for the extensive discussions we had on this issue. They are right in saying that we were all seeking to cure a mischief. We all identified that mischief and we wanted to find something which would be fit for purpose and could be used in the interests of justice on a. restricted basis.
I can reassure the noble Lord, Lord Renton, that the caution he asks us to exercise was evidenced throughout our discourse and we three believe that we have alighted upon a provision with which we are content, in as much as it will do justice.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 103 [Evidence at retrial]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 66:
Page 79, line 17, at end insert—
"( ) all the parties to the retrial agree otherwise;"
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Lucas Lord Lucas moved Amendment No. 67:
After Clause 118, insert the following new clause—
"INCREASE IN SENTENCES FOR AGGRAVATION RELATED TO OCCUPATION

(1) This section applies where the court is considering the seriousness of an offence committed in any of the circumstances mentioned in subsection (2).

(2) Those circumstances are—

(a) that, at the time of committing the offence, or immediately before or after doing so, the offender demonstrated towards the victim of the offence hostility based on the legitimate occupation of the victim, or

(b) that the offence is motivated (wholly or partly)—

(i) by hostility towards persons who have a particular legitimate occupation, or

(ii) by hostility towards that occupation.

(3) The court—

(a) must treat the fact that the offence was committed in any of those circumstances as an aggravating factor, and

(b) must state in open court that the offence was committed in such circumstances.

(4) It is immaterial for the purposes of paragraph (a) or (b) of subsection (2) whether or not the offender's hostility is also based, to any extent, on any other factor not mentioned in that paragraph.

(5) In this section "legitimate occupation" includes any legal employment, trade or pastime."

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this amendment follows from a discussion we had at the Report stage on what is now Clause 118. It relates to the introduction of an increase in sentences for crimes in which the disability or sexual orientation of the victims were the motivation. The principal argument then made was that there should not be an increase in sentences related to such specific circumstances, but that we should make it much more general, if not totally general, that where a crime is intended to cause

1795
fear to a class of people beyond the immediate victims, that fact should be taken into account in the sentencing.
The particular instance on which we concentrated was the many scientists, researchers and others, down to laboratory technicians, who are in daily fear for their safety and that of their families as a result of the activities of the animal rights activists. The Minister seemed to prefer limiting the provision to individual circumstances; to wish there to be a significant period and volume of suffering on behalf of some identifiable group in society, rather than making it a general crime. She preferred that there should be some established misery or mischief which then required to be dealt with.
I have cast this clause in the mould of Clause 118 with a view to tackling the particular mischief that is being done by the animal rights activists. As a member of the committee of inquiry into the legislation on scientific procedures on animals, I saw that such mischief was causing a damaging reaction among scientists as a whole. Few are prepared to speak out about what they are doing and few are prepared to admit public scrutiny into what they do. We lose a great deal of contact and understanding of science in that way and we lose the ability reasonably to criticise what people are doing on our behalf. That is all because of the activities of a small number of people who are determined to spread terror in the lives of ordinary people—those who, almost without exception, are intent on doing good for the rest of us and whose activities the vast majority of us support.
It is not acceptable that we do not remedy that ill when we are prepared to remedy the ill of crimes motivated by someone's disability. I have never come across that, although I have frequently come across people who are terrorised because they are involved with animals. It has been going on a long time and it is extremely painful. It is slowly doing the country a great deal of damage because this is becoming a difficult place in which to conduct pharmaceutical research. It is also doing a great deal of damage to society that it should be losing touch with an important moral aspect of the way we choose to treat animals. It is shrouded in secrecy because anything that comes out in the public domain is likely to result in attacks on individuals.
I would like to see the Government taking steps to remedy the situation. If the amendment offers them the opportunity to do so in their preferred manner, I would be delighted if they would take a step back and say that they want to look at it as a general circumstance in which sentences should be increased. However, it is tabled in response to what the Minister said on Report. I suspect that we have left it late in the day to succeed on this occasion, but if I fail I shall certainly return to the matter in the next criminal justice Bill—and I am confident that that will be quite soon. I beg to move.
Lord Dholakia: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, who was kind enough to draw my attention to his amendment on this matter. It is in line
1796
with the amendment moved on Report, when the Minister was kind enough to incorporate our suggestion as part of the Government's amendment.
As one who succeeded in convincing the Government on the matter of aggravation based on race, gender or disability of any kind, it would follow logically that aggravation based on hostility to one's employment must merit some consideration. I am aware that aggravation based on race, gender or disability carries weight because one cannot change any one of those factors. That may not be the same in the case of employment.
However, the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, has identified an issue which merits consideration. It would be helpful to know whether the courts have adequate powers to deal with those who engage in activities, often involving violence, because of their occupation. There are many occupations with which we may disagree but, if they are legitimate, those undertaking them must receive the state's protection. How can we ensure that that is the case in relation to the activities mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Lucas? Can the Minister tell us whether the existing law provides a higher tariff to deal with what we describe as some of the "drawbacks" for people involved in such activities?
4 p.m.
Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend Lord Lucas for bringing forward this amendment. As he said, it is a natural progression from the amendments tabled by the Government on Report in response to points raised earlier in this House. I recall that at that time the Minister was very careful to point out that the amendments which she moved on that occasion might tend to be an "open sesame" to other people, who might find that other categories of persons should also properly be given the same protection. My noble friend was right to draw attention to that.
The noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, questioned whether those people were in the same category as those who cannot change what they are by way of their gender, sexuality or race. I believe he is right to say that we need a full debate on these matters. One could argue, too, that it would be completely wrong for someone to have to change his occupation because of an illegal activity against him. In the past, the Government have maintained a robust stance on the matter of intimidation of those who carry out a lawful occupation. I fully anticipate that the Minister will repeat that commitment today.
My noble friend has raised an important matter. I welcome the fact that, in moving this amendment, he will trigger a full debate over the coming months. Like him, I rather suspect that waiting in the wings may be a government Bill which will be a perfect vehicle for that debate.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I hope that the noble Baroness and the noble Lord will be disappointed in that there will be no passing bus upon

1797
which they can leap. As your Lordships know, on Report in the Lords, the Government amended the Bill to extend the current statutory duty on sentencers to increase sentences for offences aggravated by the victim's race and religion so that offences aggravated by hostility towards the victim because of his or her sexual orientation or disability are also included.
In moving those amendments, I made it clear that we had been satisfied that there were data upon which we could operate which justified such a change. It was with pleasure that we were able to seek to address an ill which had been substantiated in such a clear way. The amendment of the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, would extend that duty to cases where the offence is motivated by hatred of the victim because of his occupation, legal employment, trade or pastime. I understand the anxiety in relation to those matters, as I understand the noble Lord's reasons for tabling his amendment.
However, we do not believe that this is the right way to go about addressing this issue. Our intention in introducing the provision for hate crimes on Report was to send a clear message that these very serious crimes, motivated by prejudice because of something fundamental and unchangeable about the victim, will not be tolerated. Crimes motivated because of the occupation of the victim do not fall into quite the same category.
Perhaps I may make it clear that the Government condemn extremists who seek to intimidate and harass those who carry out lawful businesses. However, there is a fundamental difference between this type of targeting and hate crimes. The former is not motivated by hatred of an individual because of a personal characteristic or fundamental belief but by a dislike of the job that he does or the pastimes in which he chooses to engage—that is, something external to the person which, at first blush, may not be immediately obvious in the same way as are colour, disability and the other issues.
We have made it plain that our minds will remain open to considering other situations in which similar provisions to those in Clauses 117 and 118 could be applied. However, we must be clear about the matter to which we are referring. As the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, will know, sentencers can, and will continue to be able to, take into account all the circumstances of an offence when considering its seriousness and increase the sentence accordingly. That might well include the type of hostility described in the amendment. It is important that the courts are aware of the problems of animal rights extremism, and we are working across government to raise awareness of the issues among the judiciary. Therefore, we believe that sufficient powers exist to deal appropriately with that type of crime and, in due course, I shall encourage the noble Lord to withdraw his amendment.
In order to encourage him even further, I want to respond to the questions raised by the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia. He asked whether we now have adequate powers to deal with such people and whether the tariff is high enough. We believe that the answer is
1798
"Yes". Under existing legislation, the police have a range of powers to deal with extremists. The Public Order Act 1986 gives the police powers to act in respect of a range of criminal offences relating to public disorder—for example, when threatening or abusive behaviour or harassment occurs.
We strengthened existing legislation to deal with animal rights extremists in the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 by amending the Protection from Harassment Act and the Malicious Communications Act, and we introduced the new power under Section 42 for the police to direct protestors away from residential premises. As noble Lords will be aware, we introduced amendments to the Anti-social Behaviour Bill, which is about to complete its passage through Parliament, to extend the offence of aggravated trespass to cover buildings and to amend the definition of the number of persons who constitute a public assembly from 20 or more to two or more. I believe that the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, participated in that debate. On that occasion, we explained that it was important to remove that limit because of the way in which it had been used so creatively and destructively by those who wish to cause mayhem in the manner described.
Those amendments will provide the police with additional powers to deal with protestors who occupy or invade buildings, and it will enable the police to impose conditions on smaller groups of protestors who conduct intimidatory protests outside targeted premises. It is a common tactic of animal rights protestors to demonstrate in numbers far fewer than 20. We are keen to ensure that the police have the right powers to do their job and we shall consider further measures as appropriate. But it is vital that changes in the law are translated into practical difference on the ground. That is why we are working across government to ensure an effective and consistent approach to enforcement of the law both between the police forces and across the whole criminal justice system.
We believe that the additional provisions that we have made in those Bills very much strengthen the hand of those who wish to enforce proper conduct and safety for those who are subjected to the extremist actions of animal rights protestors. The right bus was the Anti-social Behaviour Bill: we got on it; we paid our fare; and it has taken us to the right destination. Therefore, we suggest to the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, that he is right to say that this matter will wait for another day. I hope that that occasion will not be the next criminal justice Bill, whenever that occurs in the next millennium.
Lord Lucas: My Lords, I shall be very disappointed indeed if we do not have a criminal justice Bill in the next Session. We have had one every Session—if not several—and that is what keeps me alive and interested.
I congratulate the Government on what they have done in dealing with animal terrorism. They have supported Huntingdon Life Sciences Company in every way necessary when all others have deserted it. I

