To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list the items that have been purchased by his Department from Harrods store, Knightsbridge, London and the cost price of each item since the establishment of his office. [16153]

There have been no purchases by the Cabinet Office, including the Prime Minister's office and the Office of Public Service and its executive agencies, from Harrods since the establishment of the Deputy Prime Minister's office.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what is the total annual cost of the Government's promotion of each of the policies in each Department. [15315]

The information requested is not held centrally.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what consideration was given to the issue of human rights in East Timor during his meeting in January with the Indonesian Foreign Minister. [15444]

The issue did not arise at this meeting. However the Government's concerns over human rights and East Timor were raised with Mr. Alatas at ministerial level during the course of his visit.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (1) if he will list the executive non-departmental public bodies sponsored by his Department which (a) have a statutory base, (b) admit members of the public to all board or committee meetings and (c) hold open meetings for the public; and if in each case this is (i) under a statutory requirement or (ii) voluntarily; [16182](2) if he will list the executive non-departmental public bodies sponsored by his Department which are subject to

There are no executive non-departmental bodies sponsored by the Office of Public Service.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many persons and at what level in his Department were involved in considering the Government's response to the report of the Scott inquiry. [16642]

Access to the report itself prior to publication was restricted to a very small number of officials in the main Departments concerned in accordance with the procedures agreed with the Scott inquiry. However, the Scott report covered a wide range of policy issues and a number of other officials will have contributed to preparation of the Government's response without sight of the report. It is not therefore possible to give their number or grades.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what was the cost of the allocation of persons in his Department to the consideration of the Government's response to the Scott inquiry. [16576]

Access to the report itself prior to publication was restricted to a very small number of officials in the main Departments concerned in accordance with the procedure agreed with the Scott Inquiry. However, the Scott report covered a wide range of policy issues and a number of other officials will have contributed to preparation of the Government's response without sight of the report. It is not therefore possible to give the cost of the work.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister when he first saw the report of the Scott inquiry. [16592]

I first saw the report on 10 February 1996. Such access was in accordance with the procedures agreed with the Scott inquiry.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what communication he received from the secretary of the Scott inquiry concerning the time needed by the Opposition parties to scrutinise the Scott report; on what date he received such communications; what was the nature of the contents of letters; and if he will deposit copies of those letters in the Library. [16635]

I refer the hon. and learned Gentleman to the answer given by the President of the Board of Trade today.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister at what hour and minute of what day the report of the Scott inquiry was delivered to his office. [16544]

I was not one of the recipients of an advance copy of Sir Richard Scott's report. I first saw the report on 10 February 1996. Such access was in accordance with the procedures agreed with the Scott inquiry.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how he responded to communications received from Mr. Christopher Muttukumaru; what were the dates of the letters; and if he will deposit copies in the Library. [16552]

I and my officials have responded to a number of letters from Mr. Muttukumaru, for example, about my evidence to the inquiry in February 1994. Sir Richard Scott is free to publish any document he considers relevant to his report, consistent with his procedures. I understand that he proposes to do this as soon as possible.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list the members of his Department who saw the report of the Scott inquiry before it was presented to the House; and when each saw the report. [16525]

A small number of civil servants in each of the main Departments concerned had access to the report prior to publication for the purpose of preparing the Government's response. Such access was in accordance with the conditions laid down by the Scott inquiry.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will make changes in the personnel of his Department following criticisms contained in the report of the Scott inquiry. [16565]

No.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what consultations he had with non-ministerial right hon. and hon. Members before the publication of the Scott report. [16467]

I had no such consultations after the receipt of the Scott report or on the Government's response to it.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister which Ministers in his Department entered the writing rooms of the Press Gallery on 15 February. [16481]

The Parliamentary Secretary.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what further progress has been made on the independent review of the NAAFI. [15284]

The independent review has been concluded and a copy of Mr. Dart's report has been made available in the Library of the House. We will now carefully consider Mr. Dart's recommendations with a view to formulating an implementation plan in the near future.Mr. Dart's stated aim was to ensure that NAAFI continue to provide a first-class service to our armed forces and the framework he provides in his report should ensure that NAAFI has every opportunity to do so.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer to the hon. Member for Warley, West (Mr. Spellar) on 13 February, Official Report, column 493, if he will describe the nature of the new restrictions. [16145]

