To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what plans he has to announce a change in funds to combat desertification at the signing of the desertification convention in Paris in June.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer that I gave to the hon. Member for Ceredigion and Pembroke, North (Mr. Dafis) on 14 April at column 257.We have no plans to make an announcement in Paris, but we will consider our position in the light of the agreement reached.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for British nationality have been outstanding for (a) more than one year, (b) more than two years and (c) more than three years.

On 31 May 1994, there were 11,388 applications for British citizenship in the nationality division which had been outstanding for more than one year, of which 2,915 had been outstanding for more than two years, including 818 for more than three years.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the average length of time taken to process applications for British nationality; and what were the average times taken in 1979, 1984 and 1989.

Average waiting times for certificates of British citizenship issued in May 1994 were 15 months for naturalisations and 11 months for registrations; and in May 1989, 22 and 18 months respectively. Comparable figures for 1984 and 1979 are not available, but average waiting times for the first quarter of 1985—calculated on a different basis—were 13 and 11 months, and for 1979, 25 months for naturalisations.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many immigrants have entered the United Kingdom in the last 10 years; and if he will provide a breakdown of the ages and nationalities contained within this figure;(2) how many people have emigrated from the United Kingdom in the last 10 years; and if he will provide a breakdown of the ages and nationalities contained with this figure.

Information on immigration and emigration from the United Kingdom is provided by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys from the international passenger survey, which defines a migrant as a person leaving one country where he or she has been a resident for a year or longer with the intention of residing in another country for a year or longer. In the 10 years 1983–92, the total numbers of intending immigrants and emigrants were 2.31 million and 2.09 million respectively. These figures include British citizens and other EC nationals, but exclude migration between the Republic of Ireland and the United Kingdom. Analyses of the annual data by broad nationality and by broad age group are given in tables 2.1 and 2.9 respectively of the OPCS publication "International Migration, 1992", a copy of which is in the Library of the House. Data for 1993 are not yet available.As the IPS data are based on intentions to migrate, it is highly likely that they exclude persons seeking asylum after entering the country and other persons admitted as short-term visitors who are subsequently granted an extension of stay for a year or longer. It is estimated that there were around 200,000 such persons in 1983–92, net of persons leaving the United Kingdom for a short-term period who stayed overseas for longer than originally intended.The OPCS data include temporary migration for a year or longer by, for example, students and workers. Home Office data on immigration relate to the number of persons accepted for settlement—that is, allowed to stay indefinitely. There were 514,000 such persons in the 10-year period 1984–93. Analyses by nationality of the annual data for 1984–92 and 1993 are given in table 6.5 of "Control of Immigration: Statistics, United Kingdom, 1992", Cm 2368, and table 1.1 of the statistical bulletin "Control of Immigration: Statistics—Third and Fourth Quarters and Year 1993", issue 9/94, respectively. An analysis by age of person is readily available only for 1992 and is given in table 6.2 of Cm 2368. Copies of both Home Office publications are also in the Library.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how he intends to pay the residual expenses arising from the privatisation of DTELS.

DTELS—formerly the Directorate of Telecommunications—was sold on 1 March 1994 to National Transcommunications Ltd. for £6.6 million. The balance of proceeds, after payment of expenses relating to 1993–94, was surrendered to the Consolidated Fund in March 1994.There are further expenses arising from the sale to be paid in 1994–95. Parliamentary approval for this new service will be sought in a summer supplementary estimate for the Home Office's administration, immigration, probation and police support services vote, class VIII, vote 3. Pending that approval, urgent expenditure estimated at £800,000 will be met by repayable advances from the contingencies fund.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proposals he has for changes to the 1994–95 cash limits within his responsibilities and to the Home Office running costs limit.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class VIII, vote 3—Home Office administration, immigration, probation and police support services, England and Wales—will be increased by £442,000 from £1,212,240,000 to £1,212,682,000. This will enable repayment of an advance from the contingencies fund of £800,000 for residual payments, which are not included in the public expenditure control total, in connection with the privatisation of the Directorate of Telecommunications: the amount required is reduced because of transfers totalling £358,000 out of the vote to other Government Departments. In consequence of these transfers, the Home Office gross running cost limit will be reduced by £358,000 from £1,706,534,000 to £1,706,176,000.The local authority capital non-voted HO/LACAP cash limit will be increased by £421,000 from £121,870,000 to £122,291,000. The additional provision results from the transfer of supplementary credit approvals from the Welsh Office's non-voted cash limit WO/LACAP for the purpose of the replacement of fire service mobilisation and communications systems, to allow the Home Office to hold and issue the entire provision of fire supplementary credit approvals for both England and Wales. The increase will be offset by a transfer and will not therefore add to the planned total of expenditure.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if the fire service is required to attend train and plane crashes not involving fires; and if he will make a statement.

Under section 1 of the Fire Services Act 1947, a fire authority has a duty to make provision for firefighting purposes, and in particular to secure the services of a fire brigade and equipment in order to meet efficiently all normal requirements. Section 3(1)(e) of the 1947 Act gives a fire authority supplementary powers to employ its brigade for purposes other than firefighting. This may include attendance at train and aircraft accidents not involving fires.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the number of fatalities resulting from fires in buildings built since 1979 for each year since 1979; and if he will make a statement.

This information is not available from the statistics collected from fire brigades.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he intends to take steps, ahead of Royal Assent, to implement any provisions of the Police and Magistrates' Courts Bill.

