To ask the Attorney-General if he will list the buildings currently owned or rented by his Department, together with (a) the estimated value, (b) the annual rent and (c) the annual maintenance cost of each building in the current financial year.

The Departments for which I am responsible—the legal secretariat to the Law Officers, the Crown Prosecution Service, the Treasury Solicitor's Department and the Serious Fraud Office—occupy accommodation in 148 buildings in England and Wales, all of which form part of the common user estate which is administered by Property Holdings. The Secretary of State for the Environment will include the rent and maintenance costs borne by Property Holdings of this accommodation in his answer to a similar question from the hon. Member. The internal maintenance costs for the accommodation, when borne by Departments, are included with expenditure for other works and the information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Title	Date let	Duration
Technical advice on aircraft emissions/air quality	April 1991	1 year
Hazards from residual fuel oils	June 1991	8 months
Clean up of rocky shorelines	October 1991	6 months
Oil thickness measurement	November 1991	3 years
Bulk cargoes: Japanese penetration method	December 1991	3 months
Sampling of operational discharge at sea	January 1992	4 months
Drainage and settlement: Iron ore concentrate—Phase 3	January 1992	4 months
Technical advice on aircraft emissions/air quality	April 1992	1 year
Review of bioremediation techniques	April 1992	9 months
Use of demulsifiers	June 1992	3 years
Fate of chemicals feasibility study	June 1992	6 months
Review of refined products	June 1992	20 months
Dispersion—natural and chemically enhanced	July 1992	6 months
Feasibility study to forecast fuel consumption and exhaust emissions	September 1992	8 months
Eurospill (oil spill model) Extension	September 1992	9 months
Vapour cloud dispersion	October 1992	6 months
Review of sorbents	October 1992	1 year
Drainage and settlement: Iron ore concentrate—Phase 4	October 1992	8 months
Emission tests on catalyst cars	November 1992	2 months
In-situ burning of oil	November 1992	3 months
Inservice performance of oily water separators and bilge monitors	November 1992	3 months
Modelling of sinking chemicals	February 1993	4 months
Assessment of emission abatement (cold conditions)	March 1993	2 years

The Department's plans for future research are set out in our research newsletter for 1993–94, copies of which are in the Library of the House.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what was the budget of the Transport Research Laboratory in each of the last three years and the current year.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what considerations he imposed on Transportation Planning Associates, the consultants appointed to carry out the trans-Pennine study, over the use of data gathered as part of the study for purposes beyond the preparation of their report.

It is my Department's practice that consultants may make use of published reports for their own purposes, but that any unpublished material remains the Department's intellectual property. The Department's permission must be sought before unpublished material is used for consultants' own purposes or made available to outside parties.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many research contracts he has awarded to Warren Spring Laboratory in the last two years; if he will provide full details of each contract; and what arrangements for research into (a) vehicle emissions and (b) clean-up technology for oil spillages he envisages on the next 12 months.The following contracts have been let:

The Transport Research Laboratory became an executive agency on 1 April 1992, and expenditure information was published in the "Department of Transport Report 1993", Cm 2206. It is repeated in the table for the years in question.

	£ million
1990–91 Outturn	32·6
1991–92 Outturn	35·2
1992–93 Estimated Outturn	38·2
1993–94 Plans	34·1

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will support the efforts of the Turkish Government to improve the safety standards of international shipping in the Bosphorus.

The Turkish Government put forward an information paper at the last meeting of the maritime safety committee of the International Maritime Organisation, which outlined proposals for improved control of navigation in the Bosphorus. Our policy is to support all sound initiatives for improving the safety of shipping, and we shall offer constructive assistance when the Turkish Government submit formal proposals to the International Maritime Organisation.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what proposals he has for progressing further the consultation on the channel tunnel rail link, in particular with reference to the Boxley valley.

Union Railways will be arranging special meetings for two sections of the route of Ashford and Detling to Boxley. For each of these sections, more than one route option was identified in Union Railway's report. I am clear that, based on the facts in the report, the route for consultation announced by the Government in March is the right choice. The special meetings will be an opportunity for those concerned about the choice between route options to satisfy themselves on all the facts, and for material factual differences, if any, to be identified and brought to Ministers' attention.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what changes he proposes to make to the cash limits and running costs limits for his Department for 1993–94.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary revised estimate, the cash limit for class VI, vote 5 will be reduced by £5,801,000 from £495,744,000 to £489,943,000. This reduction will be offset by a corresponding increase on the Department of Transport/ local authority capital non-voted cash limit from £451,334,000 to £457,135,000 to enable the Greater Manchester passenger transport executive to repay public transport facilities grant following the receipt of European regional development fund grant and will not therefore add to the planned total of public expenditure.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will show the number of (a) locomotives, (b) high-speed trains and (c) coaching vehicles owned by British Rail in 1979 and 1992.

The information requested is as follows:

	1979	1992
Locomotives
Diesel	3,261	1,634
Electric	310	262

	1979	1992
High speed trains (power units)	136	197
Coaching vehicles	20,963	12,925

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will give the time of call and country of destination of radio communication calls from the MV Braer via Wick Radio, Shetland Radio or Collafirth Radio between 8 am on 4 January and 5 am on 5 January.

None.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will detail the steps taken by his Department and the marine pollution control unit in response to recommendations 74 and 75 in the eighth report of the Royal Commission on environmental pollution regarding the use of dispersants to deal with oil spills; and if he will make a statement.

I refer the hon. Member to pollution paper No. 20 of 1983, which sets out the Government response to the royal commission report. Since its publication, the MPCU has considerably increased its capacity for dealing with oil spills and, with its contractor Air Atlantique and with Warren Spring Laboratory, has developed consider-able expertise in the use of aerial spraying of dispersants and aerial surveillance. In addition, the MPCU has four ship-based oil recovery systems ready to deploy in vessels of opportunity and stockpiles of booms, skimmers and other recovery and clean-up equipment. Details of the arrangements for dealing with pollution arising from spillages of oil from ships into the marine environment are set out in the marine pollution control unit's national contingency plan. This was revised in May 1993 and copies have been placed in the Library of the House.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list those organisations which have made representations to him regarding proposed cuts in funding under section 11 of the Local Government Act 1966.