The new US restrictions require a range of naval engineering and navigation equipment to be procured from domestic sources only, subject to certain limited waiver provisions. The new restrictions include the procurement of marine unique gyrocompasses, electronic navigation chart systems, steering controls, pumps, propulsion and machinery control systems. In addition, for a period of one year, new restrictions will apply to procurement of the main propulsion engines for the LPD-17 class of vessels and the emergency generator set for the new Attack submarine. These restrictions are renewable in future legislation.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if Sir Derek Boorman sought permission to make public the information he disclosed on a television programme broadcast on 11 February. [15968]

None of the views expressed by Sir Derek in his interview would have required prior permission from my Department and he did not seek it.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what guarantees are being offered by his Department in respect of future rental income for the properties forming part of the married quarters estate which are currently being offered for sale. [16392]

As explained in the "Preliminary Information Memorandum", a copy of which was placed in the Library, the terms of the sale will include

"a government backed minimum cashflow in the form of a Guaranteed Payment providing a floor to rental income from the portfolio".

The guaranteed payment will be set by reference to the rent on the minimum number of properties MOD expects to occupy.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received from (a) hon. Members, (b) local authorities and (c) trade unions concerning the proposed collocation of ATSA at Chertsey; and if he will make a statement. [16650]

In addition to those from a number of right hon. and hon. Members, my Department has received representations from the following local authorities and trade unions:

• London borough of Greenwich
• Broxtowe borough council
• Malvern Hills district council
• Melton borough council
• Hereford and Worcester county council
• Council of Civil Service Unions.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the overall cost (a) to his Department and (b) to the exchequer in the financial appraisal of the options concerning the future location of ATSA. [16652]

Various options are being considered for the future location of ATSA, including a "do minimum" option collocation at a number of different single sites and a joint site option. The building works and other relevant costs were incorporated into an investment appraisal of all the options considered over a projected 25-year period. This appraisal listed the options in order of cost, with the Malvern-Chertsey twin site the most expensive, and the Chertsey single site the least expensive over the 25-year period. We are now considering the results of the consultative process which ended on 19 February.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what appraisal he has made of the possible location of ATSA on (a) the Royal Arsenal east site and (b) the Royal Arsenal west site; and if he will make a statement. [16651]

The possibility of ATSA collocation in Woolwich was considered at an early stage in the study. The costs of providing the agency's office, technical, messing, and married quarters accommodation, however, were assessed to be higher than that for collocation at either Chertsey or Malvern. With this in mind, as well as the additional heritage and planning implications associated with many of the MOD's sites in Woolwich, and the fact that collocation there would not best satisfy the agency's business needs, it was decided not to subject a Woolwich collocation option to detailed scrutiny.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with English Partnerships regarding the future location of the ATSA based in Woolwich. [16653]

In view of the decision not to subject a Woolwich collocation option to detailed scrutiny, we did not specifically discuss with English Partnerships, the potential owners of the Royal Arsenal west site, the opportunities for ATSA's collocation in Woolwich. Nevertheless, our discussions with them and the London borough of Greenwich as to the future of the Royal Arsenal west site continue, with the aim of achieving a comprehensive solution for the transfer of the site into civilian use so as to maximise local employment prospects.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence further to paragraph 3.15 of the June 1995 consultation document, what is his latest estimate of the upfront capital costs for the additional building at Abbey Wood and the refurbishment of Ensleigh on the collocation of the naval support command headquarters at Abbey Wood/Ensleigh (Bath); at what cost opportunity costs for spare capacity at Abbey Wood were included in this estimate; and if he will make a statement. [16419]

Our estimate for the upfront capital cost for the additional building at Abbey Wood and the refurbishment of Ensleigh remains at about£40 million at 1995 prices and inclusive of VAT. The allowance for the opportunity cost of spare space at Abbey Wood separately included in the investment appraisal was based on the capital cost of the buildings concerned.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are his current plans for the refurbishment of Ensleigh; what is his latest estimate of the cost of the refurbishment; what was the estimated cost in June 1995; and if he will make a statement. [16341]