I intend that the new police authorities should be set up this autumn to prepare for the assumption of their full responsibilities from 1 April 1995. Under the terms of the Police and Magistrates' Courts Bill currently before Parliament, the new authorities will include independent members who are neither councillors nor magistrates. I intend to undertake an advertising exercise at a cost not exceeding £40,000, so that members of the public can apply for appointment as an independent member of their police authority. No appointments will be made until the Police and Magistrates' Courts Bill has become law. The appointments will be made by the councillor and magistrate members of the new police authorities.Parliamentary approval for expenditure on this new service will be sought in a summer supplementary estimate for the Home Office administration, immigration, probation and police support services, England and Wales vote, class VIII, vote 3. Pending that approval, urgent expenditure estimated at £40,000 will be met by repayable advances from the Contingencies Fund.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment his Department is to make as to the effect of the recent tax increases on economic recovery within the Greater London area.

The forecast for economic growth this year, including Greater London, takes full account of the effect of the tax increases announced in last year's Budgets. A number of recent indicators, including manufacturing output, retail sales, and new car registrations, suggest that the economy is continuing to recover.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many job offers were reported by staff in his Department under the requirements of the rules on the acceptance of outside appointments in each of the last 10 years by (a) staff of grade 3 and above, (b) staff below grade 3, (c) staff in sections concerned with procurement or contract work, under section 15 of the rules of 1 February 1993 and (d) staff in other sections, under section 14; and how many of these reports were followed by an application to join the company concerned.

The Treasury only holds records on the information requested from 1987. The answer to each question is as follows:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of British gilts were bought by foreign purchasers in each of the last three years and for 1994 to date.

A sectoral breakdown of purchases of Government securities is given at table 10.2F of the Central Statistical Office's "Financial Statistics".

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the most recent Council meeting of the European Economic and Finance Ministers.

I represented the United Kingdom at the Economic and Finance Council of the European Union—ECOFIN—in Luxembourg on 6 June.The Council discussed follow-up work to the Brussels European Council conclusions on the Commission's White Paper on "Growth, Competitiveness and Employment." The Council endorsed a report from the Economic Policy Committee on labour markets which stressed the need for structural reforms and greater flexibility. The Council welcomed the indication from the President of the European Commission that he was ready to pursue the suggestion made by the German Minister for the establishment of an independent task force to consider deregulation. The Council considered reports from the European Commission and the European investment bank of trans-European networks.Most Ministers agreed that there was insufficient evidence to show that a "financing gap" existed regarding TENs. The presidency will present a report to the Corfu European Council summarising the views expressed at ECOFIN.The Council approved a recommendation on broad economic guidelines for consideration by the Corfu European Council in accordance with article 103(2) of the treaty.The Council adopted the decision allowing the Community to participate in the European investment fund. I am placing in the Libraries of both Houses a copy of that decision and the associated EIF statute.The Council took note of the work of a high-level group on possible taxes on carbon and energy, which would report to the Environment Council on 8–9 June, and concluded that final responsibility for taxation matters rests with the ECOFIN Council.Finally, the Council also had a brief general discussion on fraud. However, a substantive discussion was deferred until July when detailed conclusions are expected to be adopted.There were no formal votes.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what changes are proposed to the Inland Revenue's cash and running costs limits for 1994–95.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary revised estimate, the cash limit for class XVII vote 5 will be reduced by £51,462,000 from £1,704,123,000 to £1,652,661,000 and the running costs limits will be increased by £25,738,000 to £1,714,655,000. The cash limit reduction allows for £362,000 to be transferred to the Lord Chancellor's Department—class IX, vote 1—in respect of the transfer of responsibility to that Department for the costs of the general commissioners of income tax. The balance of the cash limit reduction and the increase in the running costs limit arise from the outsourcing of some of the Department's information technology work to EDS Scicon Ltd. on 1 July 1994. This involves switching capital expenditure into running costs.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary. Lord Chancellor's Department when the legal services ombudsman intends to publish his third annual report.

The legal services ombudsman has today published his third annual report.

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what plans he has to implement the recommendations in the Law Commission's report, "Domestic Violence and Occupation of the Family Home."

The Government have decided to implement almost all the recommendations contained in the report and consider them to provide a firm basis upon which to reform the law relating to the civil remedies for domestic violence and occupation of the family home. Legislation to implement the recommendations will be introduced when a suitable opportunity occurs.The Government have not accepted the recommendation to give the police the power to take civil action on behalf of victims of domestic violence or the recommendation for two of the proposed new categories of associated persons who would be able to apply for non-molestation and occupation orders.The categories which have not been accepted are people

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what proposals he has to change his Department's cash limits and running costs limits for 1994–95.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary revised estimate and supplementary estimates, the following changes will be made:

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list (a) the number of accidents involving a tractor or other agricultural machinery on public roads and (b) the number of fatalities resulting from such accidents for each of the past eight years; and if he will make a statement.

To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what changes will be made to the cash limits or running costs limits for 1994–95 for which he has responsibility.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary revised estimate, the cash limit for class XI, vote 7—Department of National Heritage administration—will be reduced by £3,080,000 from £24,680,000 to

It is not possible to identify tractors and agricultural machinery in the road injury accident data collection system. However, by linking road accident data with vehicle licencing information, it is possible to provide broad estimates of the information required since 1989, which are shown in the table.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what was the total public expenditure on road maintenance in England for each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement.

The figures are:£21,600,000. This results from the transfer of responsibility for the international passenger survey to the Central Statistical Office from the 1 April 1994.In addition, the Department of National Heritage gross running costs limit will be reduced by £3,080,000 from £31,008,000 to £27,928,000.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what has been the percentage reduction in British Army uniformed manpower strength since 1990.

Between 1 April 1990 and 1 May 1994, the uniformed strength—trained and untrained personnel—of the Regular Army has reduced by approximately 20 per cent.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what has been the percentage reduction in Royal Navy uniformed manpower strength since 1990.