In addition to letters from, or on behalf of, staff, governors or parents from schools and other educational institutions, written observations have been received from the following:

• Age Concern
• Association of County Councils
• Association of LEA Advisory Officers for Multicultural Education
• Association of London Authorities
• Association of Metropolitan Authorities
• Association of Teachers and Lecturers
• County of Avon
• Bedfordshire County Council
• Berkshire County Council
• Birmingham City Council
• Blackburn Racial Equality Council
• Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council
• London Borough of Brent
• Bristol City Council
• Buckinghamshire County Council
• Burnley and Pendle Racial Equality Council
• Burnley Borough Council
• Burton-on-Trent Pakistani Welfare Association
• Bury Metropolitan Borough Council
• Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council
• Cambridgeshire County Council
• London Borough of Camden
• Cleveland County Council
• Coventry City Council
• Coventry Racial Equality Council
• London Borough of Croydon
• Derbyshire County Council
• Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council
• London Borough of Ealing
• East Sussex County Council
• London Borough of Enfield
• Enfield Racial Equality Council
• Free Church Federal Council
• Gloucester City Council
• Gosford Asian Group
• London Borough of Greenwich
• London Borough of Hackney
• London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham
• Hampshire County Council
• London Borough of Harrow
• Harrow Council for Racial Justice
• Hemel Hemstead Muslim Welfare Association
• Hereford and Worcester County Council
• London Borough of Hillingdon
• London Borough of Hounslow
• Humberside County Council
• London Borough of Islington
• Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
• Kensington and Chelsea Teachers Association
• Kent County Council
• Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council
• Lancashire County Council
• Leeds City Council
• Leicester City Council
• Leicestershire County Council
• Leicestershire Gujerati Hindu Association
• The Library Association
• Lincolnshire County Council
• London Boroughs Association
• London Borough of Lewisham
• London Boroughs Grants Unit
• Manchester City Council
• London Borough of Merton
• Merton African Caribbean Association
• Middlesbrough Borough Council
• National Association of Headteachers
• National Association of Schoolmasters and Union Women Teachers
• National Union of Teachers
• Newcastle Upon Tyne City Council
• London Borough of Newham
• Newham Bengali National Association
• Northamptonshire Race Relations Advisory Council
• North Staffordshire Racial Equality Council
• Northern Race Relations Advisers Group
• Norwich City Council
• Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council
• Preston Borough Council
• Professional Association of Teachers
• Reading Bangladeshi Association
• Refugee Council
• London Borough of Redbridge
• Redditch Borough Council
• Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
• Rossendale Borough Council
• Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council
• Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council
• Scunthorpe Borough Council
• Secondary Heads Association
• Sheffield City Council
• Slough Borough Council
• South Glamorgan County Council
• London Borough of Southwark
• Southwark Diocesan Board of Education
• Staffordshire County Council
• Staffordshire Federation of Mosques
• Staffordshire Pakistani Welfare Association
• Stevenage Chinese Class Association
• Stevenage Gujerati Hindu Association
• Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council
• Suffolk County Council
• Sunderland City Council
• Sussex Racial Equality Council
• London Borough of Sutton
• Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council
• London Borough of Tower Hamlets
• Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council
• Union of Buckinghamshire Racial Equality Councils
• Warwickshire County Council
• Watford Afro Caribbean Association
• Watford Borough Council
• Welwyn Garden City Islamic Society
• West Midlands Fire Service
• Westminister City Council
• West Sussex County Council
• Wimbledon Mosque
• Worcester Racial Equality Council

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prisoners in the Humberside and East Midlands region escaped from (a) prison service escort and (b) police service escort in each of the last five years; and from what type of escorting vehicle the escapes were made.

Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the director general of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps he has taken to discharge the requirements of the EC directives commonly known as the framework and workplace directives; what assessment he has made of the benefit of an extended and replacement designating order by virtue of section 1(2) (f) of the Fire Precautions Act 1971 for places of work, compared to making regulations under section 12 of the 1971 Act.

The health and non-fire safety requirements of the framework and workplace directives have been implemented by regulations made by my right hon. Friend. the Secretary of State for Employment. As to implementing the fire safety requirements, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave him on 7 June, Official Report, column 68.Consideration was given at the outset to implementing those requirements by making a designation order under section 1 of the Fire Precautions Act. We concluded, however, that such action would place unacceptably high burdens on employers and fire authorities. The use of regulations should, in our view, be less onerous and enable

Awards
	£800-£999	£1,000-£1,999	£l,000-£2,999
1986–87	2,256
1987–88	2,250
1988–89	3,489
1990–91	4,357	10,031
1991–92			17,296
1992–93	[information not yet available]

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what plans he has to change (a) the £1,000 lower limit, (b) the treatment of compensation payments as capital for benefit purposes and (c) the conduct and character of the victim rule as part of his review of the criminal injuries compensation scheme;(2) when he expects to publish his review of the criminal injuries compensation scheme.

The criminal injuries compensation scheme is not being reviewed. In his reply to a question from my right hon. Friend the Member for Westminster, North (Sir J. Wheeler) on 23 November 1992, Official Report, column 457, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (Mr. Clarke) announced that the Government intended to replace the present criminal injuries compensation scheme with a tariff scheme next year to provide a more straightforward service to claimants. We intend to publish details of the new scheme, including decisions on a lower limit and on the relevance of the conduct and character of the victim, in a White Paper later this summer.The treatment of compensation payments as capital for benefit purposes is a matter for the Secretary of State for Social Security. I understand that he has no plans to change the present arrangements.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many payments of between £1,000 and £1,500 were awarded under the criminal injuries compensation scheme in each of the last two years; and if he will provide a regional breakdown of such payments;(2) how many payments of between £850 and £1,000 were made under the criminal injuries compensation scheme in each of the five years prior to the raising of the lower limit to £1,000; and if he will provide a regional breakdown of such payments.

Details of awards made by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board within various bands are given in the board's published annual reports. Copies are held in the Library.The number of awards between £850 and £1,000, and between £1,000 and £1,500, is not given, but the table summarises the most recent information about the nearest equivalent bands. Information about the regional breakdown of awards is not collected centrally.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will publish in the Official Report the letter of 20 May from the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State to the hon. and learned Member for Burton containing the Government's response to the Home Affairs Committee's fourth report, Session 1992–93, on immigration advice post-UKIAS, HC 546.

The following is the text of the letter:

"In this letter, with the agreement of Kenneth Clarke, I am giving you the Government's response to the fourth report of the Home Affairs Committee published on 9 March entitled 'Immigration Advice Post-UKIAS'.

The Committee's Report commended the Planning Group led by Mr. Malins for producing their Report. As you are aware, in a written answer to a Parliamentary Question from Sir John Wheeler on 16 March, I announced that we had asked the Planning Group to take steps to implement their proposals and establish the new body outlined in their Report. We have drawn the Committee's Fourth Report to the attention of the Planning Group so that they may consider the recommendations it contains.