Further work is being undertaken on the scope of the Ensleigh refurbishment programme following the decisions announced last September. Some refurbishment work is already under way. The estimate for the costs of the work is commercially confidential, but the estimate for the overall upfront capital costs of Ensleigh refurbishment and the new building at Abbey Wood remains about£40 million.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is his current estimate of (a) the number of staff who will seek household removal and (b) the cost of excess daily fares in respect of the collocation of the naval support command headquarters at Abbey Wood-Ensleigh (Bath); and if he will make a statement. [16342]

The consultation document on the NSC headquarters accommodation options assumed, in the appraisal of the Abbey Wood-Ensleigh option, about 100 house moves by Bath-based staff. The transport study which informed this assessment has recently been updated and the results will soon be available. No significant change is expected in the number of staff who may elect to move home. The latest estimate of the total cost of excess fares for the Abbey Wood-Ensleigh option is£5.8 million.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are his latest estimates of the costs of the collocation of the naval support command headquarters at Abbey Wood-Ensleigh (Bath); what are the significant changes from the cost estimates presented in the June 1995 consultation document; and if he will make a statement. [16343]

The net present value—NPV—figure for the costs of NSC relocation is£132 million at the latest price base. Other than the price base uplift, from 1994 to 1995 prices, there are no significant changes from the NPV figure presented in the consultation document.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will commission an inquiry into the underwriting of the export of artillery shells from British companies to Iran since 1985. [15625]

I have been asked to reply.Export licences for export of weapons to Iran have not been available since 1980, and therefore the ECGD would not have underwritten applications for export of artillery shells to Iran during the period since 1985.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how he responded to communications received from Mr. Christopher Muttukumaru; what were the dates of letters; and if he will deposit copies in the Library. [16551]

My officials have responded to a number of letters from Mr. Muttukumaru. Sir Richard Scott is free to publish any documents he considers relevant to his report, consistent with his procedures. I understand that he proposes to do this as soon as possible.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what communication he received from the secretary of the Scott inquiry concerning the time needed by the Opposition parties to scrutinise the Scott report; on what date he received such communications; what was the nature of the contents of letters; and if he will deposit copies of those letters in the Library. [16634]

I refer the hon. and learned Member to the answer given to him by right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade earlier today.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the members of his Department who saw the report of the Scott inquiry before it was presented to the House; and when each saw the report. [16524]

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what was the cost of the allocation of persons in his Department to the consideration of the Government's response to the Scott inquiry. [16575]

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many persons and at what level in his Department were involved in considering the Government's response to the report of the Scott inquiry. [16557]

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make changes in the personnel of his Department following criticisms contained in the report of the Scott inquiry. [16566]

I refer the hon. Members to the reply given earlier today by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.

		Permits
Category	Permit holders	1988	1993	1996
1	Right hon. and hon. Members (first, second and third floors)	606	638	633
2	Officers of the House (fifth floor)	112	118	123
3	Staff of the House with over 15 years service (certain spaces on the fourth and fifth floors)	25	63	61
4	Late night staff (certain spaces on the fourth and fifth floors)	280	279	284
4	Named members of the Press Gallery (certain spaces on the fourth and fifth floors)	18	18	16
5	Members' secretaries with over 15 years service (certain spaces on the third floor)	44	20	20
6	Permanent photo-identity pass holders on Fridays and non-sitting days only (fourth and fifth floors)	474	600	594

The number of places in the underground car park for the use of right hon. and hon. Members only has remained at 260 throughout this period.

To ask the Lord President of the Council if he entered the writing rooms of the Press Gallery on 15 February. [16487]

No.

To ask the Lord President of the Council at what hour and minute of which day the report of the Scott inquiry was delivered to his office. [16490]

After 3.30 pm on Thursday 15 February.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence at what hour and minute of what day the report of the Scott inquiry was delivered to his office. [16541]

During the afternoon of Wednesday 7 February 1996.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he first saw the report of the Scott inquiry. [16593]

It was delivered to me on Wednesday 7 February 1996.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which Ministers in his Department entered the writing rooms of the Press Gallery on 15 February. [16482]

None.

To ask the Chairman of the Administration Committee how many current passes for the House of Commons car park have been issued to each category of persons entitled to such parking passes; how many places are for the use only of hon. and right hon. Members; and what were the equivalent figures in (a) 1988 and (b) 1993. [16093]

The information requested is as follows:

To ask the Lord President of the Council how he responded to communications received from Mr. Christopher Muttukumaru; what were the dates of letters; and if he will deposit copies in the Library. [16555]

I have had no communications from Mr. Muttukumaru.