Between 1 April 1990 and 1 May 1994, the total uniformed strength—trained and untrained personnel—of the Royal Navy, including Royal Marines, has reduced by approximately 12 per cent.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what proposals he has to change the 1994–95 (a) cash limit and (b) running costs limits for the Office of Public Service and Science.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary revised estimate the cash limit for the Office of Public Service and Science, class XVIII, vote 1, will be decreased by £16,366,000 from £75,794,000 to £59,428,000 and the gross running cost limits will also be decreased by £15,745,000 from £95,751,000 to £80,006,000. The functions of the Offices of the Prime Minister, Government Chief Whip and Parliamentary Counsel have been transferred to the Cabinet Office, class XIX, vote 1. The net running cost limits for the Civil Service college has been decreased by £1,244,000 from £1,800,000 to £556,000.The changes will not add to the planned total of public expenditure.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what changes he proposes to the estimates class XVIII, vote 2—science.

The cash limit for this vote is being reduced by £13,030,272 to £1,225,526,728. The reduction is the net effect of the following. A reduction to £13,685,272 in respect of that expenditure of the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, which is being met from the receipts from the sale of the Plant Breeding Institute. An increase of £655,000 in respect of class 3 super-computing time, responsibilty for which is to transfer from the higher education funding councils for England, Wales and Scotland. The increase will be offset by transfers from class X, vote 2—education: higher and further education—of £542,000; class XIV, vote 17—Scotland and Forestry Commission: education, arts and libraries—of £79,000; and class XV, vote 4—Wales: training and education—of £34,000. The additional provision has been allocated to subhead A3—the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many job offers were reported by staff in his Department under the requirements of the rules on the acceptance of outside appointments in each of the last 10 years by (a) staff of grade 3 and above, (b) staff below grade 3, (c) staff in sections concerned with procurement or contract work, under section 15 of the rules of 1 February 1993 and (d) staff in other sections, under section 14; and how many of these reports were followed by an application to join the company concerned.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 14 June at column 371–72.

To ask the Prime Minister what was the cost to public funds of the referendums on (a) membership of the European Community and (b) Scottish devolution.

The cost to public funds of the 1975 referendum on membership of the European Community was £6,100,000. The 1979 referendum on devolution for Scotland cost £820,500.

To ask the Prime Minister what arrangements are being made to finance No. 10 Downing street, the Whips Offices, the Office of Parliamentary Counsel and the ceremonial branch.

Responsibility for No. 10, the Whips Offices, the Office of Parliamentary Counsel and the ceremonial branch has been transferred, within the Cabinet Office, from the Office of Public Service and Science vote to the other services vote, with effect from 1 April 1994.Parliamentary approval of this transfer of expenditure will be sought in a summer supplementary estimate for the Cabinet Office other services vote, class XIX, vote 1. Pending that approval, urgent expenditure estimated at £7,365,000 will be met by repayable advances from the contingencies fund.

To ask the Prime Minister what proposals he has to change the 1994–95 cash limit or running costs limit for the Cabinet Office other services vote.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for Cabinet Office other services, class XIX, vote 1, will be increased by £16,366,000 from £27,015,000 to £43,381,000. At the same time the running costs limit will be increased by £15,467,000 from £26,295,000 to £41,762,000.The increase reflects the transfer of certain administrative functions and provision from the Cabinet Office Office of Public Service and Science vote, class XVIII, vote 1, and will not therefore add to the planned total of public expenditure.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the current projects included in his Department's research budget; and what proportion of his Department's research budget is spent on research to improve standard spending assessments.

My Department is currently funding over 800 research projects. As the list of these projects runs to several pages, I will write to the hon. Member with a copy of the list.It is not possible to provide an accurate estimate of the proportion of my Department's current research budget which will be spent on research to improve standard spending assessments until the research is commissioned, but it is not expected to exceed 0.05 per cent. in 1994–95.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to review current noise disturbance legislation.

In 1990 an independent noise review was established by my Department to consider all forms of control over noise pollution. It made several useful recommendations relating to improvement of the legislation which were considered carefully. As a result provisions were introduced into the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to strengthen the existing statutory nuisance duties and powers to control noise from domestic, industrial and commercial premises. These powers have been further extended by the Noise and Statutory Nuisance Act 1993 to control noise from vehicles, machinery and equipment in the street. We continue to monitor the effectiveness of existing environmental noise legislation and are keen to ensure that it is used to its full effect.My Department continues to discuss all aspects of noise pollution and disturbance, including the scope for further improving the operation of the relevant legislation, with other Departments and a wide range of professional and voluntary organisations concerned with these issues.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list the estimated average annual water bill per household (a) before water metering and (b) after water metering; and if he will make a statement.

The average household unmeasured water supply bill in England and Wales in 1994–95 is £94 and for a metered water supply it is £97. The average household charge for combined water and sewerage services is £199 for both measured and unmeasured services.Charges should not discriminate against metered customers. I am pleased that this year average measured household bills have fallen—by 1 per cent. for water and 3.8 per cent. for sewerage—ensuring a fairer balance in tariffs between measured and unmeasured customers.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to increase the planned level of total standard spending for 1995–96 to meet the transitional costs arising from local government reform in England.

For 1994–95 local authorities subject to reorganisation will be able to borrow to meet transitional costs. I expect that similar arrangements will apply for 1995–96 and subsequent years, and we shall take account of those arrangements in the local government finance settlement each year. The amount in 1995–96 will depend on decisions about areas to be reorganised which have yet to be made.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will place in the Library a copy of the report on the cost benefit analysis for flow restoration to the River Darent approved by his Department in December 1993.

Yes. Copies will be placed in the Library.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what advice he has given to the Director General of Water Services in respect of the cost implications to water services plcs of action to be taken on those sites of special scientific interest and rivers identified as being adversely affected by water abstraction.