1799
believe that that is something for which we should all be profoundly thankful to the Government. I agree that the changes made in the Anti-social Behaviour Bill are looking extremely constructive. I am delighted that we are going down that road.
However, turning to this amendment and this subject, I believe that the Government have rather crossed that line already in what is now Clause 117 by making religion the subject of one of these hate-crime clauses. I entirely agree that that should be the case. Religion has caused more hate than possibly any other aggravating cause set down in these two clauses. None the less, people are capable of changing and often do. In the life of Christianity and Islam there have been periods when conversion by the sword has been a popular method of creating new recruits. There is nothing permanent about religion.
At the moment we are in a period of stability, but that does not mean that people who were born Muslim or born Christian stay Muslim or Christian. My former brother-in-law was born a Christian but is now a Muslim. I know of people who were born Muslims and who sustain their religion and I also know Muslims who have become Christians. There is quite a good commerce between religions. I am delighted that religion has been admitted to the cannon of hate crime, but it has opened the door to considering the possibility of hate crime in relation to other aspects of a person's life that are mutable rather than immutable and matters of choice rather than matters that people have thrust on them by circumstances or genetics. Clearly, this is not the time to press the issue. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 138 [Savings for powers to mitigate sentences and deal appropriately with mentally disordered offenders]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 68:
Page 96, line 28, after "with" insert "such".
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 68 I shall speak also to a very large group of amendments. Amendments Nos. 68 to 72, 75 to 79, 85 to 87,111,112 and 115 to 121 make a number of minor improvements to the sentencing provisions in the Bill. Amendments Nos. 68 to 72, 79, 111, 112 and 115 make a number of minor drafting improvements. Amendments Nos. 75 to 78 make a number of minor corrections to the interpretative definitions for the sentencing provisions. Amendment No. 85 delays the commencement of the Scottish powers of arrest provisions for the wildlife trafficking offences. Those will now be commenced by order at the same time as the equivalent provisions for England and Wales. Amendments Nos. 86 and 87 extend the timescale for the implementation of the mandatory life sentence provisions from two to four weeks after Royal Assent to make them practically implementable. Amendments Nos. 116, 117 and 119 to 121 make minor consequential amendments. Amendment No. 118 makes minor changes to existing provisions in the
1800
Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 to ensure that an offender serving a detention and training order may be transferred from England and Wales to Scotland. I beg to move.
Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, I refer briefly to Amendment No. 122 in my name which is grouped with the government amendments. I give notice that I shall move that amendment formally. It is a consequential amendment on Amendment No. 225 which I moved to a Division on Report and which the House approved.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 179 [Mental health treatment requirement]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 69:
Page 118, line 11, leave out "relevant" and insert "community order or suspended sentence".
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 183 [Periodic review of drug rehabilitation requirement]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 70:
Page 121, line 44, leave out from "which" to end of line 45 and insert "he could have been dealt with for that offence by the court which made the order if the order had not been made".
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 184 [Alcohol treatment requirement]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No.71:
Page 122, line 37, leave out "relevant" and insert "community order or suspended sentence".
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 222 [Licence conditions]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 72:
Page 142. line 22, leave out "(2)(b)(ii) or".
On Question, amendment agreed to.
4.15 p.m.
Lord Ackner Lord Ackner moved Amendment No. 73:
Before Clause 241, insert the following new clause—
"AMENDMENT TO MURDER (ABOLITION OF DEATH PENALTY) ACT 1965
In section 1(1) of the Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 (c. 71) (abolition of death penalty for murder), for the word "sentenced" there is substituted "liable"."
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, the amendment would achieve a simple matter: to make the sentence for murder no longer mandatory life, but at the discretion of the court. The crime of murder contains two features that are not always appreciated. The first relates to intent. The intent is not limited to an intent to kill; it applies to an intent to cause serious bodily harm. Accordingly, if there is a quarrel in a pub and one party to the quarrel breaks his bottle of beer and uses it as a weapon by thrusting it in the face of his companion, who dies as a result, that will be murder.
The second feature is that there are no categories of murder for which life imprisonment is reserved. The Homicide Act, which was enacted before capital murder was abolished, contained a number of categories in which capital murder was distinguished from murder that attracted life imprisonment. There were so many anomalies that it proved so unworkable that those provisions were withdrawn when the abolition of the death penalty came into force.
The result, as Lord Hailsham pointed out, is that the definition of murder now covers a vast spectrum of cases. I refer to what he said in the case of Regina v. Howe 1987, referred to at page 33 of the report of the Select Committee on Murder and Life Imprisonment, published in 1989, under the chairmanship of Lord Nathan—on which committee I had the privilege to serve. Lord Hailsham stated:
"Murder, as every practitioner of the law knows, though often described as one of the utmost heinousness, is not in fact necessarily so, but consists in a whole bundle cf offences of vastly differing degrees of culpability, ranging from brutal, cynical and repeated offences like the so called Moors murders to the most venial, if objectively immoral, 'mercy killing' of a beloved partner".
The other result, to which my noble and learned friend Lord Lloyd referred in the debate in Committee, is the case of Clegg. I refer to it for a different reason. As noble Lords may remember, Clegg was wholly and properly convicted of murder when he shot at a car that was being driven through a checkpoint in Ireland. There was much outcry about the case and subsequently he obtained an acquittal. Before that was obtained he was allowed out of prison, so that his sentence amounted in fact to no more than about four years.
My next point relates to the number of misapprehensions that have arisen on the subject that we are discussing. First, the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis, in Committee particularly asked my noble and learned friend Lord Lloyd not to press the matter to a Division because, he said,
"the consequences are of enormous importance".—[Official Report, 14/10/03; col. 834.]
I suggest that that is not the case. The consequences are of significance, but there is no enormous importance.
Following the publication of the Nathan committee's report on murder and life imprisonment, a similar amendment to that which is before your Lordships was debated on the Criminal Justice Bill 1991. It succeeded by a majority of nearly 100 voters; the number was 177 in favour of the amendment and 79 against.
Secondly, it is quite wrong to say that Schedule 19— I think that it is still Schedule 19—would fall to the ground if this amendment was passed. Schedule 19 is self-contained and it would continue in existence if the sentence for murder became discretionary. The Home Secretary, by species of ministerial decree, has laid down the categories of murder and the kind of minimum sentences which they should attract.
Thirdly, it is suggested that we are "going soft on crime" if we allow the amendment. Again I refer to the Nathan report on the subject. It stated:
"The Committee recognise that the courts have, in recent years, been faced with crimes of the most extreme gravity. They believe that the form of life sentence which they recommend would provide the degree of protection which the public rightly demand and would provide a sufficiently severe sentence to deal with the most outrageous crimes. After the introduction of a discretionary sentence for murder, the Committee anticipate that the average length of time served under a life sentence would be considerably longer than it is now. The Committee expect that their proposals will lead to very lengthy penal sanctions being set in the most grave cases. In some cases, this may result in imprisonment for the rest of the prisoner's life".
Fourthly, on the subject of misapprehension, I refer to the observation made by the noble Baroness, Lady Scotland, that if this amendment was passed, it,
"would undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system".—[Official Report, 14/10/03; col. 837.]
I suggest that that is quite wrong. In Committee, the noble Lord, Lord Borrie, observed:
"The most powerful part of the speech of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Lloyd, was his indicating how false, how dishonest, how unreal and how unhelpful to the public is the mandatory life sentence, which in so many circumstances does not mean what it says and is not intended by the judge to mean what he has to say".—(Official Report, 14/10/03; col. 835.]
Fifthly, in the April 1991 debate that followed the report of the Nathan committee, my noble and learned friend Lord Lane said:
"No crime, however exceptional, requires the imposilion of a sentence which everyone knows will not be implemented".— [Official Report, 18/4/91; col. 1593.]
Sixthly, it is said that the public's reaction to deliberate taking of life is what makes the offence one of the utmost gravity. I refer again to the Nathan committee's report. It made reference to two cases in which life was intentionally taken. It stated:
"In the case of the Maw sisters, the sentence of three years' imprisonment on two young women who deliberately kilted their drunken father was harshly criticised for its severity, and in the case of one of them, reduced on appeal to six months; and the Thompson sisters, who shot their tyrannical father as he lay in bed having an epileptic fit and were given a two years suspended sentence seem to have attracted nothing but public sympathy. The public seem to be well able to recognise powerful mitigation, even in the case of deliberate killing. In the former case the defendants were found to be acting under provocation, in the latter to be under diminished responsibility; but there may well be similar cases where the jury is unable to find these defences to be made out. Moreover, individual judges do in practice, determine how long the life sentence is in reality".
Lastly, I turn to the suggestion that the imposition of the mandatory life sentence carries with it a deterrent effect. Again, I refer to the report of the Nathan committee. It stated that the fact that,
"the life sentence is mandatory actually reduces any deterrent value a life sentence may have. It dilutes what should be the awe-inspiring nature of the life sentence. Because many murderers receive unnecessary life sentences, the average time served is reduced, giving credence to the common belief that 'life' means nine years. If the life sentence became discretionary, the average time served by lifers would be substantially increased".
I now come to the coup de grace which arises from the fact that the Home Secretary, as a result of European human rights legislation, is no longer permitted to play any part in deciding how long a murderer can stay in prison. That must affect how one proceeds in future.
In discretionary life cases, the matter is argued out in front of the judge, with counsel producing the mitigation, calling any evidence he thinks appropriate, such as medical evidence, and urging upon the judge what he should do. The judge can there and then say, "The penal aspect of the sentence—the part that is appropriate for punishment and deterrence—is 'x' years", which would mean that once the "x" years expire, it is for the Parole Board to decide whether it is safe to allow him to be released. Alternatively, he may make no comment, save to say that he does not think that it is an appropriate case on which to make any recommendation. That means in substance that the person will go to prison for life.
In murder cases, there can be no alternative but to follow the same procedure. Provision has been made for the Attorney-General to have the right to apply to the Court of Appeal to say that a sentence is excessively lenient. There is no basis now for drawing any distinction. There is no situation in which the Home Secretary can say, "Wait a moment; I may wish to keep the person in prison longer than the judge may have in mind".
We have now reached a position where it is appropriate to make the two wholly comparable so far as concerns sentencing. I beg to move.
4.30 p.m.
Lord Lloyd of Berwick: My Lords, noble Lords may remember that in Committee, which seems a long time ago, my name stood first on the amendment and my noble and learned friend Lord Ackner's stood second. I would not like noble Lords to think that there was any significance in the reversal of the order; my noble and learned friend was simply quicker off the mark in getting to the Public Bill Office.
I do not intend to repeat any of the arguments that I advanced in Committee, as they are all well known, recorded in Hansard and have been fully covered by my noble and learned friend Lord Ackner today. I will content myself simply to say that I do not think that they have been answered, because I do not believe that they can be answered.
I wish to make a point that I did not mention in Committee. The Minister said that one must have regard to the families of murder victims and referred to the rage that they feel when a life taken is not mirrored by a life sentence—I think that I quote her correctly. Of course we must have regard to the families of victims of murder, as with every other crime; but I ask for evidence that they are comforted by the imposition of a life sentence that they know means nothing.
1804
I am a former member of the Advisory Committee on Victim Support—I was a rather bad member, but I am still in touch with the committee. I am told that the families of victims care not about the meaningless imposition of a life sentence, but how long the defendant will serve in prison and, when he has completed his sentence, the terms on which he will come out. That is what they want to hear, not mere repetition of words that they know do not mean what they appear to mean. I believe that my information is correct, so let us hear no more in this debate about the need to reassure the families of victims by imposing a mandatory life sentence in every case of murder. All that does is to bring the sentencing process into disrepute.
When capital punishment was first curtailed in 1957, under pressure from Mr Sidney Silverman, and finally abolished in 1965, I suspect that a great majority of the country was in favour of retaining it. A majority in the country may still favour that view; but, in 1957, and again in 1965, Parliament gave a lead, and my noble and learned friend and I ask it to do exactly the same again. Thus, I regard the present amendment as unfinished business left over from 1965.
At one end of the scale there are murders that deserve a whole life sentence; at the other end are murders where a life sentence was wholly and utterly inappropriate. I gave the example of Private Clegg, which my noble and learned friend mentioned again. That is why judges have always been against the mandatory life sentence. It is not that they mind being told what to do—or not much—but they dislike being made to say things that are clearly nonsense; for example, imposing a life sentence and saying, "You shall serve three years".
The list of the great judges who have opposed the mandatory life sentence is endless. My noble and learned friend has mentioned some names; I add only that of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Bingham of Cornhill, the senior Law Lord. His lecture on the mandatory life sentence, given in 1998, when he was Lord Chief Justice, is, as one would expect, a model of clarity, but it is also worth reading for some of the quotations that he uses. He quotes from a speech of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Irvine, in this House in 1989, who stated:
"I would suggest that it is beyond argument that murder embraces such a multitude of diverse sins that the single mandatory life sentence must"—
that is his emphasis, not mine, but I emphasise it, too—
"be inappropriate".
He then states:
"The mandatory life sentence does not underpin public abhorrence of murder because everyone knows that life does not mean life".—[Official Report, 6/11/89; col. 521.]
I quote those passages from the noble and learned Lord, Lord Irvine of Lairg, without his permission, but I agree with every word.

1805
The noble and learned Lord, Lord Bingham, also quoted the noble Lord, Lord Richard, as saying:
"The argument in favour of change is based upon one simple proposition—that murders vary greatly".
In the course of that lecture, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Bingham, said that his views were representative of and had the overwhelming support of all the Queen's Bench judges. The lecture ends with this sentence, with which I will also end:
"I very much hope that a new, open-minded administration will be willing to re-examine the merits of this important question".
I share that hope and I am happy to support the amendment.
Earl Russell: My Lords, I do not know how many of your Lordships read the small print in The Times in the depths of mid-August. I admit that I do not very regularly do so myself, but on this occasion, I needed to brief a candidate in the Brent by-election. I discovered that, in Norway, so many people are sentenced to prison that they have had to introduce a waiting list for prison places. I understand that it is approximately two years long. That illustrates that a policy of severe sentencing may in the end turn out to be self-defeating.
I will leave the House with a quotation from Lord Williams of Mostyn, speaking on the Crime (Sentences) Bill, in which the mandatory sentence was extended. He asked whether the judge would be expected to tell the prisoner:
"I am sentencing you to life imprisonment. By the way, you can expect to serve 18 months".—[Official Report, 27/1/97; col. 1063.]
Lord Thomas of Gresford: My Lords, the mandatory life sentence is a dishonest fiction, which gives no comfort to victims' families, for all the reasons already stated. It also distorts the criminal law in a significant way. It is a mandatory sentence, therefore defendants plead not guilty and there are defences of provocation, lack of intent, self-defence and so forth, all of which cause considerable difficulties. The public would understand if the mandatory life sentence were abolished and the judge could pass what he considered to be the appropriate sentence for what has been done—whether whole life for a sadistic killing or a matter of months or a year for a mercy killing. It would satisfy the need for justice that the victims' families feel and it would be a great advance on the present situation.
4.45 p.m.
Lord Borrie: My Lords, if someone is convicted of murder, he should be liable to be sentenced to life. However, we have an opportunity to change the present law and it is surely not worthy of this Parliament to allow the present rule to continue—that a person convicted of murder must be given a life sentence. That is not worthy of Parliament because it is so remote from reality. We know that many convicted murderers will not in fact serve life—that much is known at the time, by the judge who is currently required to say certain false things.
1806
The only arguments on the matter that we heard from my noble friend the Minister in Committee were adequately answered by the noble and learned Lords who proposed the amendment. Nearly 40 years after the abolition of the death penalty, it is surely not necessary to have this provision to satisfy a public that perhaps still wishes to have a death sentence for murder. After all this time, surely it is not necessary to continue with the fiction that the substitute for a death sentence is always and invariably life imprisonment.
Lord Hylton: My Lords, I venture to support this amendment, speaking purely as a layman. I do so because I have given considerable thought to cases such as that of Private Clegg, which has already been mentioned. There have been others in Northern Ireland—that of Guardsman Fisher among others. A person manning a checkpoint is put in the extremely difficult position of deciding, in probably less than a second, whether to shoot, which may cause innocent death, or whether not to shoot which may allow a car bomb to go through and kill dozens or hundreds of other people. Such things have arisen in Northern Ireland and could arise in Iraq.
In Australia, there is a crime of causing death by using excessive force. We do not have that and Schedule 20 says nothing about causing death by excessive force. It does however provide for a minimum tariff of 15 years. Those are the reasons for which I believe the amendment is necessary.
Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, I do not support the amendment. When we on these Benches were in government we did not support discretionary sentences for murder and we do not do so now. That position is wholly consistent with a Division that I invited noble Lords to join me in last week, when we removed minors under the age of 18 from the operation of Schedule 19. However, within that amendment, I ensured that the mandatory life sentence remained.
I will not repeat the arguments that have come from these Benches in the past, because Third Reading is not the time for that. However, I was interested—as always—in the arguments put forward by the noble and learned Lords, Lord Ackner and Lord Lloyd of Berwick. They are always beguiling in the way in which they adduce their arguments, but I am not going down their line today and I cannot foresee that I will go down their line in the future.
I was especially intrigued by the points made by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Ackner, when he said that there may be a misapprehension about lengths of sentences. The noble and learned Lord read out some comments, the purport of which was to say that we need not be too alarmed about having a discretionary life sentence. We could persuade the public by saying, "Don't worry, life sentences won't be any shorter than they are now". Even if I were prepared to argue on that basis—which I am not, I will stick to my principles on this—my next point would be that those comments were made before the provisions of this Bill were