To ask the Lord President of the Council what communication he received from the secretary of the Scott inquiry, Mr. Christopher Muttukumaru, concerning the time needed by the Opposition parties to scrutinise the Scott report; on what date he received such communications; what was the nature of the contents of letters; and if he will deposit copies of those letters in the Library. [16546]

I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by the President of the Board of Trade today.

To ask the Lord President of the Council when he first saw the report of the Scott inquiry. [16579]

After 3.30 pm on Thursday 15 February.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 7 February, Official Report, column 183, what information is available regarding payments for compensation and damages following disturbances in prisons in England and Wales over the past 10 years. [14963]

[holding answer 13 February 1996]: Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the temporary Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to reimburse the Lancashire police authority for the cost of policing political party conferences held in Blackpool. [16154]

None at present, but Lancashire police authority has been told that we would be prepared to consider the special payment of police grant under section 31 B of the Police Act 1964 for exceptional expenditure incurred in connection with safeguarding national security for the 1997 party conference. We would assess the case for a special grant in the context of the relative financial burden that the party political conferences impose on the force and in the light of the security situation prevailing at the time.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list cases in which Mr. Mervyn Ritter has given evidence on behalf of the Crown against other prisoners while he was in prison. [16077]

Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the temporary Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many arson attacks were reported to each police authority area in the last three complete years. [16147]

The available information relates to offences of arson recorded by the police and is published annually in table 3.1 of "Criminal statistics, England and Wales, Supplementary tables, Volume 3", copies of which are available in the Library.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what percentage of the Prison Service budget was spent on security for (a) 1993–94, (b) 1994–95 and (c) 1995–96; what is the projected percentage for 1996–97; and if he will make a statement. [15903]

[holding answer 21 February 1996]: Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the temporary Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to introduce further market testing in the Prison Service; and if he will make a statement. [15904]

[holding answer 21 February 1996]: Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the temporary Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received regarding funding for dealing with the aftermath of disasters; and if he will make a statement on the responsibilities exercised by his Department in this area. [15615]

None. The Home Office provides some funding to local authorities in England and Wales to assist them in their planning for major disasters—including peacetime disasters—however caused. But representations about the availability of funding to assist those authorities to deal with a disaster after it has happened should be made to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list all emergency plans sponsored by local authorities during the last five years; and if he will make a statement on what plans he has to assist councils to retain emergency teams following the reorganisation of local government. [15616]

The Home Office encourages local authorities to develop flexible emergency management arrangements which are capable of responding to any incident; but we do not require them to submit copies of the plans which they have made.We have issued guidance to the new authorities suggesting how they might wish to approach planning for emergencies in the new situation created by the reorganisation of local government. Members of the Department's emergency planning division have also visited them to discuss the new arrangements.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the executive non-departmental public bodies sponsored by his Department which (a) have a statutory base, (b) admit members of the public to all board or committee meetings and (c) hold open meetings for the public; and if in each case this is (i) under a statutory requirement or (ii) voluntarily. [16184]

(a) The following executive non-departmental public bodies—NDPBs—have a statutory base:

• Alcohol Education and Research Council
• Commission for Racial Equality
• Data Protection Registrar
• Gaming Board for Great Britain
• Horserace Betting Levy Board
• Horserace Totalisator Board
• National Lottery Charities Board
• Police Complaints Authority.

(b) None of executive NDPBs for which I am responsible admits members of the public to all board or committee meetings either under a statutory requirement or voluntarily.(c) The Commission for Racial Equality holds conferences and seminars on race relations issues and the Data Protection Registrar holds meetings to discuss the operation of the Data Protection Act, but neither they nor any of the executive NDPBs for which I am responsible are under a statutory requirement to hold open meetings.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to reply to the letter from the hon. Member for Woolwich dated 18 December 1995, regarding the application for extradition in respect of Kani Yilmaz; and if he will make a statement. [16466]

I replied to the hon. Member on 21 February.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will place in the Library a copy of the document referred to by the Home Office presenting officer at the appeal in Leeds by Mohammed Akhtar, Ref. A47642/3 (s); PO1 736/95. [16425]