The Director General of Water Services has been advised of the proposals by Thames Water Utilities Ltd. to spend £6 million on the river Darent low flow alleviation scheme, and of proposals by Suffolk—now Essex—Water to spend £0.65 million in helping to restore water levels in Redgrave and Lopham fen.Discussions are continuing on the cost implications of additional schemes for completion over the next few years.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what notification he has received from (a) the National Rivers Authority and (b) the statutory nature conservation agencies, regarding the investment necessary to remedy the adverse impacts of abstraction boreholes affecting rivers and sites of special scientific interest.

The National Rivers Authority identified costs for remedial action for the River Darent of £7 million with an additional £5 million should subsequent testing under drought conditions indicate the need for further augmentation, and for Redgrave and Lopham fen, £2.8 million, approximately half of which is to be funded from the EC LIFE programme.The National Rivers Authority reported on 40 rivers requiring remedial action in its report "Low Flows and Water Resources", published in March 1993.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list those rivers and sites of special scientific interest that have suffered adverse impacts of water abstraction boreholes.

The National Rivers Authority listed 40 sites requiring remedial action in its report "Low Flows and Water Resources", published in March 1993.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made towards ratifying the United Nations convention on biological diversity.

The United Kingdom ratified the convention on biological diversity on 3 June 1994. Before ratifying we had already demonstrated our commitment to the aims of the convention, domestically and internationally, through the production of our biodiversity action plan and through the financial and other assistance we have made available to help developing countries preserve their biodiversity. We look forward to playing a constructive and positive role in the convention and its meetings.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will provide policy guidance on waste imports and exports.

Last month a new control regime on waste shipments was introduced. The EC Waste Shipments Regulation and the United Kingdom's associated Transfrontier Shipment of Waste Regulations 1994 came into effect on 6 May. This legislation enabled the United Kingdom to fulfil its obligations under the Basle convention, to which the United Kingdom became a party on 8 May.These obligations are based on the principle of national self-sufficiency in waste disposal. This principle is the means by which countries can be encouraged to take responsibility for disposing of the waste they generate. Thereby they are encouraged to minimise wastes—especially hazardous wastes—and to reuse and recycle, and to pursue policies of sustainable development.We must also have regard for other environmental responsibilities arising from our membership of the European Union and the global community. In implementing the Basle convention, we should not lose sight of these wider considerations.As a developed country, with ample disposal facilities to meet our waste arisings, we ourselves will have no need to export wastes for final disposal in other countries. The EC regulation prohibits such exports to countries outside the EC and EFTA the European Free Trade Association. We shall go further by proposing a complete prohibition on such exports to all countries.There is no equivalent case for a general ban on exports of wastes for recovery. But special considerations apply to the export of hazardous wastes for recovery in developing countries and countries in transition. At the second conference of the Basle convention in March, it was recognised that there is a high risk that such exports will not be managed in environmentally sound ways in the country of receipt. It was decided that, except in exceptional circumstances, trans-boundary movement of hazardous wastes from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to non-OECD states for the purposes of recovery should be prohibited. In the Government's opinion, this decision has now taken effect.Our policy towards imports is based on similar principles. In future, the presumption will be that wastes should not be imported for final disposal in this country. This applies both to landfill, either directly or indirectly, and to incineration, and also to disposal under the guise of recovery—so-called "sham recovery". However, imports for genuine recovery operations, including energy recovery, will continue to be allowed.For most wastes, all other countries should now develop adequate final disposal facilities and there seems to be no reason to delay a prohibition of imports. There may, however, be special circumstances where imports of certain wastes for specialist disposal processes—and in particular for high temperature incineration—might be justified on wider environmental grounds for very limited periods and quantities. This would apply on a transitional and reducing basis where a country had not yet completed specialist disposal capacity or was dealing with a backlog inherited from a former communist regime in eastern Europe. We propose to develop strict criteria which would regulate any such continued imports. Our criteria would take account of the technical and environmental characteristics of the waste stream, and the circumstances of the exporting country. Except for small quantities particularly from developing countries, we would propose that the transitional period should not exceed three years at most.We do not contemplate importing from countries in a position to develop their own disposal facilities, but taking no action to do so. That would be quite contrary to our policy towards self-sufficiency. Nor would we allow imports which could not be safely handled and managed within the existing disposal capacity in the United Kingdom.We shall be making more detailed proposals on exports and imports in the form of a draft waste management plan. Associated with the plan will be technical guidance designed to assist competent authorities in making decisions. There will be a full opportunity for consultation on the draft plan and technical guidance before it is issued.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he proposes to make any changes to the cash limits in 1994–95.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary revised estimate, the cash limit for class VII, vote 8—revenue support grant, payments of non-domestic rates, Valuation Office services, etc., England—will be reduced by £2,900,000 from £29,635,066,000 to £29,632,166,000. This comprises a reduction of £4,400,000 in provision for Valuation Office rating services and an offsetting increase of £1,500,000 for Valuation Office banding and valuation services. Some £1,550,000 of the savings will be used to support increased expenditure on class VII, vote 12—council tax transitional reduction grant, community charge grants, emergency financial assistance to local authorities, non-domestic rates outturn payments, etc., England. The remaining savings of £1,350,000 will be surrendered to the Consolidated Fund.Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary revised estimate, the cash limit for class VII, vote II—PSA Services—will be reduced by £25,000,000 from £123,693,000 to £98,693,000, and the net running cost limit on this vote will reduce by £25,000,000 from £123,293,000 to £98,293,000. The reduction reflects savings achieved in the residuary functions, and reductions in severance figures and secondee numbers arising out of most recent forecasts following the sales of the former PSA building management businesses.In addition, and subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the cash limit for class VII, vote 13—sale of PSA businesses—will be increased by £9,449,000 from £401,000 to £9,850,000. The increase will not constitute a claim on the reserve as it will be netted off the proceeds from the Government's privatisation programme. The provision is sought, as provided for in the sales agreements, to fund adjustments to cash assets following reviews of the completion statement of the PSA building management businesses post-sale, and to contribute to the costs incurred by the purchasers of both PSA projects and the building management businesses in making transferred staff redundant.Increases on votes 8 and 12 will be offset by reductions in other cash-limited expenditure and will not therefore add to the planned total of public expenditure.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what progress has been made in preparing updated guidance for local authorities on energy efficiency in council housing in follow up to interim guidance published last year.