1807
introduced. It would be even more difficult for judges in the future to pass a life sentence if it were discretionary, in terms of this Bill.
As we have debated at length in Committee and on Report, we on these Benches think that there is a lot of smoke and mirrors about the sentencing in this Bill. Release after serving half the term of a sentence would not bring the honesty in sentencing that the noble and learned Lords are quite right to want to achieve. I agree that there is no general understanding about what a life sentence means. However, unlike them I do not think that the solution is to go for a discretionary sentence. The solution is that all of us have a duty to ensure that the explanation is more properly given to the public. It is only fair to say that, if there were a Division, I would, in my capacity as a spokesman and for myself, support the Government.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for her support. I hope not to speak too long. I do not want to re-tread the ground that we have already covered so comprehensively in Committee and on other occasions. However, there are a few things that I must say in response to the arguments so fully set out by the noble and learned Lords, Lord Ackner and Lord Lloyd of Berwick.
First, I agree with the noble and learned Lords that Parliament has had several opportunities to abolish the mandatory life sentence. I also agree that on no occasion were both Houses in agreement that it should be done. On the previous occasion and today, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Ackner, referred to the Nathan Select Committee, which, I believe, reported on the desirability of mandatory life sentences in 1989. The noble and learned Lord is right to say that the Committee held the view that the mandatory life sentence should be replaced with a maximum sentence of discretionary life. The government of the day did not accept that recommendation, and neither do we.
Several noble Lords said that the life sentence was a fiction. The noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, went so far as to say that it was a dishonest fiction. The noble Earl, Lord Russell, referred to the example given by Lord Williams of Mostyn. My noble friend Lord Borrie asked why we would not change it, and he was supported by the noble Lord, Lord Hylton.
It is not a dishonest fiction. There is a misunderstanding of what "life" means. A "life sentence" means just that: it extends to the whole of the defendant's life. There is a misunderstanding about the fact that part of the life sentence will be spent in custody and the remainder in the community. It is possible for a person, for the duration of their life, until the day on which they die, to be recalled to prison, if they breach the undertakings or conditions on which they remain in the community on licence.
We have made it clear in the Bill that we intend the licence to have meaning. It is sad that many of those who deal with the issue of life sentences wrongly believe that the sentence ends on the person's discharge from prison, when it does not. When the
1808
noble and learned Lord, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, says that a life sentence does not mean life and that, in some way, it means nothing, I must, with the greatest respect, wholeheartedly disagree with him. Many of those who are subject to a life sentence say that, for the rest of their days and notwithstanding the fact that they are no longer within the four walls of a prison, they are conscious of being imprisoned by the knowledge that, if they transgress in any way, they may be recalled to prison to continue their sentence in incarceration. For them, that has great meaning. Your Lordships will find that few prisoners who have been thus released will say, as the noble and learned Lord said, that it means nothing. It impinges on the quality of the liberty that is given them. There are those who say, for that reason, that someone who has served their time in prison should no longer be subject to such restraint. We disagree. I hope that your Lordships will understand why we do not see it as a fiction and do not agree with the comments made by the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford.
Nor do we agree with the comments made by my noble friend Lord Borrie, although I understand why he made them. It is 40 years since the abolition of the death penalty, and it is because we wish to maintain the present position and not have it reintroduced that we maintain that it is important to keep the idea of release on licence. We must make it mean something.
Lord Ackner: My Lords, the noble Baroness said that the Government wanted the position to remain as it is. Now that the Home Secretary no longer has any part to play in determining the time that an individual prisoner spends in prison, how will the procedure in court relating to what the judge says and does differ between murder and discretionary life sentences?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, if a person is convicted of murder and the life sentence imposed, that person will, whatever tariff the judge alights on, remain on licence for the remainder of their life, once the tariff has been served and the person released into the community. With a discretionary sentence, the sentence imposed in terms of years would, unless the court determined that that person should be subject to a life sentence, be the total period served by the defendant. Such a person would not, I imagine, thereafter be on licence.
Lord Ackner: My Lords—
Lord Renton: My Lords—
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I remind the House that we are on Report—
Noble Lords: Third Reading.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Third Reading—even worse. At Third Reading, the constraints on your Lordships are even more rigorous, and the scope for questions more limited.
Lord Ackner: My Lords, I am entitled to ask a question. I have not had an answer to my question. How will the procedure in court differ, now that the Home Secretary has no part to play? Does the judge say, "The period that I consider that you should serve by way of the penal part is X. After that, you will be subject to the Parole Board"? Or, will he say, "I make no recommendation, because life should mean life". How will the position differ, if at all?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, at the moment, we do not have the rules that will apply to such matters. With regard to the procedure for murder and discretionary life sentences, we believe that the murder tariff will be set by the court with reference to the principles that we outlined, while, with discretionary life sentences, the court will set the tariff but not on those principles.
I anticipate that the court, in one sitting or two, will, first, give the nature of the sentence—life imprisonment. Secondly, it will say what the tariff should be. Thirdly, it should describe to the defendant what the proposals are for the role of the Parole Board. Fourthly, it should say that a life sentence, if imposed, will be life on licence for the remainder of the person's life. I cannot tell your Lordships the precise details. The rules relating to how the system will work in practice have not been set. However, it will certainly be for the court to set the tariff.
That will not impinge in any way on the fact that, if a life sentence is imposed, all that the judge will be doing is indicating the part of the sentence that must be spent in custody. Whatever remains, after the custodial sentence is served, will be on licence. The defendant will remain on licence, whether released by the Parole Board on conditions or otherwise, for the remainder of his life.
It is a matter of concern. I join the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay of St Johns, in saying that we must do better in helping people to understand that life means life. It may be that the whole of the life sentence will be served in prison or that part of the sentence will be served in prison and part will be served in the community.
The document produced by the Law Commission is very helpful. I should like to take the opportunity to thank the Law Commission for its valuable work and analysis in this area. The paper refers to the relationship between the partial defences to murder and the mandatory penalty. It argues that were the mandatory penalty to be abolished, there would be less need for the partial defences, which is an issue that will be looked at.
The document is an initial consultation paper that sets out options for reform. In due course, the Government will consider the final report. However, I must make it clear that we have absolutely no intention to abolish the mandatory life sentence. That is our firm policy and an understanding of our position is reflected throughout the Law Commission report. It is clear from the consultation document that the Law
1810
Commission would not claim that these matters are simple or that the abolition of partial defences and mandatory life is the only option.
I hope that I have made clear why the Government consider this an appropriate matter to retain and why it would not be right to accept the amendment. I invite the noble Lord to withdraw. I make it plain that if the amendment is pressed, the Government will resist it.
Lord Renton: My Lords, before the noble Baroness sits down, for the sake of the record, would she tell us the present position with regard to the Royal prerogative of mercy?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, the Home Secretary had, until the Anderson case, an ability to set the tariffs. The Parole Board exercised the judgment on behalf of the public in relation to when it is safe and satisfactory to release those persons. The noble Lord will remember that the Royal prerogative of mercy was of particular importance when we still had the death penalty. I know that the new shadow Home Secretary would like to reintroduce lethal injection as a means of dealing with murderers, but it is not a view with which we concur.
Lord Ackner: My Lords, my noble and learned friend Lord Lloyd is a very busy person. I anticipated that there could be a possibility of his not being available when the amendment was called. It was not out of any desire to put the position on the basis of alphabetical merit, but in order to know where I stood. In fact, when the amendment was called on Report, he was not there.
Lord Lloyd of Berwick: My Lords, nor were you.
Lord Ackner: My Lords, I was. My noble and learned friend was not there to protest about the situation. I accordingly managed to get it stood over; I did not know how it would be today.
I should like to make two points. First, the noble Baroness spoke as if the discretionary life sentence does not involve imposing a life sentence when it is appropriate. One imposes, at one's discretion, a life sentence. Subsequently, all the questions about remaining on licence for the rest of one's life come into being. The only difference is that, under my amendment, the prisoner gets his "just deserts". It is a fair sentence.
Secondly, I want to refer to what happened in 1991 when there was a ping-pong arising out of the success in this House of a majority vote of nearly 100. The noble Lord, Lord Waddington, Leader of the House and former Home Secretary, according to The Times dated 4th July 1991, said to the House:
"I am certainly not saying baldly to you that the Commons has spoken and you must agree. I am very well aware of how often you have shaped public opinion and attitudes and I would not be surprised if, at some future date, policy on this matter does change as a result of a change in public opinion which you have influenced".
I say that that date has arrived.

1811
Finally, I refer to what Lord Hailsham said when he described the reasons given in the Commons for insisting as,
"frankly and intellectually ridiculous".
He continued:
"One day people will see sense, even in the House of Commons, and the hairy heel of populism which they have followed will ultimately disappear".
I think that we should have the opportunity of showing that is the case today.
5.6 p.m.
Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 73) shall be agreed to?
Their Lordships divided: Contents, 92; Not-Contents, 116.

Division No. 1

CONTENTS

Ackner, L.

Maddock, B.

Addington, L.

Mallalieu, B.

Alexander of Weedon, L.

Mar, C.

Ampthill, L.

Mar and Kellie, E.

Avebury, L.

Masham of Ilton, B.

Bagri, L.

Michie of Gallanach, B.

Baker of Dorking, L.

Miller of Chilthorne Domer, B.

Barker, B

Monson, L.

Beaumont of Whitley, L.

Morris of Aberavon, L.

Biffen, L.

Mowbray and Stourton, L.

Bledisloe, V.

Murton of Lindisfarne, L.

Borrie, L.

Newby, L.

Brennan, L.

Northover, B.

Brittan of Spennithorne, L.

Palmer, L.

Campbell of Alloway, L.

Peyton of Yeovil, L.

Chalfont, L.

Phillips of Sudbury, L.

Chan, L.

Prashar, B.

Colville of Culross, V.

Quinton, L.

Craig of Radley, L.

Rawlinson of Ewell, L.

Craigavon, V.

Rennard, L.

Dahrendorf, L.

Renton, L.

Dholakia, L.

Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L.

Donaldson of Lymington, L.

Roll of Ipsden, L.

Eden of Winton, L.

Roper, L.

Elles, B,

Russell, E.

Elton, L.

Russell-Johnston, L.

Fearn, L.

Saltoun of Abernethy, Ly.

Geraint, L

Sandberg, L.

Goodhart, L.

Scott of Needham Market, B.

Hamwee, B.

Sharp of Guildford, B.

Harris of Richmond, B.

Shutt of Greetland, L.

Holme of Cheltenham, L.

Simon of Glaisdale, L.

Hooson, L.

Smith of Clifton, L.

Howe of Aberavon, L.

Steel of Aikwood, L.

Howe of Idlicote, B

Stern, B.

Hurd of Westwell, L.

Stoddart of Swindon, L.

Hussey of North Bradley, L.

Strange, B.

Hylton, L. [Teller]

Swinfen, L.

Kennedy of The Shaws, B.

Thomas of Gresford, L.

Laird, L.

Tordoff, L.

Lamont of Lerwick.L.

Walmsley, B.

Lawson of Blaby, L.

Weatherill, L.

Lester of Herne Hill, L.

Wedderburn of Charlton, L.

Listowel, E.

Williams of Crosby, B.

Livsey of Talgarth, L.

Wilson of Dinton, L.

Lloyd of Berwick, L. [Teller]

Wright of Richmond, L.

1812

NOT-CONTENTS

Acton, L.

Howells of St. Davids, B.

Allenby of Megiddo,V.

Howie of Troon, L.

Alli, L.

Hoyle, L.

Amos, B. (Lord President)

Hunt of Chesterton, L.

Andrews, B.

Hunt of Kings Heath, L.

Anelay of St Johns, B.

Irvine of Lairg, L.

Archer of Sandwell, L.

Janner of Braunstone, L.

Ashton of Upholland, B.

Jay of Paddington, B.

Bach, L

Jones, L.

Bassam of Brighton, L.

Jordan. L.

Bernstein of Craigweil, L

Judd, L.

Blackstone, B.

King of West Bromwich, L.

Bragg, L.

Kirkhill, L.

Brooke of Alverthorpe, L.

Layard, L.

Brookman, L.

Lea of Crondall, L.

Burlison, L.

Lofthouse of Pontefract, L.

Campbell-Savours, L.

Macdonald of Tradeston, L.

Carter, L.

McIntosh of Haringey.L.

Christopher, L.

McIntosh of Hudnall, B.

Clarke of Hampstead.L.

MacKenzie of Culkein, L.

Cohen of Pimlico, B.

Marsh, L.

Corbett of Castle Vale, L.

Manson of Barnsley, L.

Crawley B

Massey of Darwen, B.

Davies of Coity,L.

Merlyn-Rees, L.

Davies of Oldham, L. [Teller]

Mishcon, L.

Dean of Thornton-le-Fylde,B.

Mitchell, L.

Desai, L.

Nicol, B.

Dixon, L.

Orme, L

Donoughue, L.

Patel of Blackburn, L.

Dormand of Easington, L

Paul, L.

Dubs, L.

Pendry, L.

Elder, L.

Pitkeathley, B.

Evans of Parkside, L.

Plant of Highfield, L.

Evans of Temple Guiting L.

Radice, L.

Ramsay of Cartvale, B.

Falconer of Thoroton, L. (Lord

Randall of St. Budeaux, L.

Chancellor)

Rendell of Babergh, B.

Farrington of Ribbleton, B.

Rooker, L

Faulkner of Worcester, L.

Sawyer, L.

Filkin, L.

Scotland of Asthal, B.

Fitt, L.

Sheldon. L.

Fowler, L.

Simon, V.

Gale, B.

Skelmersdale, L.

Gibson of Market Rasen, B.

Stewartby, L.

Golding, B.

Stone of Blackheath, L.

Goldsmith, L.

Symons of Vernham Dean, B.

Gordon of Strathblane, L.

Taylor of Blackburn, L.

Goudie, B.

Temple-Morris, L.

Gould of Potternewton, B.

Tenby, V.

Graham of Edmonton, L.

Thornton, B.

Gregson, L.

Tomlinson, L.

Grocott, L.[Teller]

Turnberg, L.

Harris of Haringey, L.

Turner of Camden, B.

Harrison, L.

Warner. L.

Haskel, L.

Whitaker, B.

Haskins, L.

Whitty, L.

Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, L.

Wilkins, B.

Hogg of Cumbernauld, L.

Williams of Elvel, L.

Hollis of Heigham, B.

Woolmer of Leeds, L.