It would not be practicable to place in the Library all the information on countries of origin available to presenting officers, since this is drawn from a wide range of sources. Where country reports summarising such information are prepared, they will be placed in the Library when finalised.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he intends to publish the report from Mr. J. J. Rowe QC on the operation in 1995 of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1989; and what conclusions he has reached on the future of the Act. [17300]

I have now considered Mr. Rowe's report which I have today placed in the Library and have decided to accept his recommendation that the legislation should be renewed in its entirety for a further 12 months. A draft order to give effect to that is today being laid before the House.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 February. [15165]

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list his official engagements for Thursday 22 February. [15166]

This morning I presided at a meeting of the Cabinet and had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others. In addition to my duties in the House, I shall be having further meetings later today.

To ask the Prime Minister what action he is taking to ensure that each Government Department lists in its annual report (a) what action it has taken in the past 12 months and (b) what it plans to do in the next 12 months to reduce the regulatory burdens on businesses. [15614]

The Government have agreed as part of their response to the deregulation task force's 1995 annual report, published in September 1995, that all governmental Departments will provide this information in their annual reports. It is for each Secretary of State to ensure that this happens.

To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to his written answer of 14 February, Official Report, column 592, from what sources of information he assesses the record of Government against their targets for repealing or amending regulations. [16185]

I receive regular reports from the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster on progress under the deregulation initiative. These incorporate information from individual Departments on their progress in repealing and amending regulations.

To ask the Prime Minister how he responded to communications received from Mr. Christopher Muttukumaru; what were the dates of letters; and if he will deposit copies in the Library. [16553]

I and my officials have responded to a number of letters from Mr. Muttukumaru, for example, about my evidence to the inquiry in January 1994. Sir Richard Scott is free to publish any document he considers relevant to his report, consistent with his procedures. I understand that he proposes to do this as soon as possible.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will make changes in the personnel of his Department following criticisms contained in the report of the Scott inquiry. [16564]

I do not envisage making such changes. Where officials criticised in the Scott report had acted conscientiously, in good faith and in accordance with Government policy, it would not normally be appropriate to take disciplinary action against them. If there are cases where disciplinary action is considered appropriate this would be carried out under normal departmental disciplinary procedure.

To ask the Prime Minister how many persons and at what level in his Department were involved in considering the Government's response to the report of the Scott inquiry. [16556]

Access to the report itself prior to publication was restricted to a very small number of officials in the main Departments concerned in accordance with the procedures agreed with the Scott inquiry. However, the Scott report covered a wide range of policy issues and a number of other officials will have contributed to preparation of the Government's response without sight of the report It is not therefore possible to give their number or grades.

To ask the Prime Minister what consultations he had with non-ministerial right hon. and hon. Members before the publication of the Scott inquiry. [16465]

I had no such consultations on the contents of the Scott report or on the Government's response to it.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will revise "Questions of Procedure for Ministers" following the report of the Scott inquiry. [16469]

"Questions of Procedure for Ministers" is updated from time to time as the need arises. That will continue to be the case.

To ask the Prime Minister from which civil servants he took advice before making his decision not to permit members of opposition parties to see the report of the Scott inquiry until three hours before it was presented to the House. [16609]

Successive Governments have not disclosed the nature or the specific sources of the advice they receive from the civil service.

To ask the Prime Minister when the Scott report was made available to the head of research at Conservative central office. [16422]

At 15.30 pm on 15 February 1996.

To ask the Prime Minister when he first saw the report of the Scott inquiry. [16595]

Wednesday 7 February 1996.

To ask the Prime Minister what consultation he had with the Secretary to the Cabinet concerning the Government's response to the Scott inquiry; and where and when such consultations took place. [16605]

I have regular consultations with the Secretary of the Cabinet on current issues affecting the Government. These generally take place in 10 Downing street. Details of these consultations are private.

To ask the Prime Minister when he first consulted other Cabinet Ministers about the contents of the report of the Scott inquiry; and where and when such discussions took place and with whom. [16517]

I have frequent meetings with Ministers at which we discuss Government business. These meetings usually take place in No. 10 Downing street. The details of such meetings are private.