I am pleased to inform the House that updated and consolidated guidance was published on 13 June. A copy of the guidance, entitled "Energy Efficiency in Council Housing", has been placed in the Library.Improving energy efficiency in council housing brings benefits to tenants, landlords and the environment. Tenants benefit from warmer, healthier homes which are cheaper to heat. Landlords gain from lower maintenance and management costs. The environment benefits from reductions on carbon dioxide emissions.Since last year, all local housing authorities have been expected to take account of energy efficiency in their housing strategies and investment programme submissions. Performance here is one of the factors taken into consideration in determining housing investment programme allocations.The guidance, which draws on lessons from my Department's successful green house demonstration programme and the Energy Efficiency Office's best practice programme, provides practical assistance on how to go about developing an effective energy efficiency policy. Accompanying the main guidance is a series of guides providing further advice on key themes such as funding sources for energy efficiency work, tenant consultation and the benefits that can flow from integrated packages of measures.Some authorities have been making great strides on energy efficiency. I welcome that. But much remains to be done not only to combat environmental problems but to maximise the scope for cost-effective energy efficiency action and getting added value from planned investment.I look to authorities to translate this important guidance into action.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what is his policy towards the development of a motorway service area on green-belt land owned by Cape plc of Uxbridge and adjoining the M25 motorway; and if he will make a statement.

[holding answer Friday 20 May 1994]: The proposal referred to is that between junctions 15 and 16 of the M25 at Woodlands Park, near Iver. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport has directed refusal of this application. There is also an article 14 direction in place restricting the grant of permission in respect of this development. I have received the representations of my hon. Friend on behalf of his constituents and as far as policy is concerned, I refer him to my answer of 18 May at column 507.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations her Department has received from Parcom member states regarding the forthcoming 16th joint meeting of the Oslo and Paris Commissions.

None.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations she has received on the application of environmental conditions to livestock headage payment schemes; and if she will make a statement.

We received 40 responses to the consultation paper on the application of environmental conditions to livestock headage payment schemes which we issued on 29 March 1994, from a range of bodies including the main farming and environmental interests. The Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food announced, on 10 June, that measures to prevent over-grazing similar to those already operating in the hill livestock compensatory allowance scheme would be introduced into the other livestock premium schemes when they are renewed. We have written to all those who responded to the paper to inform them of this decision.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what evaluation she has made of the National Farmers Union proposals for preventing over-grazing; and if she will make a statement.

The NFU received a detailed response to its proposals for preventing over-grazing from the Minister of Agriculture earlier this year.On 10 June the Minister of Agriculture announced that measures to prevent over-grazing similar to those already operating in the hill livestock compensatory allowance scheme would be introduced into the other livestock premium schemes when they are renewed.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in what circumstances it is her Department's practice, when issuing a public consultation document, to inform those consulted that their responses will be made public unless they explicitly ask for them to be kept confidential; and if she will arrange for her Department to do so in all cases in future.

It is commonplace for the Department, when issuing a public consultation document, to inform those consulted that their responses may be made public unless they explicitly ask for them to be kept confidential. This practice is being codified in departmental guidance to ensure that it is followed in all cases.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) how the recently announced Department of Environment review of radioactive waste management policy will affect the position that the United Kingdom will take at the forthcoming 16th joint meeting of the Oslo and Paris Commissions;(2) what position the United Kingdom will be taking at the forthcoming 16th joint meeting of the Oslo and Paris Commissions on proposals concerning nuclear issues; and if she will set out her reasons in each case.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if she plans to continue the decommissioning scheme for fishing vessels; and if she will make a statement.

On 14 December 1993, when I announced the suspension of the introduction of days-at-sea restrictions, I said that we would be reviewing the way forward for the other elements of the fisheries conservation package, in particular decommissioning. That review has now been completed and I am pleased to announce that the two further rounds of decommissioning, this year and in 1995–96, are to go ahead as planned. Of the total of£25 million for 1993–94 to 1995–96, £8.9 million will be made available this financial year. This includes an amount corresponding to the balance remaining from last year's scheme. I hope that a further significant reduction in fleet capacity will be achieved so contributing, with licence aggregation penalties, towards our Community effort reduction targets or multi-annual guidance programme. We shall be exploring further with the industry and with the Commission what other measures we might adopt to help us to achieve our MAGP targets. We are looking particularly at technical conservation measures and at

I refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my hon. friend the Minister of State for the Environment and Countryside on 14 June, at column 337.

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many job offers were reported by staff in her Department under the requirements of the rules on the acceptance of outside appointments in each of the last 10 years by (a) staff of grade 3 and above, (b) staff below grade 3, (c) staff in sections concerned with procurement or contract work, under section 15 of the rules of 1 February 1993 and (d) staff in other sections, under section 14; and how many of these reports were followed by an application to join the company concerned.