We have noted the concern expressed by the Committee on the proposal that the governing body of the Immigration Appeals Advisory Service should be entirely appointed. Our chief concern has to be that the new organisation should be constituted and structured so as to be able to meet its obligations under Charity Law and to satisfy us that there is proper accountability for grant paid. The proposals made in the Planning Group's Report satisfied these criteria and that Group is proceeding to implement them.

The Committee also refers to the recommendation contained in its Report 'Delays in the Immigration and Nationality Department' that the IAAS should take the lead in establishing a register of reputable agencies in the immigration field. It notes that the Planning Group's proposal on extension and maintenance of liaison with other advice groups and immigration law practitioners could be extended to meet this recommendation. The Government's response to the Committee's Report confirmed that this recommendation had been drawn to the attention of both the Planning Group and the Law Society and that, should such a list (or lists) be drawn up, the Government would be ready to consider making it available to applicants.

I am copying this letter to John Greenway and placing copies in the Library of the House."

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what are the criteria for deciding whether and when military intervention is required when protecting Bosnian safe areas.

UNPROFOR forces throughout Muslim-held territory in Bosnia will continue to closely monitor the situation on the ground and provide the UN command with judgments as to whether, and in what form, it would be necessary to counter any acts of aggression against the safe areas. We and others have declared our willingness, in accordance with United Nations Security Council resolution 836, to make air power available to protect UNPROFOR in the safe areas.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what proposals the Government have for strengthening the rules of engagement for troops guarding the safe areas in Bosnia.

United Nations Security Council resolution 836 authorises UNPROFOR, acting in self-defence, to take necessary measures including the use of force to reply to bombardment of the safe areas in Bosnia, armed incursion into those areas, and the obstruction of either relief convoys or of the troops themselves. The resolution also provides for the use of air power in and around safe areas to support UNPROFOR in the performance of its mandate. We and others have declared our willingness to make air power available for this purpose.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many cases are currently proceeding against Her Majesty's Government at the European Court of Justice.

Four.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what was the waiting time for cases, involving Her Majesty's Government, to be judged by the European Court of Justice, over the past seven years; and what is the expected waiting time for cases commencing (a) this year and (b) in the next three years; and if he will make a statement.

It is not possible without disproportionate cost to give the waiting time for cases involving Her Majesty's Government over the past seven years. However, the court has confirmed that the average waiting time for references from all member states to the European Court in 1991 was 18·5 months, and 24·2 months for all direct actions. The average waiting time in 1992 increased to 18·8 months for references and 25·8 months for direct actions. It is not possible to make any predictions about future litigation before the European Court of Justice.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) if he will make a statement on the details of the United Kingdom Government's policy towards devising or strengthening appropriate mechanisms or powers for implementing the universal adherence of existing United Nations human rights standards and the enforcement of international legal agreements on human rights in advance of the UN world conference on human rights in Vienna on 14 to 25 June;(2) what current initiatives he is promoting within the United Nations to strengthen appropriate mechanisms or powers for implementing the universal adherence of existing United Nations human rights standards and the enforcement of international legal agreements on human rights; and if he will make a statement;(3) if he will make a statement outlining the United Kingdom Government's policy and specific proposals to strengthen appropriate mechanisms or powers for implementing the universal adherence to UN human rights standards and the enforcement of international legal agreements on human rights;(4) if he will make a statement on his policy towards the proposals before the United Nations conference on human rights to be held in Vienna on 14 to 25 June to give consideration to the creation of a UN permanent commissioner for human rights and an international court for human rights.

We regard the implementation of universal human rights standards as a high priority. We recognise the need to strengthen the role of the UN Centre for Human Rights which is the UN body mainly responsible for human rights work. With our EC partners, we have proposed that the post of director of the centre be upgraded to that of Under Secretary-General for Human Rights or High Commissioner for Human Rights. We have also co-sponsored resolutions at the UN General Assembly and the UN Commission on Human Rights calling for the centre to be given a greater share of the existing UN regular budget. We will continue to work towards these objectives at the world conference on human rights.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what role his Department has played in preparations for the United Nations world conference on human rights in Vienna on 14 to 25 June.

We have been represented at the four preparatory meetings held in advance of the UN world conference on human rights. We shall also play an active role at the conference itself.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he intends to make a substantive submission to the world conference on human rights in Vienna on 14 to 25 June.

I will lead the United Kingdom delegation to the world conference on human rights, and I will address the conference on behalf of Her Majesty's Government.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he expects to receive a copy of the final agenda for the United Nations world conference on human rights in Vienna on 14 to 25 June; and if it will be made available to the general public.

The agenda for the forthcoming world conference on human rights was adopted as the annex to resolution 47/122 of last year's United Nations General Assembly. As such, it is freely available to the general public.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will publish the list of (a) delegates and (b) observers who will represent the United Kingdom at the United Nations world conference on human rights in Vienna on 14 to 25 June, and the non-governmental organisation to which each belongs, where appropriate.

I refer the hon. Lady to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Clydebank and Milngavie (Mr. Worthington) on 13 May, at column 559. The precise composition of the delegation is being finalised, and will be transmitted to the conference organisers in due course.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will make a statement on the growth and development of industrial heritage tourism.

As the birthplace of the industrial revolution, Britain has a uniquely rich industrial heritage, which is of interest to both domestic and overseas visitors. The English tourist board has identified industrial heritage tourism as a growth area, and launched its promotional campaign "Experience the Making of Britain" earlier this year, in partnership with the private sector. The English tourist board will evaluate the effect of the campaign later this year. I understand that early indications are encouraging.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage if he will make a statement on his policy for assisting the conservation of manuscripts.

My right hon. Friend and I recognise the vital importance of the conservation of manuscripts in preserving the nation's heritage. The Department provides an annual grant to the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts, enabling it to promote and assist the preservation of historical records. The Government were also instrumental in setting up in 1989 the National Manuscripts Conservation Trust for which they make annual funding available to provide assistance to owners and custodians in preserving manuscripts, documents and archives of national importance. In addition, Government funding for the new British Library building at St. Pancras will allow better preservation of the national collections for present and future users in a pollution-free environment.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage, pursuant to his statement of 11 December 1992, Official Report, columns 1123–33, when he expects to publish the consultant's report on the organisation and structure of the Arts Council; and if he will make a statement.