To ask the Prime Minister what was the cost of the allocation of persons in his Department to the consideration of the Government's response to the Scott inquiry. [16577]

Access to the report itself prior to publication was restricted to a very small number of officials in the main Departments concerned in accordance with the procedure agreed with the Scott inquiry. However, the Scott report covered a wide range of policy issues and a number of other officials will have contributed to preparation of the Government's response without sight of the report. It is not therefore possible to give the cost of the work.

To ask the Prime Minister what communication he received from the secretary of the Scott inquiry, concerning the time needed by the opposition parties to scrutinise the Scott report; on what date he received such communications; what was the nature of the contents of letters; and if he will deposit copies of those letters in the Library. [16636]

I refer the hon. and learned Member to the answer given to him by the President of the Board of Trade today.

To ask the Prime Minister at what hour and minute of what day the report of the Scott inquiry was delivered to his office. [16542]

During the afternoon of Wednesday 7 February 1996.

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list the members of his Department who saw the report of the Scott inquiry before it was presented to the House; and when each saw the report. [16522]

A small number of civil servants in each of the main Departments concerned had access to the report prior to publication for the purpose of preparing the Government's response. Such access was in accordance with the conditions laid down by the Scott inquiry.

To ask the Prime Minister on whose authority it was decided not to permit members of opposition parties to see the report of the Scott inquiry until three hours before the report was presented to the House. [16512]

The Government decided, in the light of precedents, that it was appropriate to allow access to Opposition spokesmen three and a half hours before the publication of the report.

Name of body	Parliamentary commissioner	Audit commission	National audit office	Open government	Performance indicators	Citizen's charter
Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
Construction Industry Training Board	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Education Assets Board	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
Engineering Construction Industry Training Board	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Equal Opportunities Commission	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes

To ask the Prime Minister if he will list all locations where a full set of the transcripts from the Scott inquiry are lodged. [15970]

Transcripts of oral evidence to the Scott inquiry are publicly available from Smith Bernal, Official Court Reports, 167 Fleet Street. London EC4A 2EA, tel. 0171 939 2266. I understand that copies are also available for public consultation in Westminster public libraries. Since transcripts of oral evidence were available to the general public I have no means of identifying the locations of all such transcripts.

To ask the Prime Minister how many photocopies the Government have made of the Scott report as of 13 February. [15703]

[holding answer 16 February 1996]: No photocopies were made of the report as a whole prior to publication. Photocopies of some sections of the report were made, in accordance with agreements reached with the inquiry.

To ask the Prime Minister which Ministers in his Department entered the writing rooms of the Press Gallery on 15 February. [16484]

If any Ministers did so, that is a matter for them.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment how many environmental appraisals were produced by her Department using the guidance contained in the Department of the Environment's "Policy Appraisal and the Environment" in 1995; and if she will place copies in the Library. [15111]

[holding reply 14 February 1996]: None.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if she will list the executive non-departmental public bodies sponsored by her Department which are subject to (a) investigation by the Parliamentary Commissioner, (b) scrutiny by the Audit Commission. (c) scrutiny by the National Audit Office, (d) statutory provisions for open government, (e) performance indicators and (f) provisions under the citizens charter. [16016]

The information requested is shown in the table:

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment which of the executive non-departmental public bodies sponsored by her Department have a statutory base and which (a) admit members of the public to all board or committee meeting

		Admit public to all meetings		Hold open meetings
Name of body	Statutory base	Statutory	Voluntary	Statutory	Voluntary
Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research	No	No	No	No	No
Construction Industry Training Board	Yes	No	No	No	No
Education Assets Board	Yes	No	No	No	No
Engineering Construction Industry Training Board	Yes	No	No	No	No
Equal Opportunities Commission	Yes	No	No	No	No
Funding Agency for Schools	Yes	No	No	No	Yes
Further Education Funding Council	Yes	No	No	No	Yes
Higher Education Funding Council for England	Yes	No	No	No	No
Investors In People UK	No	No	No	No	No
National Council for Educational Technology	No	No	No	No	No
National Council for Vocational Qualifications	No	No	No	No	No
National Youth Agency	No	No	No	No	No
Remploy Ltd.	Yes	No	No	No	No
School Curriculum and Assessment Authority	Yes	No	No	No	No
Teacher Training Agency	Yes	No	No	No	Yes

