§ Mr. Terlezkiasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) in view of the nuclear disaster in the Ukraine, if he is satisfied that civil defence in the United Kingdom is sufficiently staffed and is able to respond to emergencies, in cases of nuclear fallout; and if he will make a statement;
(2) in view of the nuclear disaster at Chernobyl in the Ukraine, if he will consider increasing the grants for civil defence purposes; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Giles ShawCivil defence resources in this country can often be used to advantage against peacetime emergencies, but there has been no significant role for them in the response to the effects of the explosion at Chernobyl. We are separately examining the resources available to local authorities as a part of the assessment of their civil defence preparedness.
§ Mr. Terlezkiasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the total capital grant given to South Glamorgan county council for civil defence purposes; how the money is being used, from the latest available information; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Giles ShawIn the financial year 1984–85, the most recent year for which final figures are available, South Glamorgan county council received £61,518.86 civil defence grant on net audited expenditure of £79,863.56. The main elements were the county emergency planning team, the provision and equipping of emergency centres, staff training in civil defence, and the rental of emergency communications equipment.
In common with all other county level authorities in England and Wales South Glamorgan county council was asked on 21 January 1985 to complete its plans under the Civil Defence (General Local Authority Functions) Regulations 1983 and to send copies to us by 15 January 1986. In the absence of any response from South Glamorgan, officials wrote to the council on 25 February to say that my right hon. Friend required copies of the plans and to draw attention to regulation 6(f) of the Civil Defence (Grant) Regulations 1953 under which grant may be withheld if a document that has been required is not provided. The council responded by sending copies of plans which dealt only with peacetime emergencies. The council was informed on 3 April that, subject to considering any representations it might wish to make, my right hon. Friend proposed to withhold £45,518 from the 399W grant that would otherwise be payable for 1985–86, until such time as the plans required were received. We are now awaiting the council's representations.