The table shows the number of job offers reported by staff in the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in each of the last 10 years. All but one of these reports resulted in an application to join the company concerned.possible changes to the licensing system, but these considerations need not delay progress on the decommissioning front.We have always made it clear that we want the decommissioning scheme to provide real long-term benefits to the fishing industry. By enabling the pressure on fish stocks to be reduced the scheme can help fisheries conservation and improve fishing prospects for the future. But the scheme will not achieve this result if the remaining vessels increase their fishing effort and so undermine the impact of decommissioning. This would be unwelcome for both the fishing industry and for taxpayers who will want to see that the expenditure is effective and provides good value for money. So as decommissioning progresses we intend to monitor the fishing effort of the remaining fleet. If it increases, we shall have to take suitable effort control measures to deal with the situation. I hope the industry will collectively exercise restraint, and so make the use of such controls in the context of this scheme unnecessary.The Fishing Vessels (Decommissioning) Scheme 1994 was laid before Parliament today. The rules of the scheme are broadly the same as under the 1993 decommissioning scheme, as I believe that the 1993 scheme was welcomed by most in the industry and successfully removed the maximum active capacity for the available funds. Vessel owners are invited to submit tenders for the amount of decommissioning grant for which they would be prepared to scrap their vessel and surrender its licence. Applications will be ranked in terms of pounds per vessel capacity unit. Eligibility criteria similar to those in the 1993 scheme will apply but the 1994 scheme will be focused on those vessels in respect of which full pressure stock licences have been issued. This means that decommissioning will remain widely accessible but will be targeted at those vessels fishing the stocks which are the most at risk.To be eligible for decommissioning grant, vessels must meet the following main criteria:

To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what was the outcome of the International Whaling Commission's 46th annual meeting.

The International Whaling Commission's 46th annual meeting was held at Puerto Vallarta, Mexico from 23–27 May. The United Kingdom delegation was composed of officials from the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, assisted by officials from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department of the Environment and representatives of environmental organisations.The principal achievement of the meeting was the creation of a circumpolar Southern Ocean sanctuary for whales, within which commercial whaling will be banned indefinitely. The northern boundary of the sanctuary is 40 deg south except in the eastern Pacific, between 130 deg west and 50 deg west, where it is 60 deg south; in addition, below the existing Indian Ocean sanctuary the boundary is 55 deg south, the southern boundary of that sanctuary, so that the two sanctuaries do not overlap.The new sanctuary will cover the main feeding grounds of all southern ocean baleen whales, including those populations of fin and sei whales that feed between 60 deg south and 40 deg south of the south Atlantic and western Pacific. There are few records of whale activity in the same latitudes in the eastern Pacific, which for this reason fall outside the sanctuary.The creation of a Southern Ocean sanctuary represents a major step forward for the conservation of whales. It ensures that should the current moratorium on commercial whaling ever be lifted, the whale stocks in the Southern Ocean will remain protected. I am pleased to say that the United Kingdom delegation played a prominent role in devising the proposal which was ultimately adopted.At the meeting, we restated the United Kingdom's continuing strong support for the moratorium. We accordingly voted against a request by Japan for an interim quota of 50 minke whales, to be taken by traditional whaling communities. This proposal was defeated and I am pleased to report that the moratorium remains intact.Some progress was made on the revised management procedure, a key element in the proposed revised management scheme. The IWC's scientific committee reported that it had completed its work on the RMP, which it recommended for adoption. This was consistent with the remit it was given, when the moratorium was agreed, to devise new management procedures. In response to this recommendation, a resolution was adopted accepting that the scientific committee's work on the RMP completes the main scientific component in the development of the RMS, but making it clear that the RMP cannot be formally adopted in advance of the RMS. The resolution also emphasises that nothing it contains justifies any activity that is contrary to the moratorium.The United Kingdom played an active role in the preparation of this resolution, which meets our own key requirements. In particular, it states clearly that the RMP will not be adopted in advance of the RMS and sets out the elements that will have to be satisfactorily included in the RMS before it can be considered for adoption. A good deal of work on these will be required. In this context, we attach particular importance to the securing of a fully effective, enforceable and internationally credible inspection and observation scheme that would ensure that any whaling operations in the future are properly controlled. Without such measures, it would not be possible for the United Kingdom to support any form of RMS.We once again reaffirmed the importance we attached to ensuring that any whales taken in whaling operations are killed humanely. Together with New Zealand, we secured the adoption of a resolution criticising the use of the electric lance as a method of secondary killing. This drew on new research which strongly suggests that the electric lance is both ineffective and cruel. The resolution calls on Governments using this technique to develop alternative methods of secondary killing and requests the IWC to look into the matter again next year, in the light of the advice of the forthcoming workshop on humane killing. The meeting also agreed the terms of reference we proposed for this workshop, which will meet immediately before next year's annual meeting.Last year, United Kingdom proposals on whale watching were accepted by the IWC. These led to the production of a useful report on the economic importance of whale watching. In the light of this report, the United Kingdom was able to secure support for a further proposal, which was adopted by consensus, requiring the IWC and its scientific committee to provide advice to national Governments on whale watching and to keep developments under review. This will ensure that the IWC has a permanent role to play in this expanding new industry.It was agreed that two scientific workshops on environmental threats, dealing with the potential effects of pollution and of climate change, should be held over the next two year's. We took a prominent role in the discussion of these issues in the scientific committee, and helped promote a resolution underlining the importance that the IWC attaches to the impact on whale stocks.During the meeting, the United Kingdom delegation expressed concern about reports of illegal international trade in whale meat, and supported a successful resolution calling on all members to ensure that existing restrictions on trade in whale meat and whale products were strictly enforced and asking Governments to report all attempted evasions to the IWC.The United Kingdom delegation also took the opportunity to criticise strongly Norway's decision to resume commercial whaling and to urge the Norwegian Government to reconsider. We were supported by a number of other delegations.Overall, this was a very successful meeting for the United Kingdom. We achieved all our main objectives and made useful progress on a range of issues. I believe that we are now well placed to make further progress at the IWC's 47th annual meeting in Dublin next year.The IWC remains the only effective world forum for the discussion of whaling issues; it continues to operate as a result of those countries who wish to remain its members.