Last December, I announced my conclusions on the appropriate balance between central and local decision making on funding. I made clear that the delegation of additional funding responsibilities to the regional arts boards and the devolution of the Scottish and Welsh Arts Councils would have implications for the size and structure of the Arts Council. At my request, and with full co-operation at all levels of the Arts Council, Price Waterhouse has now examined these organisational issues. I have now published its report.Price Waterhouse has conducted a very full analysis, involving wide consultation both within the Arts Council and outside. Its recommendations include:

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what changes will be made to his Department's cash limits or running cost limits for 1993–94.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary revised and new estimates and of the National Lottery etc. Bill, the following changes will be made:

(i) The cash limit for Class XI, Vote 7 (Department of National Heritage administration) will be reduced by £1,426,000 to £25,294,000. The reduction in the cash limit is the net result of a transfer of £1,500,000 to a New Estimate for Class XI, Vote 8, to provide for the anticipated administrative and operational costs of the Office of the National Lottery, offset partly by an increase in provision of £74,000 for the introduction of the repayment for services provided by the Chessington Computer Centre.

(ii) The departmental gross running costs control limit will also be reduced by £1,426,000 from £31,282,000 to £29,856,000 as a result of these changes.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what targets he has set for the Historic Royal Palaces agency.

The following targets have been set for the Historic Royal Palaces agency for the financial year 1993–94:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many Select Committee recommendations have been made about his Department since April 1989; and how many have been accepted.

Since April 1989 the Environment Select Committee has published 27 reports. Details, together with the relevant Government responses, are as follows:SESSION 1988–89

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what proportion of the United Kingdom population is estimated to be exposed to night-time noise levels in excess of 65 dB(A); what assessment he has made of the health effects of such exposure; and what plans he has to meet the targets for noise reduction contained in the European Community's fifth environmental action programme.

Results from a noise incidence study of England and Wales carried out as part of my Department's noise research programme indicate that under 1 per cent. of the population is exposed to night-time noise levels above 65dB(A). Research in this area has not so far shown scientifically demonstrable links between night-time noise levels, loss of sleep and effects on health, but this area is being kept under review.The importance of a quieter night-time noise environment is recognised in my Department's draft planning policy guidance note on planning and noise. It suggests a group of four noise exposure categories, in which different planning constraints on noise sensitive development are appropriate. Recommended noise levels for each category are set out in the draft guidance for both day-time exposure—07.00 to 23.00—and night-time exposure—23.00–07.00. Where relevant, the suggested noise level figures take account of, and broadly reflect, the EC fifth environment action programme. The draft guidance, a copy of which is in the Library, also offers more general advice on night-time noise exposure issues.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will give details of the London Docklands development corporation expenditure for 1992–93 broken down into (a) administration, (b) environmental improvements, (c) land acquisitions, (d) land reclamation, (e) services and utilities, (f) roads, (g) the docklands light railway, (h) industry support, (i) social facilities, (j) housing and (k) promotion and publicity.

The London Docklands development corporation's estimated expenditure for 1992–93, comprised of grant in aid and receipts, was as follows:

	£ million
(a)Administration: (including estate management)	21·1
(b)Environmental Improvements	5·4
(c)Land acquisitions	7·7
(d)Land reclamation	3·8
(e)Services and Utilities	1·1
(f)Roads (including Limehouse Link)	82·1
(g)The Docklands Light Railway (Beckton extension)	52·7
(h)Industry support	0·1
(i)Social facilities	8·2
(j)Housing	4·0
(k)Promotion and publicity	2·7

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the cost to the London Docklands development corporation of the banquet to celebrate the completion of the Limehouse link road held on Friday 7 May.

The LDDC's contribution to the Limehouse link community dinner was £27,750. Other costs were met largely through support from local businesses.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the London Docklands develop-ment corporation's income from the sale of land in 1992–93; and what is the projected income for 1993–94.

LDDC's income from the sale of land for 1992–93 was £20·014 million and the expected income for 1993–94 is £20·027 million.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made towards the winding up of the LDDC.

Discussions are taking place between LDDC and the three docklands boroughs about the progressive withdrawal of the LDDC from the more developed parts of the designated area.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what action the United Kingdom is taking to prevent the eutrophication of those water bodies which will not be identified as sensitive areas under the EC urban waste water treatment directive because the source of nutrients is from a sewage works of less than 10,000 population equivalent in size;(2) what mechanisms he will employ to protect sites of high nature conservation interest from damage due to nutrient enrichment water courses.

The National Rivers Authority will continue to impose conditions in consents for discharges which do not come within the scope of the urban waste water treatment directive, to meet any water quality objectives in force for the receiving waters in question. Our proposals for the system of statutory water quality objectives include a specific special eco-system use class in recognition of the needs of nature conservation.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what request he has received from the Conservation Foundation to support its initiative to foster an environmental protection partnership between the United Kingdom and the Russian Federation.

The Conservation Foundation has written asking for support for its initiative and this request is under consideration.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how much has been spent by his Department on grants or loans to water companies under section 151 of the Water Industry Act 1991 each year since privatisation.

Since privatisation, under section 151 of the Water Industry Act 1991 or the equivalent provisions of the Rural Water Supplies and Sewerage Acts 1944 to 1971, the following sums have been spent by my Department on grants:

	£ million
1990–91	5·95
1991–92	5·35
1992–93	4·44

There have been no loans.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the areas in England proposed to him as candidate sensitive areas under the EC urban waste water treatment directive by (a) English Nature and (b) the National Rivers Authority.

In March 1993, my Department, together with the Welsh Office and the Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food, published its response to the consultation exercise it carried out on the criteria and procedures for identifying sensitive areas under the urban waste water treatment directive. The National Rivers Authority has been asked to compile a list of candidate sensitive areas using these criteria. Although English Nature has not made any proposals on the basis of the finalised criteria, it will be consulted about the NRA's list.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many women are currently (a) chief executives and (b) directors of (i) metropolitan councils, (ii) non-metropolitan district councils, (iii) county councils and (iv) borough councils.

My Department does not collect this information. The Local Government Management Board —the employers' organization—however has produced the following statistics from its 1992 annual survey, based on responses from 375, out of 450, local authorities in England and Wales:

(a) Chief Executives—7 (out of 375)

• Metropolitan districts—I (out of 31)
• Non-Metropolitan districts—4 (out of 278)
• Non-Metropolitan counties—0 (out of 44)
• London Boroughs—2 (out of 22)

(b) Directors—150 (out of 2,803)

• Metropolitan districts—22 (out of 385)
• Non-Metropolitan districts—68 (out of 1,670)
• Non-Metropolitan counties—27 (out of 498)
• London Boroughs—33 (out of 250)

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what monitoring his Department is undertaking of the proportion of cars using the Limehouse link road which are starting or completing their journeys in the docklands area.