Resolved in the negative, and amendment disagreed to accordingly.
5.16 p.m.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 74:
After Clause 270, insert the following new clause—
"DISQUALIFICATION FROM WORKING WITH CHILDREN
Schedule (Disqualification from working with children) (which contains amendments of Part 2 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 (c. 43) relating to disqualification orders under that Part) shall have effect."
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I am pleased to move government Amendment No. 74 I shall speak to all the government amendments in this extensive group; that is, Amendments Nos. 80, 81, 92, 113 and 123. The amendments have been tabled in response to concerns raised previously in debate. I must again thank the noble Baroness, Lady Blatch, and other noble Lords for raising these important issues with the Government.
Disqualification orders are provided for under Part 2 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 so that offenders convicted of a specified violent or sexual offence involving a child and receiving a sentence of imprisonment of 12 months or more can be disqualified from working with children in the future. These are important safeguards and it is essential that they work effectively to protect children.
New Clause 29A provides senior courts with a discretionary power to make a disqualification order on an offender, whether an adult or a child, convicted of one of the specified offences against a child, but whose sentence does not meet the sentence threshold of 12 months. The court will need to be satisfied that the offender is likely to commit a further offence against a child. This will enable the court to disqualify someone who poses a continuing risk to children from working with them, regardless of the sentence passed. This amendment builds on one proposed on Report by the noble Baroness, Lady Blatch, and I believe it strengthens the raft of measures to safeguard children. I hope that the noble Baroness will be pleased to see that the seed of her idea has flourished into so robust a plant.
New Clause 29B will provide a means of making applications for disqualification orders at any time after sentencing on individuals who meet the qualifying criteria, but in relation to whom the court appears not to have considered the question of an order. Noble Lords will recall that, currently, such matters have to be brought back before the court within 28 days. We believe that a better formula is that which is now being proposed, enabling the matter to be brought back at any time.
It will apply solely to cases in which the court was under a duty to consider the issue of a disqualification order but appeared not to do so—that is, where the individual committed one of the offences specified in Schedule 4 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 and the sentence threshold specified in the Act is met. The amendment has the effect that the prosecution will have a discretion to go back at any time to the court and apply for a disqualification order to be made.
Amendment No. 114 would provide that proposed new Section 29B applied to cases sentenced after the disqualification order provision came into force on 11th January 2001, as well as to any cases that might occur in future. Because the consideration of the order is one which should have taken place at the time of sentencing, and because disqualification orders are preventive measures rather than being punitive in
1814
nature, proposed new Section 29B as drafted already means that the provisions apply to such cases and there is no need to make this explicit.
Amendments Nos. 74, 80, 81, 92 and 123 are consequential amendments.
The noble Baroness, Lady Blatch, drew the House's attention to some examples of cases where it appeared that the court had failed to consider disqualification orders when it was under a duty to do so. It is extremely regrettable that consideration was not apparently given by the sentencing court at the time of originally sentencing those offenders, but proposed new Section 29B would provide a potential means of remedying such cases. Whether an application under proposed new Section 29B is made in a particular case will be a question for the Crown Prosecution Service. The additional advice to be issued by the Judicial Studies Board and the Crown Prosecution Service to sentencers and prosecutors, to which I alluded on Report, should also be of great assistance in ensuring that the occurrence of such cases is minimised.
The noble Baroness, Lady Blatch, also raised previously the question of monitoring the operation and impact of these orders and we are actively considering how best to do this.
I trust that your Lordships will agree that these government amendments serve to strengthen the raft of provisions in place to deter those who have already offended against children from posing a risk to them through work. I invite the House to accept these amendments and, because it is unnecessary, to reject Amendment No. 114. I hope that the noble Baroness, Lady Blatch, will feel that the comprehensive amendments brought forward by the Government have fully dealt with the mischief she sought to cure.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I am enormously grateful to the Minister for introducing these amendments today. Three years is a long time. I know it has been difficult to get the clauses right but they are now pretty well where I want them to be. I personally thank the noble Baroness because she and her colleague, the noble and learned Lord the Attorney-General, have both been sympathetic to the points raised. Indeed, the noble Lord, Lord Bassam, at an earlier stage expressed sympathy with the points we raised. It is good that these very important points are being addressed.
I seek clarification from the noble Baroness on two points. First, am I correct in thinking that where the Crown Prosecution Service takes the view from the outset of a case that there is a probability of a disqualification order being awarded, the case can be allocated to a senior court from the start? Will it be free to deal with a case in that way?
However, it is not always possible at the outset to make such a judgment. A case could go to the magistrates' court and it could subsequently transpire,

1815
after all the evidence has been considered, that a disqualification order is indeed appropriate. Proposed new paragraph 2(1)(b) in Amendment No. 113 states:
"the individual is sentenced by a senior court".
Would it be possible at the point of sentencing for the magistrates' court to refer the sentencing to the senior court so that the original sentence could be dealt with on the basis of what had happened in the magistrates' court and in addition, if appropriate, a disqualification order could be awarded? If not, if the magistrates award the sentence, then sentence would not have been dealt with in the senior court. It would be helpful if that point could be clarified.
As for the issue of retrospection, I listened very carefully to what the noble Baroness said. My understanding is that I should not worry about retrospection because legislation for that is in place. However, there remains the vexed case of Sadowski. I still do not know whether a disqualification order was even considered or, if it had been considered, whether one would been awarded. From all that we know about the Sadowski case it would appear that a disqualification order would have been appropriate.
Do I understand correctly that, from here on, if a court omits to consider and/or award a disqualification order where appropriate, such an omission can be dealt with retrospectively at any time? Do I further understand correctly that if it transpires that a disqualification order should have been considered in Sadowski but was not considered, that cannot be dealt with under the amendment?
I shall not be churlish and refuse to support the amendments—they go a huge way towards achieving what I want—but there would be an important lacuna if a case as serious as that of Sadowski, where there would be a danger if such an offender was allowed to work with children in the future, could not be dealt with. I do not argue that we should go back through all the cases considered in a senior court where it would not have been appropriate to either consider or award a disqualification order, but where a sentence has been passed and one should have been automatically applied, there is a case for considering that person unfit to work with children.
Having said that—I understand that a reply is winging its way to the Minister as I speak—I again thank the Minister and her officials for the enormous amount of work that has been carried out on these amendments. I am deeply grateful.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I reiterate our gratitude for the way in which the noble Baroness has pressed the issue. She is absolutely right— enormous effort has been put in by our officials and others to produce this provision rapidly. We had to grapple with quite complex legal issues in order to introduce a robust provision which would not transgress against any of the proper restraints imposed by the Human Rights Act and other initiatives.
Let me make it plain that where a relevant case is determined by a magistrates' court it can be referred to the Crown Court for sentencing, including a
1816
disqualification order, under the dangerousness provisions of the Bill. If it appears to the Crown Prosecution Service that a case could attract disqualification, that would be a reason for it to go to the Crown Court. If, because of the way in which a case develops in the magistrates' court, it subsequently becomes clear that it falls into that category, it could then go to the Crown Court. If there was some mistake, some misunderstanding, and a disqualification was not made, then when the mistake was identified it would be possible to utilise the Bill's provisions to cure that mistake. That is how we see the provisions working. That is why we considered it appropriate that we could go back at any time.
The noble Baroness knows that the previous Bill refers to bringing back a case within 28 days. We believe that there may be difficulties in future about that and so we have crafted the provision in a more open way so that the mischief may be addressed. Any case involving sentence and disqualification can be caught by the provisions of the clause.
I turn to the noble Baroness's second question, about Sadowski. I hope that she understands that, after the general remarks I have made on proposed Section 29B, it would be quite inappropriate for me to comment on whether an application should be made under that section in relation to any particular case. That would be a matter for the independent prosecution authorities to consider. From the Dispatch Box, I would not like to say anything at all that might be construed subsequently as improperly impinging on the exercise of a prosecutor's discretion.
However, the noble Baroness asked for a response on the question of Sadowski, and I should like to say what happened in that case. Previously, she asked me why Luke Sadowski was not subject to a disqualification order although he appeared to meet the qualifying criteria. I understand that the question of the disqualification order was overlooked at the time of sentencing, but that was realised the following day. Urgent attempts were made to bring the matter back before the court under Section 155 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, but the legislation requires that the application be heard by the sentencing judge within 28 days of the sentence being passed. That was not possible, for various reasons, so Sadowski is not therefore currently subject to a disqualification order.
I hope that I have said enough to give the noble Baroness comfort that situations such as these can be cured, although I reiterate that I say nothing about the particular case, as to do so would be improper. I hope that 1 have given her the real relief that she sought.
5.30 p.m.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, do I understand correctly that the provision of proposed Section 29B would allow the courts to revisit the Sadowski case? My understanding of what the Minister said at the beginning was that, from hereon, in the case of anyone sentenced where the courts omitted to consider and/or to award in appropriate cases a disqualification order,

1817
the courts could return at any time subsequently and put that right. My understanding was that retrospection did not go quite as far as the case of Luke Sadowski. I understand and totally accept that the Minister cannot talk about individual cases. However, if the retrospection catches that sort of person, in cases that happened prior to the Bill going on the statute book, I am a very happy bunny indeed.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I could not possibly comment, but I would not be surprised if the noble Baroness's description was an accurate one of what we have just done.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 276 [Interpretation of Part 11]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendments Nos. 75 to 78:
Page 168, line 8, leave out from beginning to "or".
Page 168, line 32, leave out from beginning to "or".
Page 168, line 47, leave out from beginning to "or".
Page 169. line 7, leave out from "order" to "or" in line 8.
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Clause 299 [Section 297: interpretation]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendments Nos. 79 to 81:
Page 182, line 39, leave out "such".
Page 183. line 1, after "if insert "(a)"
Page 183, line 3, at end insert "or
(b) an order under section 29A of that Act has been made in respect of him."
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Clause 301 [Civil proceedings for trespass to the person brought by offender]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 82:
Page 183, line 15, after "convicted" insert "in the United Kingdom".
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, these are minor technical amendments to Clause 301. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 83:
Page 184, line 1, at end insert—

"(6A) Where—

(a) in service disciplinary proceedings, as defined by section 276(1), a person has been found guilty of an offence under section 70 of the Army Act 1955 (3 & 4 Eliz. 2 c. 18), section 70 of the Air Force Act 1955 (3 & 4 Eliz. 2 c. 19) or section 42 of the Naval Discipline Act 1957 (c. 53). and

(b) the corresponding civil offence (within the meaning of that Act) was an imprisonable offence,

he is to be treated for the purposes of this section as having been convicted in the United Kingdom of the corresponding civil offence."

On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 302 [Orders and rules]:
Lord Thomas of Gresford Lord Thomas of Gresford moved Amendment No. 84:
Page 184, line 20, leave out from "power" to second "is"
The noble Lord said: My Lords, the amendment relates to the powers of the parole board under the Bill. Under Clause 211(2), it is the duty—
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I do not like to interrupt the noble Lord, but may I indicate that I intend to give him the pleasure of accepting the amendment, so perhaps he could shorten what he wishes to say in its support?
Lord Thomas of Gresford: My Lords, I am so disappointed that I cannot explain the amendment to your Lordships. What is a victory without your understanding? I am most grateful. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Clause 308 [Commencement]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendments Nos. 85 to 87:
Page 187, line 6, leave out "279" and insert "279(1) to (3), (5) and (6)".
Page 187, line 17, leave out "two" and insert "four".
Page 187, line 18, at end insert "(and Schedules 20 and 21)".
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Clause 309 [Extent]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 88:
Page 188, line 27, at end insert " (except as mentioned in subsection (7A))".
The noble Baroness said: Amendments Nos. 88 to 91, 93 to 106 and 125 to 146 are all consequential amendments. Amendments Nos. 93 to 106 are additions to the consequential amendments listed in Part 2 of Schedule 3 for allocation and sending. Amendments Nos. 125 to 146 make corresponding additions where necessary to the repeals Schedule 35. Amendments Nos. 88 to 91 amend Clause 309, which deals with extent, so as to preserve the amended or repealed provisions, where necessary, in Northern Ireland. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendments Nos. 89 to 92:
Page 188, line 32, leave out "to 3" and insert "to 4"
Page 188, line 32, at end insert "(except as mentioned in subsection (7B))"
Page 188, line 34, at end insert—

"(7A) Paragraphs 29, 30,31, 37, 38,46,49 and 58A of Schedule 3 do not extend to Northern Ireland.

(7B) The repeals in Part 4 of Schedule 35 relating to-—

(a) the Bankers' Books Evidence Act 1879 (c. 11),

(b) the Explosive Substances Act 1883 (c. 3),

(c) the Backing of Warrants (Republic of Ireland) Act 1965 (c. 45),

(d) the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 (C. 2), and

(e) the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (c. 49),

do not extend to Northern Ireland."