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many (a) decisions, (b) disallowances and (c) warning letters were issued in each region and Great Britain as a whole in each quarter since April 1990 in respect of actively seeking employment; and if he will make a statement.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what action was taken by Her Majesty's inspectorate of mines in regard to the under-reporting of dust counts in British mines which was referred to the inspectorate earlier this year; and when the inspectorate was first aware of the under-reporting.

[pursuant to his reply of 4 November 1993]: I wish to announce that the report of the investigation by the Health and Safety Executive's inspectorate of mines into respirable dust sampling at British Coal Corporation mines is released today.The investigation was undertaken following allegations of widespread tampering with dust sampling equipment and expressions of concern about discrepancies between the results of routine statutory sampling of respirable dust and check sampling undertaken by BCC.The mines inspectorate has thoroughly investigated these allegations but has found no evidence to substantiate them. It has also reviewed the procedures for monitoring dust levels.The report identifies weaknesses in the integrity of the sampling instruments and in the arrangements for their security while stored at individual mines. It therefore makes a number of sensible recommendations with the aim of ensuring long-term confidence in the dust sampling programme at mines. These include the proofing of sampling instruments against tampering and improved, more secure, arrangements for the storage of instruments at mine sites. The report also recommends that consideration should be given to the introduction of independent dust sampling and audit procedures.I have today sent a copy of the report to the hon. Member for Wentworth (Mr. Hardy) and for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) who wrote to me on the matter. Copies have also been placed in the Library.

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) what is the Child Support Agency's target time for dealing with complaints; and how many complaints have been dealt with in that time;(2) how many complaints have been logged by the Child Support Agency computerised complaints monitoring system;(3) how many complaints have been received by the Child Support Agency since its inception;(4) what form of redress is available to the complainant if a complaint to the Child Support Agency is not dealt with in the time stipulated for a reply;(5) whether he will publish the results of the review into the complaints procedures of the Child Support Agency.

The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will give details of the war pensions trial complaints system; on what date the system went into operation; and how many complaints have been received and processed to date.

This is a matter for Mr. Peter Mathison, the chief executive of the War Pensions Agency. He will write to the hon. Member.

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) how many absent parents have had their maintenance assessments reduced as a result of the regulatory changes introduced on 7 February; and what has been the average reduction per week to date;(2) how many absent parents have had their maintenance assessments reduced as a result of changes to the parent-with-care allowance introduced on 7 February; and what has been the average reduction per week to date.

The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for Ros Hepplewhite, the chief executive. She will write to the hon. Member.

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security on what date the OTIS—"Opportunity to Improve Service"—computerised system for complaints operated by the Benefits Agency was inaugurated; how many complaints have been logged from that date; what percentage of those complaints and suggestions have resulted in a change to the agency's policy or procedure; and what plans there are for such a system to be adopted by other agencies.

The operation of the OTIS computerised system in the Benefits Agency is the responsibility of Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member.

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security how many invalidity benefit awards have been (a) reviewed, (b) disallowed following review and (c) reinstated on appeal during each of the last 12 months in the Wrexham Maelor and Mid Wales district and North Wales Coast district of the Benefits Agency.

This is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member with such information as is available.

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what is the average length of time taken to decide an application for assistance from the social fund nationally; and what is the average length of time taken at (a) East Nottinghamshire, (b) North Nottinghamshire and (c) West Nottinghamshire Benefits Agency offices.

The administration of the social fund is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member.

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) if he will make a statement on the use of computerised benefit calculation models by his Department; and what policy applies to claimants wishing to obtain access to these systems;(2) how much his Department has spent on introducing computerised benefit calculation models throughout the Benefits Agency network; how many terminals are currently operational; and if he will list the Benefits Agency facilities where access to these terminals is available to claimants.

The administration of benefits is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the chief executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the hon. Member with such information as is available.

To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what percentage of carers currently entitled to (a) invalidity benefit and (b) unemployment benefit will be eligible for the new incapacity benefit; and if he will make a statement.

The information is not available.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) what assessment he has made of the effects of the delay in translating the Doctors' and Dentists' Review Body award to clinical academic staff on the latter's morale;(2) if he will make a statement on the steps taken since October 1991 to find a long-term solution to the annual problem of implementing the translation of the NHS pay award to clinical academic staff;(3) what steps he is taking to ensure that young doctors entering academic medicine will be assured of sufficient, well structured, and appropriately rewarded career posts;(4) if he will give an assurance to the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals that he will meet in full the difference between the cost of clinical and non-clinical pay awards for 1994;(5) if he will make a statement on the process of implementing the 1994 doctors' pay award for clinical academic staff.

The negotiation of pay awards for clinical academic staff is a matter for the university employers, not for my right hon. Friend. Universities will be required to fund pay awards for clinical and non-clinical academic staff in 1994 from within their existing resources. It is also for the university employers to decide how best to recruit, retain and motivate their clinical academic staff.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what instructions are given to security staff in his departmental offices in London for dealing with (a) those sleeping rough in departmental doorways and (b) beggars in the vicinity; and how many problems have been experienced with each category in the last three months.

No special instructions are issued to the custody guards for dealing with incidents arising from either category. The guards' operational standing orders direct them to notify the local police where the actions of any individuals in bordering public streets are judged to pose a threat to the Department's perimeter security. No problems of this nature have arisen in the last three months.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what action he is taking to reduce the number of children suspended or expelled from schools in (a) Humberside and (b) England.