The LDDC, in liaison with the Department of Transport, is monitoring traffic flows on the new docklands roads, including Limehouse link and on other routes through the docklands area.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many people were employed on the construction of the Limehouse link road.

The average number of people employed, during construction of the Limehouse link road, was 700.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what was the total cost of the construction of the Limehouse link road, broken down into (a) cost of relocation, (b) cost of land acquisition and (c) construction costs; and what was the additional cost of bringing the project back on schedule from the delays during the early part of the contract.

The total construction costs of the Limehouse link road were as follows:

£ million
	Cost
(a) Cost of replacement housing	108·2
(b) Cost of land acquisition	12·6
(c) Final price of construction contract	255·1

There were no additional costs within the terms of the contract to recover the schedule from early delays within the terms of the contract.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to put into effect the proposals made in the report on environmental education commissioned from Professor Peter Toyne.

The Government are considering the recommendations in Professor Toyne's report, most of which are directed to the educational establishment. My Department has encouraged industry to formulate its needs as clearly as possible, to help educational institutions to address them.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the sections and organisations within his Department for which there are plans for relocation or amalgamation.

Following the decision last year to demolish 2 Marsham street, Property Holdings has been asked to find alternative accommodation for the headquarters of my Department. There are also some 90 posts across the Department employed on programmes to be transferred to the Urban Regeneration Agency.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the buildings currently owned or rented by his Department, together with (a) the estimated value, (b) the annual rent and (c) the annual maintenance cost of each building in the current financial year.

Property Holdings, part of the Department of the Environment, was set up in 1990 to manage the Government common user office estate and holds something in excess of 3,000 properties.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether the measures adopted in the agreement on the conservation of small cetaceans of the Baltic and North sea will apply throughout United Kingdom waters.

The Government strongly support the agreement. We have also made it clear that we shall apply the spirit of the agreement in order to conserve dolphins and other small cetaceans in all our coastal waters. Work to implement the agreement is already being taken forward on that basis.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he received representations from Liverpool city council concerning the level of discounts available on empty properties requiring substantial remedial work; what level of discount is being sought; when he expects to be in a position to make an announcement; and if he will make a statement.

Councillor Margaret Clarke wrote to my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing, Inner Cities and Construction on 26 March asking for consent to increase the discount percentages for the sale of empty properties included in the home opportunities programme from the 30 per cent. allowed under the general consent to 60 per cent.That request is receiving careful consideration and I hope to reply shortly.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what contracts his Department has placed with consultants in the past year to evaluate the prospects for recycling of construction and demolition wastes; and what information he has on such recycling in other European Community member states.

A contract was placed with Howard Humphreys and Partners Ltd. in November 1992 to carry out research on recycling of demolition and construction wastes in the United Kingdom. It will report towards the end of this year, and will advise on how greater use of these wastes might be achieved and on good environmen-tal practice for recycling plants. The research will also yield information on current practice in other EC countries. The Government are also taking an active role in an EC priority waste streams project on recycling building and demolition wastes.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what are his decisions on final caps for the authorities which he has designated for capping; and if he will make a statement.

I have laid before the House a draft order, under section 57 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, setting out my decisions on the final caps for the three authorities which have challenged their proposed caps and put forward higher alternatives.For each of these authorities, I have considered all the available relevant information, including the case made by the authorities in support of a higher cap, before taking my decisions. For Castle Point and Gloucestershire, I have decided to confirm the caps which were initially proposed. In the case of Harlow, I consider that some relaxation would be justified and I have decided to increase its cap by £0·6 million.These caps are, in my view, reasonable, appropriate and achievable in all the circumstances of the authorities concerned.The caps for each of the designated authorities and the resulting reductions in a two-adult band D council tax in their area are as follows:

Authority	Final Cap (£ million)	Reduction in Council tax (£)
Castle Point	7·97	18
Gloucestershire	306·61	55
Harlow	11·80	263

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what changes he proposes to make to the cash limit or running cost limit on PSA Services' vote in 1993–94.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary revised estimate, the cash limit for class VII, vote will be reduced by £295,000 from £164,055,000 to £163,760,000. The running cost limit will be reduced by £607,000 from £104,203,000 to £103,596,000.The reduction in the cash limit is due to the transfer of £205,000 to Property Holdings to cover expenditure on the maintenance of certain security equipment, and also to the transfer of £90,000 to the Welsh Office to cover the cost or redeploying surplus PSAS staff.The reduction in the running costs limit also reflects a higher provision for running cost receipts as a result of more recent forecasts.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what changes he has to announce to his Department's cash limits and running cost limit for 1993–94.

The DOE urban aid non-voted cash limit will be increased by £12,236,000 from £950,671,000 to £962,907,000. This includes increased grant in aid of £10,364,000 to the London Docklands development corporation for work on the Beckton extension of the docklands light railway. It also includes grant in aid of £2 million to the Tyne and Wear development corporation to provide additional industrial sites within its urban development area. There is also a decrease of £ 128,000 to reflect a transfer to the Department of Health in respect of urban programme health authority projects. This will be offset in part by a surrender of unallocated PES of £2,210,000 and the remainder will be charged to the reserve and will not therefore add to the planned total of public expenditure.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what steps he is taking to ensure that housing associations pay the proper value of land purchased from local authorities; and if he will make a statement.

[holding answer 26 May 1993]: Housing associations are now the main providers of new social housing. The Government encourage local authorities, in their role as housing enablers, to release land free—or at a reduced cost—to housing associations in return for increased nominations for people from their waiting list. The additional nominations assist the local authority in meeting its statutory obligations in respect of housing the homeless. It is for local authorities to decide in each individual case.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will provide financial support to local authorities investing in coal-fired heating systems and other coal-burning equipment; and if he will make a statement.

[holding answer 27 May 1993]: The Government have no plans to do so at present.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what would have been the impact per authority in 1993–94 if the weight of the additional educational needs index in distributing primary and secondary standard spending assessments had been reduced by (a) 0·5 per cent., (b) 1 per cent., (c) 5 per cent. and (d) 10 per cent.; and what implications this would have for the area cost adjustment.

[holding answer 7 June 1993]: I have placed in the Library a table which shows the effects on each authority's education standard spending assessment for 1993–94 of reducing the weight on the additional educational needs index within the primary and secondary elements by (a) 0·5 per cent., (b) 1 per cent., (c) 5 per cent. and (d) 10 per cent. The area cost adjustment factors are applied after the results of applying the additional educational needs index.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what would be the impact on each authority's standard spending assessment of reducing the weight of the ethnicity factor within the additional educational needs index to (a) 20 per cent., (b) 10 per cent. and (c) 2 per cent.; and what are the reasons for including the ethnicity factor within the additional educational needs index.