Page 188, line 42, at end insert "or
(b) the extent of section (Disqualification from working with children) and Schedule (Disqualification from working with children) so far as relating to the making of orders by, or orders made by, courts-martial or the Courts-Martial Appeal Court".
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Schedule 3 [Allocation of cases triable either way, and sending cases to the Crown Court etc]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendments Nos. 93 to 106:
Page 212, line 11, leave out from "1956," to end of line 14 and insert "the Protection of Children Act 1978 or the Sexual Offences Act 2003;"
Page 226, line 7, at end insert—
"Army Act 1955 (3&4 Eliz. 2 c. 18)
In section 187 of the Army Act 1955 (proceedings before a civil court where persons suspected of illegal absence), at the end of subsection (4) there is inserted—
"The references in this subsection to provisions of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 and to corresponding enactments are to be taken to refer to those provisions and enactments as if no amendment to them had been made by the Criminal Justice Act 2003."
Air Force Act 1955 (3 & 4 Eliz. 2 c. 19)
In section 187 of the Air Force Act 1955 (proceedings before a civil court where persons suspected of illegal absence), at the end of subsection (4) there is inserted—
"The references in this subsection to provisions of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 and to corresponding enactments are to be taken to refer to those provisions and enactments as if no amendment to them had been made by the Criminal Justice Act 2003." "
Page 226, line 14, at end insert—
"Naval Discipline Act 1957 (c. 53)
In section 109 of the Naval Discipline Act 1957 (proceedings before summary courts), at the end of subsection (4) there is inserted—
"The references in this subsection to provisions are to be taken to refer to those provisions as if no amendment to them had been made by the Criminal Justice Act 2003." "
Page 227, line 7, at end insert—
"Firearms Act 1968 (c. 27)
In Schedule 6 to the Firearms Act 1968 (prosecution and punishment of offences), in Part 2, paragraph 3 is omitted."
Page 227, leave out line 29 and insert—
"( ) after "under" there is inserted "section 52(5) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998,","
Page 227, line 30, at end insert—
"( ) after sub-paragraph (ii) there is inserted—
"(iia) section 17C (intention as to plea: adjournment);", and
( ) at the end of sub-paragraph (iii) there is inserted "or
"(iv) section 24C (intention as to plea by child or young person: adjournment),"."
Page 228, line 9, leave out sub-paragraph (2) and insert—
"( ) In section 2, as substituted by the Courts Act 2003 (trial of summary offences), in subsection (2), for "as examining justices over" there is substituted "under sections 51 and 51A of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 in respect of."
Page 228, line 18, at end insert—
"( ) In section 8B, as inserted by the Courts Act 2003 (effect of rulings at pre-trial hearing), in subsection (6), the words "commits or" are omitted."
Page 230, line 30, at end insert—
"( ) In section 43 (power of magistrates' court to commit for restriction order), for subsection (4) there is substituted—
"(4) The powers of a magistrates' court under section 3 or 3B of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 (which enable such a court to commit an offender to the Crown Court where the court is of the opinion, or it appears to the court, as mentioned in the section in question) shall also be exercisable by a magistrates' court where it is of that opinion (or it so appears to it) unless a hospital order is made in the offender's case with a restriction order.""
Page 230, line 35, at end insert ", and
( ) in subsection (7), for the words from "inquire" to "1980" there is substituted "send him to the Crown Court for trial under section 51 or 51A of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998", and in paragraph (b) of that subsection, the words "where the court proceeds under subsection (1) of that section" are omitted."
Page 233, line 14, at end insert—
"Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 (c. 34)
58A In section 6 of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 (interpretation), in subsection (3)(c), for "commits him" there is substituted "sends him to the Crown Court"."
Page 233, line 31, at end insert—
"Reserve Forces Act 1996 (c. 14)
In Schedule 2 to the Reserve Forces Act 1996 (deserters and absentees without leave), in paragraph 3, after sub-paragraph (2) there is inserted—
"(2A) The reference in sub-paragraph (2) to provisions of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 is to be taken to refer to those provisions as if no amendment to them had been made by the Criminal Justice Act 2003.""
Page 234, line 16, at end insert—
"Sexual Offences (Protected Material) Act 1997 (c. 39)
In section 9 of the Sexual Offences (Protected Material) Act 1997 (modification and amendment of certain enactments), subsection (1) is omitted."
Page 236, line 7, at end insert—
"Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (c. 29)
( ) The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 is amended as follows.
( ) In section 6 (making of confiscation order), in subsection (2)(b), for "section 3, 4 or 6" there is substituted "section 3, 3A, 3B, 3C, 4, 4A or 6".
( ) In section 27 (defendant absconds after being convicted or committed), in subsection (2)(b), for "section 3, 4 or 6" there is substituted "section 3, 3A, 3B, 3C, 4, 4A or 6".
( ) In section 70 (committal by magistrates' court), in subsection (5), after "way)" there is inserted "or under section 3B(2) of that Act (committal of child or young person)"."
Question, amendments agreed to.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 107:
Before Schedule 4, insert the following new schedule—

OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON
Murder
1 Murder.
Attempted murder
2 An offence under section 1 of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 (c. 47) of attempting to commit murder.
Soliciting murder
3 An offence under section 4 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (c. 100).
Manslaughter
4 Manslaughter.
Wounding or causing grievous bodily harm with intent
5 An offence under section 18 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (c. 100).
Kidnapping
6 Kidnapping.

SEXUAL OFFENCES
Rape
7 An offence under section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 (c. 69) or section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
Attempted Rape
8 An offence under section 1 of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 (c. 47) of attempting to commit sin offence under section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 (c. 69) or section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
Intercourse with a girl under thirteen
9 An offence under section 5 of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 (c. 69).
Incest by a man with a girl under thirteen
10 An offence under section 10 of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 (c. 69) alleged to have been committed with a girl under thirteen.
Assault by penetration
11 An offence under section 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
Causing a person to engage in sexual activity w ithout consent
12 An offence under section 4 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 where it is alleged that the activity caused involved penetration within subsection (4)(a) to (d) of that section.
Rape of a child under thirteen
13 An offence under section 5 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
Attempted rape of a child under thirteen
14 An offence under section 1 of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 (c. 47) of attempting to commit an offence under section 5 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
Assault of a child under thirteen by penetration
15 An offence under section 6 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
Causing or inciting a child under thirteen to engage in sexual activity
16 An offence under section 8 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 where it is alleged that an activity involving penetration within subsection (3)(a) to (d) of that section was caused.
Sexual activity with a person with a mental disorder
17 An offence under section 31 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 where it is alleged that the touching involved penetration within subsection (4)(a) to (d) of that section.
Causing or inciting a person with a mental disorder to engage in sexual activity
18 An offence under section 32 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 where it is alleged that an activity involving penetration within subsection (4)(a) to (d) of that section was caused.

DRUGS OFFENCES
Unlawful importation of Class A drug
19 An offence under section 50(2) of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 (c. 2) alleged to have been committed in respect of a Class A drug (as defined by section 2 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (c. 38)).
Unlawful exportation of Class A drug
20 An offence under section 68(2) of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 (c. 2) alleged to have been committed in respect of a Class A drug (as defined by section 2 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (c. 38))
Fraudulent evasion in respect of Class A drug
21 An offence under section 170(1) or (2) of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 (c. 2) alleged to have been committed in respect of a Class A drug (as defined by section 2 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (c. 38)).
Producing or being concerned in production of Class A drug
22 An offence under section 4(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (c. 38) alleged to have been committed in relation to a Class A drug (as defined by section 2 of that Act).
Supplying or offering to supply Class A drug
23 An offence under section 4(3) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (c. 38) alleged to have been committed in relation to a Class A drug (as defined by section 2 of that Act).

THEFT OFFENCES
Robbery
24 An offence under section 8(1) of the Theft Act 1968 (c. 60) where it is alleged that, at some time during the commission of the offence, the defendant had in his possession a firearm or imitation firearm (as defined by section 57 of the Firearms Act 1968 (c. 27)).

CRIMINAL DAMAGE OFFENCES
Arson endangering life
25 An offence under section 1(2) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 (c. 48) alleged to have been committed by destroying or damaging property by fire.
Causing explosion likely to endanger life or property
26 An offence under section 2 of the Explosive Substances Act 1883 (c. 3).
Intent or conspiracy to cause explosion likely to endanger life or property
27 An offence under section 3(1)(a) of the Explosive Substances Act 1883 (c. 3).

WAR CRIMES AND TERRORISM
Genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes
28 An offence under section 51 or 52 of the International Criminal Court Act 2001 (c. 17).
Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions
29 An offence under section 1 of the Geneva Conventions Act 957 (c. 52).
Directing terrorist organisation
30 An offence under section 56 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (c. 11).
Hostage-taking
31 An offence under section 1 of the Taking of Hostages Act1982 (c. 28).

HIJACKING AND OTHER OFFENCES RELATING TO AVIATION, MARITIME AND RAIL SECURITY
Hijacking of aircraft
32 An offence under section 1 of the Aviation Security Act 1982 (c. 36).
Destroying, damaging or endangering the safety of an aircraft
33 An offence under section 2 of the Aviation Security Act 1982 (c. 36).
Hijacking of ships
34 An offence under section 9 of the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 (c. 31).
Seizing or exercising control of fixed platforms
35 An offence under section 10 of the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 (c. 31).
Destroying ships or fixed platforms or endangering their safety
36 An offence under section 11 of the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 (c. 31).
Hijacking of Channel Tunnel trains
37 An offence under article 4 of the Channel Tunnel (Security) Order 1994 (S.I. 1994/570).
Seizing or exercising control of the Channel Tunnel system
38 An offence under article 5 of the Channel Tunnel (Security) Order 1994 (S.I. 1994/570).

CONSPIRAC
Conspiracy
39 An offence under section 1 of the Criminal Law Act 1977 (c. 45) of conspiracy to commit an offence listed in this Part of this Schedule.

SUPPLEMENTARY
40 A reference in Part 1 of this Schedule to an offence includes a reference to an offence of aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring the commission of the offence.
41 A reference in Part 1 of this Schedule to an enactment includes a reference to the enactment as enacted and as amended from time to time."
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Schedule 6 [Hearsay evidence: armed forces]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendments Nos. 108 to 110:
Page 245, line 4, at end insert—
"( ) all the parties to the retrial agree otherwise;"
Page 245, line 16, at end insert—
"( ) all the parties to the retrial agree otherwise;"
Page 245, line 28, at end insert—
"( ) all the parties to the retrial agree otherwise;"
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Schedule 7 [Breach, revocation or amendment of community order]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 111:
Page 246. line 20, leave out "182(4)" and insert "182(2)"
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Schedule 19 [Prisoners liable to removal from United Kingdom: modifications of Criminal Justice Act 1991]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 112:
Page 311, line 27, leave out "repeal or"
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 113:
Before Schedule 29, insert the following new schedule—

DISQUALIFICATION FROM WORKING WITH CHILDREN
1 The Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 (c. 43) is amended as follows.

2 After section 29 there is inserted—

"29A Disqualification at discretion of court: adults and juveniles

(1) This section applies where—

(a) an individual is convicted of an offence against a child (whether or not committed when he was aged 18 or over).

(b) the individual is sentenced by a senior court, and

(c) no qualifying sentence is imposed in respect of the conviction.

(2) If the court is satisfied, having regard to all the circumstances, that it is likely that the individual will commit a further offence against a child, it may order the individual to be disqualified from working with children.

(3) If the court makes an order under this section, it must statev its reasons for doing so and cause those reasons to be included in the record of the proceedings.

29B Subsequent application for order under section 28 or 29

(1) Where—

(a) section 28 applies but the court has neither made an order under that section nor complied with subsection (6) of that section, or

(b) section 29 applies but the court has not made an order under that section, and it appears to the prosecutor that the court has not considered the making of an order under that section,

30 the prosecutor may at any time apply to that court for an order under section 28 or 29.

(2) Subject to subsection (3). on an application under subsection (1)—

(a) in a case falling within subsection (1)(a), the court—

(i) must make an order under section 28 unless it is satisfied as mentioned in subsection (5) of that section, and

(ii) if it does not make an order under that section, must comply with subsection (6) of that section,

(b) in a case falling within subsection (1)(b), the court—

(i) must make an order under section 29 if it is satisfied as mentioned in subsection (4) of that section, and

1825

(ii) if it does so, must comply with subsection (5) of that section.

(3) Subsection (2) does not enable or require an order under section 28 or 29 to be made where the court is satisfied that it had considered the making of an order under that section at the time when it imposed the qualifying sentence or made the relevant order."

3

(1) Section 30 (supplemental provisions) is amended as follows.

(2) In the heading for "and 29" there is substituted "to 29B".

(3) In subsection (1)—

(a) for "and 29" there is substituted "to 29B", and

(b) in the definition of "qualifying sentence", after paragraph (d) there is inserted—

"(dd) a sentence of detention under section 198or200of the Criminal Justice Act 2003,".

(4) In subsection (5)—

(a) in paragraph (a), for "or 29" there is substituted ", 29 or 29A",

(b) after paragraph (b) there is inserted—

"(c) in relation to an individual to whom section 29A applies and on whom a sentence has been passed, references to his sentence are to that sentence."

4 In section 31 (appeals), in subsection (1), after paragraph (b) there is inserted—

"(c) where an order is made under section 29A, as if the order were a sentence passed on him for the offence of which he has been convicted."

5

(1) Section 33 (conditions for application under section 32) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (6), after paragraph (d) there is inserted—

"(e) in relation to an individual not falling within any of paragraphs (a) to (d), the day on which the disqualification order is made.".

(3) For subsection (8) there is substituted—

"(8) In subsection (7) "detention" means detention (or detention and training)—

(a) under any sentence or order falling within paragraphs (b) to (f) of the definition of "qualifying sentence" in section 30(1), or

(b) under any sentence or order which would fall within those paragraphs if it were for a term or period of 12 months or more."."

On Question, amendment agreed to.
[Amendment No. 114 not moved.]
Schedule 29 [Default orders: modification of provisions relating to community orders]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 115:
Page 352, line 7, leave out from "to" to "deal" in line 9 and insert "revoke the community order and deal with the offender for the offence is to be taken to be a power to revoke the default order and"
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Schedule 30 [Amendments relating to sentencing]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendments Nos. 116 to 121:
Page 368, line 8, leave out "release on licence of"
Page 368, line 26, leave out "duration and conditions of licences for"
Page 368, line 47, at end insert—

"(5A) Any provision of sections 102 to 104 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 which is applied by sub-paragraph (2) or (4) above shall have effect (as so applied) as if—

(a) any reference to secure accommodation were a reference to secure accommodation within the meaning of Part 2 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 or a young offenders institution provided under section 19(1)(b) of the Prisons (Scotland) Act 1989,

(b) except in section 103(2), any reference to the Secretary of State were a reference to the Scottish Ministers,

(c) any reference to an officer of a local probation board were a reference to a relevant officer as defined by section 27(1) of the Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993,

(d) any reference to a youth court were a reference to a sheriff court,

(e) in section 103, any reference to a petty sessions area were a reference to a local government area within the meaning of the Local Government etc. (Scotland) Act 1994,

(f) in section 103(3), for paragraphs (b) and (c) there were substituted a reference to an officer of a local authority constituted under that Act for the local government area in which the offender resides for the time being,

(g) section 103(5) were omitted,

(h) in section 104, for subsection (1) there were substituted—

"(1) Where a detention and training order is in force in respect of an offender and it appears on information to a sheriff court having jurisdiction in the locality in which the offender resides that the offender has failed to comply with requirements under section 103(6)(b), the court may—

(a) issue a citation requiring the offender to appear before it at the time specified in the citation, or

(b) issue a warrant for the offender's arrest."

(i) section 104(2) were omitted, and

(j) in section 104(6), the reference to the Crown Court were a reference to the High Court of Justiciary."