Head teachers are responsible for securing discipline in their schools and for exercising the power of exclusion. The Department has recently issued guidance to all schools aimed at promoting consistent practice in the use of exclusion and ensuring that permanent exclusion is used as a last resort. Changes in the law governing exclusions have been made in the Education Act 1993, which abolishes the category of indefinite exclusion; places a limit of 15 school days in any one term on fixed-term exclusions; and enables the Secretary of State to place time limits on the operation of exclusion procedures, to reduce to a minimum the time spent by an excluded pupil out of school. These provisions are intended to come into effect on 1 September.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what was the total funding given to each college and sixth form tertiary college in Lancashire for the years 1992–93 and 1993–94; and when the figure for the year 1994–95 will be available.

The Further Education Funding Council's total recurrent funding allocations to colleges in Lancashire for 1993–94, covering the 16-month period 1 April 1993 to 31 July 1994, and those for the 12 months ending 31 July 1995, are given in the table.There are no comparable figures available for 1992–93, when the colleges were funded by their local authority using different bases.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what changes he plans to announce to cash limits on votes within his responsibility for 1994–95.

Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary revised estimates, the cash limits for class X, vote 1—schools, research and miscellaneous services—and for vote 2—higher and further education—will be reduced as follows:

To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he expects to answer the responses to his consultation paper on the supply and demand of newly qualified young people in science and mathematics; and if he will make a statement.

The consultation paper invited responses by 30 June. We shall consider what further action to take in the light of those responses.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will list by regional health authority changes in staff numbers in 1993; and, of these, how many were nurses.

The information requested is not available.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to her answer of 9 May, Official Report, column 2, on vacant hospital consultancies, how many consultant posts were vacant in each region on 30 September 1992.

The information is shown in the table.This indicates consultant vacancies notified to the Department as at 30 September 1992. As a snapshot of vacancies on a single date they may not fairly reflect the trend for the number of vacancies over the year as a whole.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many people not on waiting lists for treatment were waiting to see a specialist in the national health service at the end of March.

There were 62,862 people waiting for their first out-patient appointment in Northern Ireland at 31 March 1994.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, what evaluation has been carried out of projects for which "Making Belfast Work" money has been provided in further education projects in inner Belfast in each of the last four years.

Since the "Making Belfast Work" initiative was introduced in 1988, all further education projects have been evaluated by the Department's inspectorate.

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much has been spent on further education in inner Belfast through the "Making Belfast Work" programme in each of the last four years; and on which projects the money has been spent.

The information is as follows:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will place in the Library a list of the current members of the national health service drugs advisory committee, together with a copy of its annual report and information on the place and frequency of its meetings, indicating whether such meetings are open to the public.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member for Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley (Mr. Foulkes) on 28 February at cols 605–6. The advisory committee on national health service drugs holds meetings as necessary to fulfil its role of advising United Kingdom Health Ministers about the composition of schedules 10 and 11 of the NHS (General Medical Services) Regulations 1992: The committee does not publish an annual report. Meetings are not open to the public.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is her policy on an autonomous midwifery profession.

The Government recognise that midwives are educated and trained to take full care of women during the antenatal, intrapartum and post-natal period, referring to a doctor if there are any deviations from the normal. "Changing Childbirth", the report of the expert group, fully supports this ethos and the national health service is working towards the implementation of the report's recommendations within a five year time-scale.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will make it her policy to ban electro-convulsive treatment on patients under the age of 18 years; and if she will make a statement.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Mrs. Golding) on 17 February at col. 926.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many sight tests were carried out in each of the last five years.

The numbers of national health service sight tests paid for in the last five financial years for which figures are available in England are shown An the table. Information for 1993–94 is not yet available.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what are the percentage increases in the pay settlements or offers for this current year to doctors, dentists, pharmacists and optometrists.

Hospital and community health service doctors and dentists have been awarded a 3 per cent. increase in salaries. General medical practitioners have been awarded a 3 per cent. increase in the average net intended income and a 1.4 per cent. increase in their expenses provisions. General dental practitioners have been awarded a 3 per cent. increase in the gross fee for each item of service and capitation payment. Hospital pharmacists have been offered 1.75 per cent. and negotiations are continuing. No offer has yet been made to optometrists whose claim was received on 25 May.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, (1) pursuant to her answer of 11 May, Official Report, column 157, what is the total cost of reducing the waiting list so that (a) no one waits more than three months for hospital treatment and (b) the average waiting time is reduced to two months;(2) pursuant to her answer of 21 April,

This information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what is her estimate of the effect of the change in number of managers, administration and clerical staff in the NHS since 1989–90.

The national health service needs good managers. As part of the reforms we have deliberately strengthened NHS management, particularly the finance and personnel functions, to provide the quality and number of managers needed to run a £32.2 billion organisation which employs over 900,000 people. The results speak for themselves. For every 100 patients treated in 1989–90 we expect to treat about 121 this year. Average in-patient waiting times have been reduced from nine months to five months. NHS managers deserve credit for their part in these achievements. We are determined to maximise the proportion of NHS expenditure devoted to direct patient care and have recently brought forward proposals to further streamline the central management of the NHS.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many whole-time equivalent NHS nursing and midwifery staff were employed on each grade and pay point of the clinical grades, educational grades, and senior nursing and midwifery pay spine in 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993, broken down by ethnic groups.

This information is not available centrally.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many beds in each health authority are available for (a) respite care and (b) continuing care.

Information collected centrally on numbers of beds does not include the classifications "respite care" and "continuing care". Information on national health service beds in England, classified by ward type, is published in "Bed availability for England (Financial year 1992–93)", a copy of which is available in the Library.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans she has to impose an obligation on each district health authority to provide (a) respite care beds for Alzheimer's disease sufferers and (b) continuing care beds.

Authorities should have a comprehensive range of services available to meet the various needs of those suffering from Alzheimer's disease.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on relations with the Ukraine.