[holding answer 7 June 1993]: The ethnicity factor has a weight of one within the additional educational needs index compared with 1·5 for the other two factors. I have placed in the Library today a table which shows the education standard spending assessment element for all authorities incorporating a reduction in the weight on ethnicity from 1 to (a) 0·2, (b) 0·1 and (c) 0·02. Ethnicity—or, more precisely, the country of origin of child or of the head of the household—is used to reflect the additional costs associated with educating children for whom English is not their first language.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make it his policy to make mandatory grants for payment to protect houses against radon.

[holding answer 7 June 1993]: No. Local authorities have powers under the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 to award discretionary renovation grants to help home owners with radon remedial measures. The Government consider it appropriate for authorities to determine the need to grant aid such work in the light of local circumstances and priorities.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment on how many occasions in each year since 1979 he has overruled the result of a planning inquiry by an inspector appointed by him.

[holding answer 7 June 1993]: The number of occasions on which the Secretary of State has determined a planning appeal, following a local public inquiry, contrary to the recommendations of the inspector, is as follows:

Year	Number
1979	17
1980	15
1981	34
1982	20
1983	13
1984	16
1985–861	25
1986–872	26
1987–88	18
1988–89	19
1989–90	21
1990–91	17
1991–92	7
1992–93	35
1 From 1 January 1985 to 31 March 1986.
2 1986–87 and subsequent years are 1 April to 31 March.
3 Data available to 31 December 1992.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment (1) what steps he is taking to implement the recommendations for more satisfactory cost-effective compliance with Council directive 85/337/EEC contained in COM (93) 28 final—EC Cons Doc 5975/93;(2) if he will place in the Library a copy of his Department's report to the European Parliament and Council on the application and effectiveness of EC directive 85/337.

[holding answer 7 June 1993]: The Government has made no report to the European Parliament or Council on the application and effectiveness of directive 85/337/EEC. The European Commission has recently submitted such a report in COM (93) 28 final. A memorandum on that document has been submitted by my noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment and placed in the Library of the House

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment which other EC countries publish national figures on the quality of their drinking water supply which are comparable to those of the United Kingdom.

[holding answer 7 June 1993]: I am not aware of any information on the quality of drinking water supplies provided by other EC countries which is comparable in extent and detail to that published in the United Kingdom.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list each of the aid projects in Kenya which are at present receiving financial assistance from the United Kingdom Government.

The table lists the capital and technical co-operation projects currently supported through the bilateral aid programme. In addition, funds are being provided for 17 projects under the joint funding scheme and two projects through the aid and trade provision.

Project	Total cost of Project £'000
Agriculture and Livestock
Rehabilitation of South Nyanza
Sugar Factory	4·660
Agricultural Information Centre	94
Tea Research Foundation/Natural
Resources Institute Collaboration	28
National Agricultural Research Project	7·640
Kenya Trypanosomiasis Research Institute	1·391
Forestry
Indigenous Forest Conservation	4·860
Conservation
Protected Areas and Wildlife Services	3·661
National Museum of Kenya
Plant Conservation and Propagation Unit	467
Energy
Geothermal Energy Project	1·295
Department of Mines and Geology	331
Construction
Technical Co-operation for Ministry of Public Works	183
Roads
Molo-Litein	12·080
Tea Roads Feasibility Study	416
Silibwet Forest Road Design	198
Highways Sector Field Manager	39

Project	Total cost of Project £'000
Railways
Kenya Railways Phase II	9·647
Ports
Kenya Ports Authority	11·327
Small Scale Enterprise
Assistance to Youth Polytechnics	157
K-Rep Juhudi Credit	967
Public Administration and Good Government
Kenya Institute of Administration	1·441
Kenya Institute of Management	580
Office of Controller and Auditor General	243
Assistance to Department of Government
Investments and Public Enterprises	82
Machakos Environmental Management Study	20
Education
Thames Polytechnic/Kenya Polytechnic Link	800
Moi University/Oxford Forestry Institute Link	530
University of Nairobi Microcomputer Project	710
National Programme for Student Communication
Skills in Universities	820
Kenyatta University English Department	282
Kenyatta University Science Faculty	1·650
Moi University Library	8,373
Moi Faculty of Information Sciences	911
Strengthening of Primary Education	3·325
Teachers Resource Centres	96
Health and Population
World Bank Third Population Project	4·601
Moi University Faculty of Health Sciences	185
Isiolo Hospital Immediate Support	549
Senior Health Planner/Economist	180
Family Planning Services	2·000
AMREF Health Care Support Unit	262

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his answer of 19 April, Official Report, column 30, on joint funding scheme projects, what were the activities engaged in to which his Department had not agreed and which caused the request to reimburse the grant; and how this was discovered.

Concern arose over this project when it was discovered that it included an element of evangelism. It is not the purpose of the joint funding scheme to support such activities, and World Vision was asked to reimburse the grant advanced to this project. It accepted our decision and readily returned the funds. The problem came to light when a representative of the British embassy in Jakarta visited the project.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has received from local authorities on the assassination of Chris Hani.

We have received a number of letters from local authorities and other organisations following Mr. Hani's assassination.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when the Minister for Overseas Development last met her EC colleagues to discuss development issues; and what was decided.

My right hon. and noble Friend the Minister for Overseas Development attended the Development Council in Brussels on 25 May. The Council agreed on future work to improve the co-ordination of EC development policies, starting with poverty and health issues. It agreed resolutions on emergency assistance, rehabilitation in some sub-Saharan African countries, South Africa and on human rights, democracy and development. The Council also discussed the situation in a number of specific African countries, the follow-up to the UN Conference on Environment and Development, women in development and population policy.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what response he has made to the study "Children of Iraq", commissioned by UNICEF by Dr. Eric Hoskins, Oxford epidemiologist, a copy of which has been sent to him.

[holding answer 7 June 1993]: I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to him today by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, column 226–27.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to his answer of 26 April, Official Report, columns 292–94, what amounts of pension costs are attributable to current public sector pensioners (a) in 1979 and (b) the most recent year for each Department or pension scheme; and if he will list the source references which show how such items are disclosed in national accounts.