Page 369, line 3, leave out "release on licence of"
Page 369, line 22, leave out "duration and conditions of licences for"
Page 372, line 32, at end insert—
" In section 76 (meaning of custodial sentence), in subsection (1) after paragraph (b) there is inserted—
"(bb) a sentence of detention for public protection under section 198 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003;
(bc) a sentence of detention under section 200 of that Act;"."
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Baroness Anelay of St Johns Baroness Anelay of St Johns moved Amendment No. 122:
Page 372, line 34, leave out sub-paragraph (2).
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 123:
Page 386, line 34, at end insert—
"( ) In section 42 (interpretation of Part 2), in subsection (2)(a), for "section 119 of the Powers of Criminal Court (Sentencing) Act 2000" there is substituted "paragraph 8(2)(a) or (b) of Schedule 11 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003".
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Schedule 35 [Repeals]:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendments Nos. 124 to 146:
Page 418, column 2, leave out lines 8 to 11 and insert—

"In section 54(1), the words "and record or cause to be recorded"."

Page 420, line 19, at end insert—

"Firearms Act 1968 (c. 27)

In Schedule 6, in Part 2, paragraph 3."

Page 420, line 26, at end insert—

"Criminal Law Act 1977 (c. 45)

In Schedule 12, the entry relating to the Firearms Act 1968 (c. 27)."

Page 420, line 32, column 2, at end insert—

"In section 8B(6)(a), the words "commits or"."

Page 421, line 14, column 2, at end insert—

"In Schedule 7, paragraph 73."

Page 421, line 14, at end insert—

"Criminal Justice (Amendment) Act 1981 (c. 27)

The whole Act."

Page 421, line 16, at end insert—

"Contempt of Court Act 1981(c.49)

Section 4(4).

Page 421, line 26, at end insert—

"Criminal Justice Act 1982 (c 48)

Section 61,

In Schedule 9, paragraph l(a).

Mental Health Act 1983 (c. 20)

In section 52(7)(b), the words "where the court proceeds under subsection (1) of that section,"."

Page 421, line 34, column 2, at end insert—

"In Schedule 1, paragraphs 2 and 3."

Page 421, line 43, column 2, at end insert—

"In Schedule 2, paragraphs 1, 9 and 14."

Page 422, line 8, column 2, at end insert—

"Section 33."

Page 422, line 12, column 2, at end insert—

"Section 144.

In Schedule 15, paragraphs 10, 66 and 104."

Page 422, line 16, at end insert—

"Courts and Legal Services Act 1990(c.41)

In Schedule 18, paragraph 1990 25(5).

Broadcasting Act 1990 (c. 42)

In Schedule 20, paragraph 29(1)."

Page 422, line 17, column 2, at end insert—

"Section 55(1)."

Page 422, line 18, column 2, at end insert—

"In Schedule 11, paragraph 25."

Page 422, line 21, column 2, at end insert—

"In Schedule 9, paragraphs 12, 17(c), 18(d), 25, 27, 29 and 49.

In Schedule 10, paragraphs 40 and 71."

Page 422, line 28, column 2, at end insert—

"Section 44(3).

Section 45.

Section 49(4)."

Page 422, line 29, column 2, at end insert—

"In Schedule 1, paragraphs 2 to 5, 8, 10, 12, 13, 15 to 19, 22(3), 24 to 26, 28 to 32, and 34 to 38."

Page 422, line 30, at end insert—

"Sexual Offences (Protected" Material) Act 1997 (c. 39)

Section 9(1).

Page 422, line 31, column 2, at beginning insert—

"Section 47(6)."

Page 422, line 35, column 2, at end insert—

"In Schedule 8, paragraphs 8, 37, 40, 65 and 93."

Page 422, line 35, at end insert—

"Access to Justice Act 1999 (c. 22)

Section 67(3).

In Schedule 4, paragraphs 16, 39 and 47.

In Schedule 13, paragraphs 96, 111 and 137."

Page 422, line 41, column 2, at end insert—

"In Schedule 9, paragraphs 62, 63, 64(2), 65, 91 and 201."

On Question, amendments agreed to.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill do now pass.
Moved, That the Bill do now pass.—(Baroness Scotland of Asthal.)
Lord Renton: My Lords, I feel bound to say to begin with that we all much admire the ability, the patience and the fortitude of the noble Baroness, Lady Scotland. She has had a tremendous task. I am going to have to comment, I am afraid, on the results of all the efforts that have been made on this colossal Bill. I should also like, although he is not with us at the moment, to pay my tribute to the noble and learned Lord the Attorney-General, who has also been diligent and helpful. However, I find it hard to believe that two such diligent and able Ministers had to use their initiative in creating such a chaotic and long Bill as this has become.
I confess, if I may, that I have been in Parliament 58 years and taken part in pretty well every Bill dealing with criminal law and procedure during that time, since 1945. Never in all those years has there been such a long and detailed Criminal Justice Bill as this, which amends lots of previous legislation and adds many clauses to what is to be on the statute book. When it came to us, the Bill was 374 pages long. By the time we had dealt with it in Committee for 11 days and on Report for five days, it became 440 pages long. Even on Third Reading the Government have had to move so many amendments that it will become another 20 pages long. I find it a bit worrying that Members of the House of Commons will have only one day in this Session, which is nearing its end, to consider this vast range of amendments. They are not merely drafting amendments of previous legislation, although there are scores of those, they are nearly all government amendments, most of them amending previous legislation, and some of them are, as we know from our discussions, very controversial.

1829
For centuries it has been the fundamental principle of our criminal cases that ignorance of the law is no defence. But now we have reached a stage where knowledge of the criminal law, even for a person of enormous ability, is impossible without referring to the previous statutes and seeing how they are amended and added to. The Government have created this situation. I say that it is vital that the Government, as soon as possible, early in the next Session, get started on the formation of a consolidation Bill; otherwise our criminal law will simply be a mystery, a mass of important Bills that have been amended by other Bills and amended by this Bill. That is not the way in which a parliamentary democracy such as ours should legislate. We have to make the legislation, especially in criminal law, understood by the people at large. Otherwise, the courts will no longer be able to say that ignorance of the law is no defence.
So I implore the Government to take note of what I have said and to get on with it as soon as they can in the next Session.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I take this opportunity not only to thank the noble Lord for his kind words—of course I note everything that he said— but to commend the sterling efforts of the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, and all those who led for the Liberal Democrats, who have been more in number; nevertheless the noble Lords, Lord Thomas of Gresford and Lord Dholakia, and others should all be named in dispatches. I thank each and every one of them for the comradely way in which they have addressed some very difficult and technical issues.
On Question, Bill passed, and returned to the Commons with amendments.

Wild Mammals (Protection) (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill [H.L.]
Read a third time, and passed, and sent to the Commons.

Access to the Countryside (Exclusions and Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2003
5.47 p.m.
Earl Peel Earl Peel rose to move, that an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that the order, laid before the House on 24th October, be annulled (S.I. 2003/2713).
The noble Earl said: My Lords, the exclusions and restrictions which I wish to draw to your Lordships' attention this evening refer to the closure mechanisms available to the owner of land in England under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act and were laid before the House on 24th October. Broadly speaking, these closure provisions are open to the owners of access land, under the Act, in order to safeguard the public from management activities that might cause a threat to their safety and to enable the owner to conduct his or her business in an unencumbered
1830
fashion in cases where the presence of people is likely to cause difficulties. I start by declaring an interest as an owner of access land which will be directly affected by the Act.
As such, these regulations have very considerable significance to both parties. It is, I would suggest, vital that they are implemented in a quick and efficient fashion, allowing for flexibility and practicality. Many owners will regard such closure orders as an essential means of carrying out their business. I remind your Lordships of the firm commitment given by the then Minister, Michael Meacher, that it is not the Government's intention for the right of access to impede the economic well-being of those who live and work in these areas or that the right of access would incur costs on owners. I believe that unless the Minister is prepared to make concessions, then both those commitments are likely to be undermined.
Under Section 22 of the CROW Act, entitled persons are allowed either to close access areas or to restrict their use for up to 28 days per year, although there are considerable limitations on when the 28 days can be taken. National holidays and certain weekend closures are precluded under the Act. Whereas there is no need for the relevant access authority to give permission for such closures, the owner has to give notice to the access authority for such a closure to be legitimate.
However, under the Act, if the land in question is subject to an agricultural tenancy, the tenant becomes the owner and is the only person qualified to apply for closure under the 28-day rule. Therefore, the situation will arise, particularly in cases where the actual owner of the land may manage that land for, say, sporting purposes, when he will have no right to the 28-day closure, even though the tenant, who would have the right under the Act, may simply graze the land and would not be involved in the principal management activities of the land such as bracken spraying, heather burning or predator control, which are carried out by the landlord. I suggest to your Lordships that we have a considerable muddle in that respect.
Furthermore, in such circumstances the owner will wish to close the area on shooting days, not simply to ensure that the shoot is not disturbed by walkers but, more importantly, to ensure that the public's safety is not compromised. It is worth remembering the very substantial income that is generated by shooting, particularly on grouse moors, most of which will be subject to the new rights of access. That income is ploughed back into the management of these areas and benefits all, not just those who live and work there but the public who enjoy those areas. In reality, as regards much of the access land, the owner will need to close the land more than the tenant, who is the only person under an agricultural tenancy who has the right to do so under the Act.
To make matters more complicated, there is the question of sporting rights, and with them much of the management of the land to which I have referred. These could be let to a third party who will be in an even more precarious position concerning applying for

1831
closure under Section 22. The Minister will be aware that under that section in the Act, provisions can be made through regulations for all such people to be added as interested persons. I urge the Minister to consider this option most seriously and to amend the regulations accordingly; otherwise, I suggest that we shall have considerable muddle, confusion and at times bad feeling, which is the one thing I should have thought we want to try to avoid.
On Regulation 4, which applies to the 28-day closure, the Government have not left much room for manoeuvre. Apart from the difficulties regarding the owner of the land that is subject to a tenancy, which I have already described, the regulations state that five days' notice must be given before a closure or restriction is permitted. I appreciate that the regulations allow for two hours' notice for closures of four hours or less, and for five-day closures for up to five hectares of land. I acknowledge that that is useful. However, many activities such as bracken spraying or heather burning involve large areas of land to be tackled at very short notice. I suggest that five days' notice is a nonsense as, of course, the weather is an all-important factor.
All I ask is for the Minister to emulate the regulations that have been produced in Wales which offer a much more flexible alternative. There, the owner can pre-register the relevant information and then just give notice of the date and the time of the closure the day before by telephone. There is no restriction on area or period of closure or registration. The access authorities can waive the notice period where they are satisfied that it was not reasonably practical for the entitled person to comply with the notice requirements. I suggest to the Minister that if it is good enough for the Welsh, it is good enough for the English.
I now turn to the regulations affecting Sections 24 and 25 of the Act. The Act allows anyone with an interest in the land to apply to the relevant access authority for a closure or restriction outside the 28 days when it is deemed necessary for either land management purposes—Section 24—or to avoid the risk of fire or danger to the public—Section 25. However, in contrast to Section 22—the 28-day rule— the owner has no right to such closures and permission rests entirely at the discretion of the relevant access authority.
Regulation 10 deals with such closures by providing the access authority with a determination period of up to six weeks, or four months for long-term closures of six months and more. I suggest to the Minister that these regulations are wholly unrealistic, particularly when one considers that in many cases those who are prevented from applying for closures under Section 22—the 28-day rule—have recourse only to these two sections in order to close land for management purposes and, indeed, to protect the general public. In such cases the owner of the land subject to a tenancy— where the tenant is the owner under the Act—the
1832
sporting tenant and, say, a commoner with grazing rights have no rights under Section 22—their only recourse is through Sections 24 and 25.
Management of stock, heather burning, spraying and predator control all require fairly instant decisions. To have to wait for up to six weeks for an approval is, frankly, nonsense. It seems inconceivable that these provisions will not be widely used and, as such, if the Government are to take a pragmatic and practical stance, these regulations will need radical revision.
However, there is an additional and major concern with the draft guidance issued by the agency on how it will exercise its discretion about closures under Sections 24 and 25. It is suggested that it will not generally grant closures unless informal management techniques have been tried first. I am curious to know what informal management techniques mean. Who will pay for these informal management techniques? What happens if they fail? Who will pay for the failures? We should not move into the realms of experimentation. We are talking about people's livelihoods and, indeed, the protection of the public. Will the Minister at least give an assurance that the fanner or landowner will not be out of pocket if such a potentially reckless approach fails and that proper closure mechanisms will be enforced in the absence of success?
I would like to make reference to another difficulty, of which I am sure that the Minister is well aware as it has been flagged up by the CLA on a number of occasions. Under the Animals Act 1971, an owner of livestock is liable for injury caused to a member of the public. As I understand it, even if the owner has taken all reasonable precautions and an injury occurs, he can still be liable under the Act. However, if a closure is in place, that Act does not apply, because anyone who ignores the closure becomes a trespasser and the owner is then not liable under that Act. My legal skills do not run to whether he or she will be liable under another Act, but under the Animals Act liability would cease if a closure order were in place.
It is essential when an owner applies for a closure, based on dangerous livestock, that the agency grants the request. Let us not forget that dangerous livestock could well cover cows with calves at foot, or a bunch of young and rather over-excitable livestock in the presence of a dog. I simply raise that point as it is something that the regulations should cover, as it will present genuine difficulties for farmers and walkers alike unless properly addressed.
I shall move on to my final point, and the one to which I attach the greatest importance. For the sake of good land management, for the sake of those who live and work in access land, and for the sake of the public who wish for enjoyment in the knowledge that they can walk safely, there has to be in place under the Act the most effective means of informing the public when the land is open and when it is closed. I should have thought that that was the one clear overriding objective that would unify all parties. I am bound to say, therefore, that it comes as rather a rude awakening

1833
to many, myself included, to find in the regulations that the Countryside Agency merely has to place a notice on a website informing the public of any closure orders that might be in place. Website information may be used by some, but the majority of walkers, particularly the casual and those on holiday, are highly unlikely to be carrying their laptops in their rucksacks.
We tried—goodness, we tried—to persuade the Government to introduce statutory access points when we were discussing the then Bill but, sadly, without success. In my view, that is the biggest failure of the Act, as it was always going to be the most effective means of informing the general public about what was going on on access land. However, under the CROW Act, there are powers for the local authority to erect signs, but sadly no duty.
Surely the Minister can see the merit in having some common signage system that alerts the general public when access areas are closed, in conjunction with suitable signs in appropriate positions informing the public of what is happening. I always felt that one of the great advantages of statutory access points would be the ability of the access authorities to explain to people what was happening on the land, which would have been a more interesting experience for them.
The noble Lord knows that certain suggestions have been put forward about how a more comprehensive signage system could be worked out. If there is no guidance for such an objective in the regulations, the access authorities are likely to ignore the option, and it will fall on those who own or manage the land to pick up the pieces and the cost of informing the public. That goes against all the assurances made during the passage of the then Bill. I ask the Minister to give a commitment that the regulations will allow for access authorities to help with provision of signs and that the necessary finance will be made available.
The regulations reflect the total lack of resources that the Government are prepared to commit to making the Act work. That is the root cause of the difficulties that we have through the ineffectiveness and paucity, if I may use that word, of the regulations. Unless the public can enjoy the countryside in the knowledge that they are safe, and have confidence in where they go and what they can do, the Act will fail. Equally, land managers must be able to manage without fear of interference or worry. That means proper sympathy and understanding by the access authorities, with the necessary resources to carry out their full responsibility.
Failure to meet those two objectives will lead only to conflict and, as I have already said, that is the one thing that we must all endeavour to avoid. The regulations must reflect a greater sense of reality and urgency, and they need considerable reappraisal. I hope that the Minister will accept that. He knows that I have great concerns about the Act, but I think that he also knows that, above all, I want it to work. I beg to move.
Moved, That an Humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that the order, laid before the House on 24th October, be annulled (S.I. 2003/ 2713).—(Earl Peel.)
Lord Livsey of Talgarth: My Lords, I shall speak only briefly, because the Bill affects England and I am a Welsh Peer. I do not wish to speak about areas where legislation is frankly rather different, as we have been told by the noble Earl. The regulations have been applied somewhat differently by the Countryside Council for Wales in relation to certain measures of access.
I have been a farm manager where there was a grouse moor. I have also been a farm manager in situations where heather burning took place regularly at certain times of year. Trying to speak objectively, no doubt there is a need for notice when such activities take place. In the management of grouse moors, for example, in the situation in which I was involved—it was in Scotland—we deliberately had a very much lower stocking rate to enable the heather to grow. That was to ensure sufficient cover for the young birds. We also produced some fantastic lambs as a result of that low stocking rate.
Flexibility is clearly required, but I support the CROW Act and its access provisions, which are in the process of creating much better access for the public. I understand the noble Earl's plea for management. I have some doubt whether it is necessary to pray against all the regulations. I should have thought that common sense and compromise would prevail where certain situations demanded it.
I know that the younger generation of the farming community is into computers in quite a big way. However, I recently attended a meeting of commoners where 86 commoners turned up. A national park officer said that the information had been put on their website. I stopped the officer from saying any more and asked the audience how many of them had computers and could access the Internet. The answer was that only six out of 80 could do that, so we must be very careful about putting information on the Internet. We live in a twin technology society—the haves and the have nots.
Mention was made of statutory entries on to land, which is foreign to me. For many years in Scotland and in Wales, open hills have had access. I cannot comment on the situation in England, except to say that often there is a point where people gain access on to land and notices are placed there. I make a plea for flexibility in accommodating management, which is important, and the needs of commoners in particular must be taken into account.
There is a balance to be achieved between sporting activities and sporting rights and access to such land. Surely, there is room for a sensible compromise in these matters.
Baroness Byford: My Lords, I support my noble friend Lord Peel and I thank him for his clear introduction of his reasons for raising the issue today.

1835
I, too, carefully went through the statutory instrument, as I am sure did the Minister. We spent hours on the CROW Bill as it went through this House. All of us wanted to ensure that it was workable and practical and that moneys were allocated for the successful implementation of the Act. On reading the statutory instrument, I have several questions for the Minister.
I shall not go into the full details—my noble friend has done so and has spelt them out clearly—but I want to highlight one or two issues. First, my noble friend rightly said that a balance must be struck between the management of the land and the safety of the public. When we took the CROW Bill through the House, we fought hard at all stages to ensure that the public would be safe. My noble friend spoke of the Animals Act and the fact that if a closure is in place the farmer is not liable. The closure relates not only to dangerous animals, and my noble friend mentioned calves at heel with cattle.
Perhaps I may share an experience with the House. Earlier this year, my niece, Julia, was walking through a field of cattle—there were no young at heel—and she had a dog. For whatever reason, the cattle were startled and I am afraid she was trampled underfoot. She managed to get up again, but her hand was broken and her shoulder badly damaged. They were not dangerous animals, but something had obviously upset them. Unfortunately, she made the mistake of hanging on to the dog rather than letting him go, in which case the cattle would have chased the dog. As it was, she was badly trampled. Fortunately she is now all right. My noble friend raises a real problem.
I want to return to some of the discussions we had in the House. My noble friend raised the issue of cost, and I understood from days of debate that the relevant authorities would have money provided for signaging in order to inform the public when land was open and closed. I have looked through the statutory instrument and I am still not clear about the matter.
When we debated the matter in October 2000, the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, clearly said that the duty of the access authority to provide visitor management facilities would be established, but I have not seen that happen. We are talking about closures, not day-to-day management. We could not persuade the Government that it would be helpful to have a central telephone point so that people could ring in order to find out where access land started and finished. But we are not talking about that today; we are talking about closures and how people will know where they are.
The Minister accepted the arguments on that and said:
"We all agree there should be no obligation on landowners to provide the facilities he is talking about. The Bill already allows for such facilities to be provided by the access authority at taxpayers' expense. For example, Clause 19 provides for notices to be erected informing the public of the boundaries of access land. Clause 33 refers to access authorities entering into agreements for the provision of means of access to land. All that is clearly the responsibility of access authorities. They have to make a judgment on their priorities as to where they provide such facilities".— [Official Report, 3/10/2000; col. 1505.]
1836
Has that intention been bypassed or lost in the passing of time?
On 9th October, my noble friend Lord Marlesford referred to costs, saying in relation to Amendment No. 302 on compensation:
"My impression from last week's proceedings is that the Government have largely accepted this. We have already had undertakings that they will pay for signing, for the additional fencing that may be necessary, for the collection of litter and for other items of additional cost".—[Official Report, 9/10/2000; col. 22.]
Where has that intention gone to in the mean time? During the same debate, we dealt with damages and liability. The issue was referred to on many occasions, therefore.
In that same debate, the Minister said:
"However, even in its present form, the Bill contains a significant number of measures that will restrict any cost likely to fall upon the landlord and ensure that other authorities meet the major costs rather than the landowner. Indeed, as we have gone through provisions at some length, I indicated a number of areas that would increase yet further the protection of the landowner in this respect".—[Official Report, 9/10/2000; col. 27.]
I need quote no further—I hope that I am making my point in questioning the validity of the additional costs that this statutory instrument places on landowners.
Furthermore, why had England decided to go down a route different from that taken by Wales? It seems illogical. It appears that exemptions are given to the owners or the tenants, and that people who have sporting or grazing rights do not have any say. I should be grateful if the Minister could clarify that.
In relation to Section 25 and fire and danger to the public, what will happen on defence land? If there has to be an exercise on defence land where access is normally available, how are the public notified? I understood that there were to be red flags at certain points around the area. That is fine if people are accessing the land on walks or at normal points, but the right to roam means that there are no such places. People can access from any point. Are there any lessons we can learn from what happens on MoD land and was that considered when the statutory instrument was raised?
Regulation 4 of the statutory instrument concerns exclusions and restrictions. Paragraph (1) of the regulation refers to:
"Notice given by an entitled person".
Can the Minister tell me exactly who is meant by the "entitled person"? I also ask the Minister whether the Government will do more than simply place notices or information for the public on the web. The recent legislation that we have dealt with in this House has referred only to the web. I should be glad to receive clarification on that point.
I believe that I have covered most points and I shall not repeat what my noble friend said. If I remember correctly, in discussing signage or a central access point where people could obtain information, we talked about a telephone helpline. Can the Minister say what has come of that? It was discussed during the passage of the Bill but has it since been ignored?

1837
Finally, will the Minister confirm that access is likely to kick in at the end of 2004? That is slightly earlier than we had expected as I believe that the date was brought forward. If that is the case, there is a great need to get the statutory instrument right. I believe we all agree that it is vital that the statutory instrument should be workable for land managers and tenants and, more importantly, so that protection is afforded to the public, who should be able to enjoy the countryside safely and with full security.
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: My Lords, I want to raise one or two points but, first, I apologise to the noble Earl, Lord Peel, for missing the first 30 seconds of his speech. I was taken slightly unawares by the speed at which the previous business was taken.
I welcome the publication of the regulations as yet another progress step towards open access becoming a reality. The points that I want to raise cover an area that the noble Earl, Lord Peel, said we would be likely to have in common, and he is absolutely right.
One issue on which I am not clear and about which I should like to hear from the Minister is that of informing the public. We spent a long time on that subject in Committee and we stressed the importance of using websites. But I believe that we imagined that the use of websites would be in addition to use of the local press and leaflets and so on. However, in the regulations it seems that the website will rule and that use might be made of other means if, at its discretion, the access authority sees fit to do so. That will be all well and good where access authorities are conscientious, as I believe they will want to be, but I wish that the regulations had referred to all means.
Part I of the regulations is entitled "Preliminary" and refers to the use of electronic communications. It lays out some of the parameters of using only electronic communications. I ask the Minister whether that is now a tried and tested method or whether Regulation 3 is the first example of such communications being used.
I may be approaching this matter in a different way from the noble Earl, but I believe it is important that the regulations work well. The public will need to know what is open or closed. It will be hugely frustrating for them if they walk a long way to reach a spot only to find that the final part of the walk is closed. They might, for example, have walked to the crest of a hill or have trudged 10 or 12 miles to a spot and it will be very frustrating for them to find that the final part is closed. That would be unacceptable.
The second area that I want to highlight is that of closures for purposes of defence. I am sure the Secretary of State for Defence will be sensitive to that matter. However, the regulations make provision for areas of land to be closed in the long term for purposes of defence, and I believe that sometimes that can be done without any written explanation being given to the public.
On the face of it, I can understand that that may seem reasonable where issues of national security, and so on, arise. However, earlier in the year, I submitted
1838
a number of Written Questions to the Ministry of Defence on the subject of the increasing use of the Defence Act 1842 to close footpaths. I do not intend to list those now because I am aware that the House will not want to spend long on this matter. The Act requires that closed footpaths are replaced by similar footpaths in the same area. However, since 1997 that has not happened in one case. I do not consider the reply given by the Ministry of Defence—that it was not necessary to follow Section 17 of the Defence Act 1842—was adequate.
It would be unacceptable if the Ministry of Defence chose to close without explanation, and chose to leave closed, large areas of open access land. I can understand that at present it is a matter of trust and I hope that the Government will get it right. But it is an issue on which I certainly intend to keep an eye, particularly in view of the attitude over footpath closures. That said, I wish the Countryside and Rights of Way Act good speed, and I look forward to hearing the Minister's reply.
6.30 p.m.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty): My Lords, it is a great delight to return to this subject with many veterans of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act. It was one of the most interesting and extensive pieces of legislation that I have taken through this House, and many exchanges took place, some of which have been recalled today. Although I would not say that we reached consensus on everything, I believe that, by the end, we agreed that we wanted a balanced operation between the great enjoyment and benefit brought to the walking public as a result of the Act and the needs of land management and the rights of landowners to enjoy their land. I hope that that has been the spirit in which we have pursued the regulations. They were developed after a full period of public consultation and after consideration of all the views expressed during that consultation.
The regulations before us today deal only with restrictions and exclusions. Some of the issues raised about more permanent arrangements—particularly some of the questions from the noble Baroness, Lady Byford—are outside the remit of the regulations. The focus of our discussions today is how to deal with temporary closures. The details of much of the system on the ground will not appear in regulations; they will be in statutory guidance. They will be worked out locally between the access authority, landowners and ramblers' associations and the Countryside Agency at national level in consultation with all interested parties. Therefore, some other areas will be covered in regulations but the bulk of them may well come within understandings locally.
I shall focus on the subject of formal exclusions and restrictions. The Act was framed in such a way as to allow rather more flexibility than I believe has been acknowledged this evening. At the simplest level, Section 22 of the Act allows owners of land 28 days, which they can use at their own discretion, to exclude