The costs of benefits, including transfer values, paid by each of the main public service pension schemes in 1979–80 and 1992–93 are as follows:

	1979–80 £m	1992–93 £m
NHS Superannuation Scheme (England and Wales)	299·4	1,689·1
NHS Superannuation Scheme (Scotland)	36·4	243·4
Teachers Superannuation Scheme (England and Wales)	437·1	2,503·0
Teachers Superannuation Scheme (Scotland)	58·1	269·2
Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme	584·0	2,156·2
Armed Forces Pension Scheme	460·1	1,732·3
Local Government Superannuation Scheme (England and Wales)	543·3	12,209·8
Local Government Superannuation Scheme (Scotland)	52·5	1220·4
1 Figures for 1990–91, the most recent year for which figures are available.

For the NHS, teachers, civil service and armed forces schemes the source references are the appropriation accounts for 1979–80 and the supply estimates for 1992–93. For the local government schemes, the source references are the yearbooks of "Local Government Financial Statistics".The costs above are not shown individually in national accounts, but are shown in aggregate in table 4·10 of the "United Kingdom National Accounts"—the CSO Blue Book, HMSO, 1992. Their treatment is described in the "United Kingdom National Accounts, Sources and Methods", HMSO 1985.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will estimate the full-year yield in 1993–94 of taxing employers' pension contributions in excess of (a) £7,000, (b) £10,000, (c) £15,000 and (d) £20,000 per year as a benefit in kind;(2) what is his estimate of the cost of tax relief for employers' contributions to occupational pension schemes and personal pension schemes in 1992–93 and 1993–94 for the top 1 per cent. of taxpayers; how many taxpayers are in receipt of contributions; and what is the average contribution;(3) what is his estimate of the cost of direct income tax relief for occupational pension schemes and personal pension schemes in force in 1991–92, 1992–93 and 1993–94 for

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to his answer of 20 May, Official Report, column 284, to what investigations the Inland Revenue and Customs and Excise have been subject by the Data Protection Registrar in relation to a suspected breach of a data protection principle; if he will summarise the nature

I regret that this detailed distributional information is not available. Available statistics on the total costs are published in chapter 6 of "Inland Revenue Statistics 1992".

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his latest estimate of the number of BES shareholders.

A reliable estimate is not available.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will estimate the cost of direct income tax reliefs in force in 1991–92, 1992–93 and 1993–94 in respect of (a) higher rate taxpayers and (b) basic rate taxpayers, giving in each case the number of taxpayers concerned and their average income.

Available information on the major income tax reliefs is given in the table:of each complaint with the date it was made; and what remedial action was taken by his Department to ensure future compliance with the principle subject to the investigation.

The Data Protection Registrar's records show that the Inland Revenue has received 17 complaints concerning suspected breaches of data protection principles. The principles involved and the dates on which the complaints were made are as follows:

Complaint Type	Number Received	Dates Received
Principle 1	2	19 October 1984
		24 July 1989
Principle 5	6	29 July 1988
		18 August 1989
		16 February 1993
		22 March 1993
		12 Match 1993
		18 March 1993
Principle 7	5	31 December 1986
		11 May 1988
		8 May 1989
		16 October 1989
		3 February 1992
Principle 8	1	24 March 1993
Unauthorised disclosure	3	15 September 1989
		31 October 1989
		3 April 1992

The Data Protection Registrar has been satisfied in all cases in which investigations are not still in progress and no remedial action to ensure compliance with data protection principles has been necessary.Between 17 December 1987 and 30 November 1992, the Data Protection Registrar recorded seven suspected breaches of data protection principles concerning Her Majesty's Customs and Excise. Details are as follows:

Complaint Type	Number Received	Dates Received
Principle 1	1	30 May 1989
Principle 3	1	12 September 1991
Principle 5	1	3 April 1989
		17 December 1987
		20 January 1989
Principle 7	3	10 November 1992
Unauthorised Disclosure	1	30 November 1992

In six cases the matter has been resolved to the satisfaction of the Data Protection Registrar. The seventh, a case of unauthorised disclosure, is under investigation.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the latest information he has on average public expenditure by member states of the EC, as a proportion of gross domestic product, on (a) education, (b) policing, (c) transport, (d) the arts and (e) science; what is the equivalent United Kingdom figure in each case; and if he will make a statement.

Data on categories of public expenditure in EC countries are included in the OECD's national accounts, volume II.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what Treasury guarantees have been given in respect of the funding of the proposed Jubilee line extension; and if he will make a statement.

The Treasury has issued no guarantees in relation to any part of the funding of the Jubilee line extension. Government funding has, however, been earmarked for the public sector contribution to the cost of the line—see, for example, "The Government's Expenditure Plans for Transport 1993–94 to 1995–96", Cm 2206.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what changes are proposed to the cash and running costs limits for 1993–94 in respect of the office of HM Paymaster General.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for the office of HM Paymaster General—class XVII, vote 13—will be increased by £1,532,000 to £4,400,000, and the running cost limit by £113,000 from £25,178,000 to £25,291,000. These increases reflect the costs of capital investment in equipment associated with the development of a replacement pensions computer systems; take account of the full cost element of the Paymaster General's depreciation expenses repayable as Consolidated Fund extra receipts; and provide for additional VAT payments to Customs and Excise. The increase will be charged to the reserve and will not therefore add to the planned total of public expenditure.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what changes are proposed in the cash and running cost limits for 1993–94 for the Inland Revenue.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary revised estimate, the cash limit for class XVII, vote 6 will be reduced by £26,765,000 from £1,690,968,000 to £1,664,203,000. There is no change in the Department's running costs limit. The change in the cash limit arises from an increase in the charges paid by the Department of Social Security to the Inland Revenue in respect of the administration costs of collecting national insurance contributions.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what changes are proposed to the Treasury's cash and running costs limits for 1993–94.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class XVII, vote 1 1993–94 will be increased by a net £450,000 from £76,017,000 to £76,467,000. The increase is mainly to meet publication costs of the retail and institutional guides to investing in gilts. These costs will be fully offset by a reduction in the Bank of England's non-voted cash limit and will not therefore add to the planned total of public expenditure.The running costs limit will be increased by £485,000 from £79,136,000 to £79,621,000 reflecting, in addition to the costs of publishing the gilts brochures, the transfer of staff and functions from the Department of Trade and Industry—class IV, vote 1—and to the Cabinet Office: Office of Public Service and Science—class XVIII, vote 1.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what consideration he has given to assisting schools to recruit on short-term secondment retired teachers who will undertake the testing of seven and 11-year-olds in order to relieve classroom teachers of this duty.

The Department has not given consideration to this particular issue. However, the review that Sir Ron Dearing is conducting of the national curriculum and assessment framework has the specific remit to consider how the tests can be made more manageable. Decisions on how schools might best make arrangements for the tests will be taken in the light of the review.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans he has to produce school transport safety guidelines for local education authorities.

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents published a report on school transport safety in 1991. It included a code of good practice. The Department contributed to the preparation of the report, and arranged for its distribution to all local education authorities.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what figures he has for the level of illiteracy in each EC member state.

International comparisons with other countries of levels of illiteracy are not held centrally.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) if he will list the local education authorities that currently make discretionary awards for mature students and the total sums budgeted for this purpose in the latest year for which figures are available;(2) if he will make a statement as to the progress of his Department's policy regarding the award of discretionary grants for mature students.

It is for each local education authority to determine its own policy and set its own budget for discretionary awards. My right hon. Friend does not seek to influence authorities in these matters and does not routinely collect detailed information on authorities' policies and budgets for discretionary awards.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many (a) officers and (b) other persons are employed by each education authority in England and Wales.

Information on the number of employees of each local education authority is currently being compiled by the Local Government Management Board from data collected on behalf of the joint staffing watch, a joint group of central and local government, and will be available in due course. I will reply to the hon. Member as soon as possible.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what was the annual cost of administering each education authority in each of the last three years.

The information is given in the table. The table shows spending by each LEA on administration in cash for 1989–90, 1990–91 and 1991–92, the latest year for which information on actual spending is available. Figures may not always be strictly comparable between LEAs due to differing local accounting practices.

LEA	Expenditure on administration
	1989–90 £000	1990–91 £000	1991–92 £000
ILEA	108,067	—	—
Corporation of London	—	474	440
Camden	—	8,164	7,791
Greenwich	—	7,799	13,094
Hackney	—	15,331	9,213
Hammersmith	—	7,564	7,929
Islington	—	11,889	11,611
Kensington	—	4,668	4,922
Lambeth	—	11,152	10,500
Lewisham	—	12,391	10,168
Southwark	—	7,151	6,987
Tower Hamlets	—	7,746	8,138
Wandsworth	—	12,915	3,498
Westminster	—	7,876	8,094
Barking	3,625	4,334	4,439
Barnet	5,103	5,469	5,893
Bexley	4,662	5,281	4,814
Brent	6,594	6,446	6,492
Bromley	4,244	4,828	4,062
Croydon	5,926	7,396	5,811
Ealing	7,954	8,072	8,534
Enfield	5,862	6,895	8,894
Haringey	6,255	9,881	5,852
Harrow	4,566	3,228	4,160
Havering	4,502	5,308	5,413
Hillingdon	5,050	6,705	5,298
Hounslow	5,110	4,798	4,089
Kingston-upon-Thames	3,438	3,298	3,349
Merton	3,839	4,605	4,902
Newham	6,285	7,287	7,215
Redbridge	4,536	4,400	4,860
Richmond-upon-Thames	3,449	4,420	3,855
Sutton	5,547	6,488	6,007
Waltham Forest	4,567	6,194	6,642
Birmingham	18,903	19,434	18,676
Coventry	8,332	9,429	12,965
Dudley	4,971	8,538	8,351
Sandwell	4,909	6,111	5,888
Solihull	2,558	3,086	3,200
Walsall	3,711	4,855	4,310
Wolverhampton	5,325	6,207	6,174
Knowsley	3,328	3,050	3,264
Liverpool	7,226	7,678	7,724
St. Helens	1,863	4,383	4,671
Sefton	5,644	5,503	5,369
Wirral	6,277	4,880	5,350
Bolton	4,643	5,746	5,889
Bury	2,954	3,110	3,277
Manchester	8,102	9,230	9,704
Oldham	4,371	9,156	2,501
Rochdale	3,529	2,810	2,194
Salford	6,105	9,131	9,357
Stockport	1,980	4,188	4,050
Tameside	2,777	3,279	3,092
Trafford	2,676	2,693	2,719
Wigan	4,323	4,023	4,051
Barnsley	2,961	3,396	3,524
Doncaster	3,797	3,805	4,079
Rotherham	3,384	2,950	4,060
Sheffield	9,727	8,020	8,199
Bradford	7,890	8,289	4,783
Calderdale	3,764	3,480	3,169
Kirklees	8,538	10,144	9,478
Leeds	10,068	12,150	11,433
Wakefield	5,423	4,303	4,417
Gateshead	3,800	4,422	3,982
Newcastle-upon-Tyne	5,996	7,192	5,859
North Tyneside	3,382	3,132	2,386

LEA	Expenditure on administration
	1989–90 £000	1990–91 £000	1991–92 £000
South Tyneside	3,422	3,059	2,830
Sunderland	3,542	3,450	3,290
Avon	14,993	17,957	15,561
Bedfordshire	7,845	9,259	10,286
Berkshire	12,716	11,757	11,377
Buckinghamshire	11,429	14,682	16,315
Cambridgeshire	11,919	14,653	11,153
Cheshire	14,488	17,167	14,022
Cleveland	10,206	11,844	12,201
Cornwall	7,215	9,158	10,019
Cumbria	10,551	11,186	8,656
Derbyshire	13,858	14,461	15,355
Devon	10,815	9,068	13,140
Dorset	7,927	9,157	8,754
Durham	5,961	6,283	6,599
East Sussex	6,931	7,908	10,149
Essex	25,756	26,782	26,253
Gloucestershire	8,023	8,900	8,906
Hampshire	16,545	19,133	21,363
Hereford and Worcester	7,729	8,666	9,837
Hertfordshire	9,354	12,826	15,280
Humberside	12,311	13,077	14,185
Isle of Wight	2,465	3,207	3,688
Kent	18,742	26,195	13,889
Lancashire	21,051	17,783	19,373
Leicestershire	10,845	12,708	12,902
Lincolnshire	8,178	9,549	10,421
Norfolk	8,275	10,255	14,922
North Yorkshire	8,901	8,937	9,266
Northamptonshire	8,868	9,212	7,903
Northumberland	4,250	3,897	4,636
Nottinghamshire	15,909	16,873	21,294
Oxfordshire	7,451	12,428	9,245
Shropshire	4,607	4,808	5,429
Somerset	8,062	7,537	9,178
Staffordshire	12,252	14,476	13,846
Suffolk	9,981	9,501	11,252
Surrey	18,626	20,663	16,990
Warwickshire	7,796	8,666	9,396
West Sussex	11,449	8,624	9,750
Wiltshire	8,039	7,753	8,914