1839
or restrict access. They do not have to seek the agreement of the relevant authority but the regulations specify that they need to give five days' notice to the relevant authority—that is, the Countryside Agency, the national park authority or Forestry Commission. I can understand why the noble Earl said that, in certain circumstances, that is too long a period. However, in order to allow yet more flexibility, the regulations reduce that notice period to two hours in the case of closures for up to four hours, as the noble Earl acknowledged, or up to five days for closures in relation to smaller areas.
In addition to that, under Section 24, which allows for longer closures of land—there is an interplay between the two situations—the application must be made for a direction to the relevant authority. However, that application can be made by anyone with an interest in the land, including, for example, shooting tenants. In that case, the regulations set out a maximum period of six weeks within which decisions must be made. That has been regarded as too lengthy, but I stress that during the initial set-up period such time may be necessary on an ongoing basis. The guidance will make it clear that the relevant authority should aim to make decisions on straightforward cases well within the statutory time limits.
To address the issue of flexibility and a speedy response, the Act introduced the system of outline directions, which was not mentioned by the noble Earl. Under the directions, those with an interest in the land—this is under Section 24 so it could be a shooting tenant—can approach the relevant authority for an exclusion or a restriction, but the exact time that a restriction will be put in place on a particular piece of land, or indeed on the whole of the land, can be notified, by telephone, at a later date. Once one has the outline restriction, there is great flexibility up to the point when the restriction is activated.
In that case the regulations set the framework for how such notifications will be made and set a maximum of five days, but they allow for a different notice period to be specified in the outline direction. Again, the relevant authority would aim to agree a shorter period in the majority of cases. A provision to allow outline directions was specifically included in the Act and in the regulations to introduce maximum flexibility for the system and to allow the legitimate needs of landowners and of others with an interest in the land to be respected.
Under Sections 22 and 24 there are references to an "entitled person". Under Section 22 an entitled person is either the landowner or a farm tenant, where there is a farm tenant for a farm business tenancy. Clearly, the landowner or the agricultural tenant—as mentioned by the noble Earl—would be able to seek the closure, although the actual triggering of it could be achieved by someone acting on behalf of the landowner or by someone designated by the landowner. It could be someone with shooting rights who specified the precise time in which the provisions of an outline restriction or exclusion could be notified.
1840
Incidentally, that is the Welsh position in relation to Section 22. The difference between the Welsh and the English regulations is not as wide as was suggested, certainly in this respect. However, there is the problem of avoiding a situation—particularly with Section 22 exemptions—where a number of different people could claim to have the authority to decide on a closure. Therefore, it is necessary to determine whether only a limited number of people are entitled to seek a short-term closure, although once they are entitled, they can trigger it.
The wider definition under Section 24 allows for people acting on behalf of individuals to be those with an interest in the land, other than the landowner or the farm business tenant. People with a sporting interest, together with anyone else with a legal interest, would be able to apply to the relevant authority under Section 24, either for the original outline permission or under that outline permission.
The noble Earl referred to informal management techniques as an alternative to closure. They are not quite as he implied. We expect that informal management techniques will often be the simplest way, but there is no requirement for them to be tried before applying for exclusions. There are many examples of other informal management techniques that do not involve total closure, but one does not have to experiment with and pilot them before one can acquire an exclusion order.
There was much concern about publicity and signage. I believe that there is some confusion between what the noble Baroness, Lady Byford, said about the commitments during the debate that relate to general responsibilities for signage and the signage during short-term closures. All the bodies involved in the rollout of the new right of access, and certainly all the access authorities, will undertake the necessary publicity to ensure that people understand the new right and the responsibility that accompanies it. In particular, the Countryside Agency is developing a communications plan that will incorporate regional commencement, guidance on the new right of access to land managers and to the public and their policy on signage, including the new open access symbol.
A request was made during the course of the Bill to limit access to specific access points. The legislation does not provide for that, nor is that implied in the regulations in relation to temporary closures. We have issued guidance to access authorities on the use of their powers under the Act and further guidance will be issued. It will be the responsibility of those who apply for closures—rather than the responsibility of the access authority—to ensure that there is information about and enforcement of the closures.
There may be other means of communicating the closure regime, particularly through the website, but that is the limit of the statutory responsibility for the access authority. Thereafter there may be informal arrangements, through local access forums and through other means, to ensure that temporary closures can be more clearly signed, but the ultimate responsibility for that will be with the landowner.

1841
We shall not rely on the website only; the guidance will provide for wider provision of information, but not on every individual short-term closure.
Baroness Byford: My Lords, perhaps the Minister could clarify one point. Will noble Lords be able to ask questions once he has finished his response or should we seek clarification before then? He says that the responsibility will be on the landowner to ensure that people know whether there is access or not. How are they supposed to do that if there is no particular access point? I apologise to the Minister but I am in a dilemma on the procedure. Perhaps I should look to the Clerk.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, the normal rules will apply. Questions will not be taken after I have sat down. If the noble Baroness wishes to interrupt, she may do so.
Baroness Byford: My Lords, therefore I ask the noble Lord to respond to my question, which I had thought I would ask later.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I am not saying that the landowner will be required to put up signs all over the place, but there is no responsibility on the access authority to provide signage for temporary closure. Therefore, if the landowner feels that there is a need for further information, that is the responsibility of the landowner or other entitled person who has requested the closure and not the responsibility of the access authority.
Clearly, we wish the procedure to work not in a regulated way, but in an informal and partnership manner between the access authority, the local landowners, the Ramblers' Association and others through local access forums and through local arrangements. There may be ways established locally that will give better guidance and, in addition to the website, there may be an individual point in an area where people can consult. We were talking about such matters for a more permanent scheme but they could also apply to temporary closures. The agency intends to establish a central restrictions unit, so there will be different ways in which members of the public can obtain details of restrictions and exclusions. That is not provided for in the regulations, but it is part of the invention of the Countryside Agency, which—to answer another of the questions of the noble Baroness—may well include in its final form a telephone hotline.
It is true that in certain circumstances the access authority may well decide that it should issue notices. But that is not an obligation on the access authority for every closure. Clearly, the authorities have the power under the Act to issue notices. That is slightly different from just putting up notices, and there is a slightly different situation, for example, where for a conservancy reason the closure is being sought on behalf of the authority itself. That is not at the landowner's initiative but at the authority's. So there are different situations.
1842
The noble Baroness also referred to defence land. Under present arrangements the Ministry of Defence can of course make restrictions for defence purposes on what is otherwise accessible land. The Act and the regulations do not change that. Although a great deal of defence land is fenced—and that is clear as there are only a few access points and red flags—much defence land is normally open access—for example, Salisbury Plain—and the Ministry of Defence when carrying out exercises has to sign to the public that access is not available. That applied before the Act and will apply after it.
The question of footpaths is slightly different. It relates to rights of way rather than access, but clearly the Ministry of Defence has responsibilities there as well.
The final point relates to finances. We need to ensure that the access authorities and others involved have adequate finances so that they can manage the scheme as a whole—closures and so forth. We have made generous settlements to the national park authorities in the past two financial years. Those settlements take account of the need to prepare for the new right of access in national park areas. We are also considering the authorities' bids for funds in 2004-05, so that they do not lack the resources to meet these challenges.
On local authorities, the Countryside Agency has produced outline proposals for a grant scheme. The agency has been asked to spell out how its ideas would work in practice. We await its proposals, so that it can assist local authorities in carrying out their powers under the Act.
So funds are available to the national park authorities, the Countryside Agency itself and of course to the local authorities via the Countryside Agency to ensure that we have adequate provision for implementation.
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: My Lords, will the funds given to local authorities be in proportion to the amount of open access land they have; in proportion to the amount of people using that open access land; or just on the normal funding formula? An answer in writing would be fine.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I may be able to give the answer to the noble Baroness in writing, but not now. Clearly, the Countryside Agency is considering how the grants should operate. They will be grants and not part of the general settlement, except in so far as general provision has been made. So they will not be based on some other formulae. I am at this point unable to specify the precise formula. The Countryside Agency is still working on the matter.
I hope that that has dealt with most of the points raised. I shall check Hansard to see whether I need to write to noble Lords about any other points.
Baroness Carnegy of Lour: My Lords, before the noble Lord sits down, I hope he does not mind my popping up because I did not involve myself with the

1843
Bill. I am not clear about what he said about what my noble friend Lord Peel said. What happens if part of a landowner's business is a rough shoot syndicate of, say, local tradesmen—the local butcher, baker and so on—who come together in a syndicate for which the local landowner arranges? The landowner asks the tenant farmer if he will apply for a closure of the land for this purpose. The tenant farmer, who perhaps is not particularly friendly with the local butcher, says that he will not. The shoot goes ahead. There has been no closure. Who is liable if there is an accident?
6.45 p.m.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I do not think that I should get into the last part of that question of relative liability. It is clear that the entitled person is either the landowner or, in certain circumstances, the agricultural tenant. If the landowner should say in either his outline restriction or more generally that for shooting purposes someone acts on his behalf, provided that is made clear in the outline arrangements, the shoot might in certain circumstances be the person to trigger the closure— although "trigger" is probably not the right word in this respect. But in most circumstances the agricultural tenant, if it is a farm business tenancy—so not any old agricultural tenant—would be the appropriate person. If he had not sought the closure it would not be a legal closure under these restrictions, as I understand it. However, I am getting close to the liability question, so I think that I had better shut up at this point, and, if necessary, write to the noble Baroness.
Earl Peel: My Lords, I am grateful to all noble Lords who have taken part in this little debate on the regulations. The noble Lord, Lord Livsey, quite rightly referred to the situation in Wales as being somewhat more pragmatic than that which the Minister and his officials have come up with in this country.
My noble friend Lady Byford was so right when she said: "We want the Act to work". She went on to say that resources must be made available. The Minister spoke about resources at the end of his winding-up speech. I am bound to say that—if I can use this term— the word on the street is that resources are somewhat scarce. I am far from convinced that the access
1844
authorities, or indeed the Countryside Agency, will actually have the necessary resources to be able to carry out their responsibilities effectively.
The noble Baroness, Lady Miller, talked about the importance of informing the public. She was absolutely right when she said—and I understood it to be so—that the website is a secondary mechanism. The prime objective is to inform people on the ground what is actually happening. I maintain that this is the only effective way to let the public know what is happening and to safeguard the interests of those who have to look after and manage the land. I am bound to say that the Minister's reply did not exactly fill me with confidence.
My noble friend Lady Carnegy raised a very interesting point. It was right at the nub of the whole difficulty of the interpretation of who can apply for a closure order under Section 22. I think that the technical answer to her question is that if it was tenanted land, the tenant was an owner under the Act and the tenant did not wish for the shooting syndicate to have any of the available 28 days, the syndicate would have to apply under Section 24. That of course is at the discretion of the local access authority, which could turn it down. So we have a very real problem here. My noble friend was absolutely right to raise the matter as she did. It was a very succinct way to demonstrate the real problems and difficulties that we have in the Act—and indeed through the regulations.
I hear what the Minister says about partnerships. "Partnership" is a great word, and it can work if there is genuine desire by all parties to make it work. But it comes down to the fundamental question of whether the resources will be made available—it is there that I fear the Government will let us down. I will read the Minister's remarks with great interest. Equally, I hope that he will read with great interest what I and other noble Lords have said, in the hope that he might consider that some of the issues that we have raised point towards future difficulties.
I repeat the most important point of all: if the legislation is to work, we must avoid conflict. That is the key. Unless the regulations are considered much more seriously, conflict will occur and the legislation will be deemed a failure. I hope that that does not happen. In the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the Motion.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
House adjourned at nine minutes before seven o'clock.

  North/South Implementation Bodies: Funding
  North/South Implementation Bodies: Funding
  Northern Ireland: Mental Health Tribunal Rules
  Northern Ireland: Mental Health Tribunal Rules
  Northern Ireland Government Offices: Cleaning
  Northern Ireland Government Offices: Cleaning
  Northern Ireland Parliament 1921–1972: Legislation
  Northern Ireland Parliament 1921–1972: Legislation
  Belfast: Waterways
  Belfast: Waterways
  Iraq: Gender Experts
  Iraq: Gender Experts
  Cameroon
  Cameroon
  Indonesia: Use of British-built Military Equipment in Aceh
  Indonesia: Use of British-built Military Equipment in Aceh
  Iraq: Unemployment
  Iraq: Unemployment
  Peacekeeping: UNSCR 1325
  Peacekeeping: UNSCR 1325
  Vietnam: Unified Buddhist Church
  Vietnam: Unified Buddhist Church
  Ceuta and Melilla: European Parliamentary Elections 2004
  Ceuta and Melilla: European Parliamentary Elections 2004
  Fourth Geneva Convention: Civilians in the Occupied Territories
  Fourth Geneva Convention: Civilians in the Occupied Territories
  Somaliland
  Somaliland
  Democratic Republic of Congo
  Democratic Republic of Congo
  Saudi Arabia: British Citizens in Detention
  Saudi Arabia: British Citizens in Detention
  Middle East
  Middle East
  Guantanamo Bay: Legal Status of Detainees
  Guantanamo Bay: Legal Status of Detainees
  FCO Annual Report on Human Rights 2003
  FCO Annual Report on Human Rights 2003
  Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission Ruling
  Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission Ruling
  Afghanistan: Police Training
  Afghanistan: Police Training
  Ascension Island: Wideawake Airfield
  Ascension Island: Wideawake Airfield
  Kosovo: UNSCR 1244
  Kosovo: UNSCR 1244
  Rough Sleepers: Westminster Cathedral Piazza
  Rough Sleepers: Westminster Cathedral Piazza
  Planning: Obligations and Charges
  Planning: Obligations and Charges
  Homeless Households: Temporary Accommodation
  Homeless Households: Temporary Accommodation
  Overseas Students
  Overseas Students
  Asylum Reform
  Asylum Reform
  Anti-social Behaviour Orders
  Anti-social Behaviour Orders
  Halloween
  Halloween
  Asylum Seekers: Detention
  Asylum Seekers: Detention
  Failed Asylum Seekers: Support
  Failed Asylum Seekers: Support
  Work Permits
  Work Permits
  Immigration Policy: ECJ Ruling in Akrich Case
  Immigration Policy: ECJ Ruling in Akrich Case
  People Trafficking
  People Trafficking
  Public Schools: Charitable Status
  Public Schools: Charitable Status
  Immigration Detainees: Language Support
  Immigration Detainees: Language Support
  Immigration Detainees: Children
  Immigration Detainees: Children
  Racial Discrimination: Political Parties
  Racial Discrimination: Political Parties
  Gulf War 1990–91: Vaccines
  Gulf War 1990–91: Vaccines
  War Widows
  War Widows
  Armed Forces: Review of Pension and Compensation Arrangements
  Armed Forces: Review of Pension and Compensation Arrangements
  London Student Pledge
  London Student Pledge
  Pension Protection Fund
  Pension Protection Fund
  State Pension
  State Pension
  Housing Benefit
  Housing Benefit
  Tax Credits
  Tax Credits
  FSA: Market Misconduct and Enforcement Action
  FSA: Market Misconduct and Enforcement Action
  Business Banking Code
  Business Banking Code
  Licensing Act 2003: National Guidance
  Licensing Act 2003: National Guidance
  Liquor Licences: Brewster Sessions 2004
  Liquor Licences: Brewster Sessions 2004
  Reports on the Observance of Standards and Codes
  Reports on the Observance of Standards and Codes
  NHS Trusts: Private Patients
  NHS Trusts: Private Patients
  NHS Foundation Trusts: Reimbursement
  NHS Foundation Trusts: Reimbursement
  Honey
  Honey
  Nuclear Waste: Disposal
  Nuclear Waste: Disposal
  Countryside Agency: Access Rights and Maps
  Countryside Agency: Access Rights and Maps