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what plans she has to allow local education authorities to continue to fund under-fives provision directly through the local management of schools formula and to redeem vouchers on behalf of local providers under the nursery voucher scheme. [16284]

Officials wrote to all chief education officers on 31 January to inform them that the proposed grant for nursery education in respect of local education authority maintained schools will be paid to local education authorities for distribution through their LMS schemes. LEAs will continue to be able to spend what they consider appropriate on provision for under-fives, taking the grant and other forms of revenue into account.It will be for local decision whether LEAs participate in handling vouchers, or leave it to the schools they maintain.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if she will list (a) the number of four-year-olds in maintained provision at January 1995,

the information requested is shown in the table:

The Department's estimate of the number of four-year-olds in maintained provision in each of the phase 1 authorities in January 1995—taken from the annual schools census—is shown in the table, with the deduction from the 1996–97 standard spending assessment in each case.

LEA	Estimated number of 4-year-olds in maintained provision at January 1995	SSA deduction (£ million)
Kensington and Chelsea	800	0.7
Wandsworth	2,600	2.4
Westminster	1,100	1.0
Norfolk	6,300	6.8

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment when she first saw the report of the Scott inquiry. [16596]

I first saw the report of the Scott inquiry on the morning of Monday 19 February.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if she will list the members of her Department who saw the report of the Scott inquiry before it was presented to the House; and when each saw the report. [16520]

No members of my Department saw the report of the Scott inquiry before it was published.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment at what hour and minute of which day the report of the Scott inquiry was delivered to her office. [16493]

The report of the Scott inquiry was delivered to my office at 2pm on Friday 16 February.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment which Ministers in her Department entered the writing rooms of the Press Gallery on 15 February. [16486]

If any Ministers did so, that is a matter for them.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if she will make a statement on the progress of the revised school premises regulations. [17173]

Following my answer on 10 January—Official Report, column 274—I can confirm that new school premises regulations have been laid before Parliament today.The new regulations will come into on 1 September this year, when the transitional arrangements of the 1981 regulations expire.The government will publish an explanatory circular and two sets guidance during the summer. The circular will explain the regulations in layman's terms; one guidance document will cover accommodation in schools and nurscries, the other will cover will cover school grounds.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what changes she plans to cash limits on votes within her responsibility for 1995–96. [17174]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced on 1 February 1996 that the cash limit for class x, vote 1, schools, research and miscellaneous services will be reduced by£75,000 from£735,483,000 to£735,408,000. The cash limit will now be reduced by a further£900,000 to£734,508,000. The reduction will be used to offset an increase in the non-voted cash limit for local authority capital for school building projects—DFEE/LACAP. The local authority capital cash limit, DFEE/LACAP, will therefore be increased by£900,000 from£46,898,000 to£47,798,000.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment (1) what plans she has to update the actuarial valuation of the teachers' superannuation scheme; [16348](2) what estimates she has made of catch-up contributions required to cater for the review of the teachers' superannuation scheme actuarial valuation. [16317]

The valuation of the teachers' superannuation scheme is carried out by the Government Actuary and it is for him to estimate the contribution required. My right hon. Friend is awaiting the Government Actuary's report on the valuation of the scheme as at 31 March 1991, which she expects early in 1996–97.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will update his answer to the hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field) of 22 May 1995, Official Report, column 469 on revenue costs of tax reliefs and allowances, to give figures for 1996–97. [14401]

Estimated full-year revenue costs at 1996–97 income levels are in the table. Separate costings have been produced for allowances and reliefs. The combined cost of both allowances and reliefs would be greater than the sum of the individual figures.

Cost of allowances and reliefs
£ billion
Group of taxpayers	Allowances	Reliefs
Top 1 per cent.	0.4	0.8
Top 5 per cent.	2.2	2.1
Top 10 per cent.	4.3	3.0
Top 25 per cent.	8.6	4.4
Top 50 per cent.	15.4	6.2
Top 70 per cent.	20.8	7.0
All taxpayers	28.1	7.4

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many local exchange and trading schemes have been established in the United Kingdom; and how many members they have. [15429]

Information on the number of local exchange and trading schemes which have been established in the United Kingdom, and the number of members they have, is not available.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list the executive non-departmental public bodies sponsored by his Department which (a) have a statutory base, (b) admit members of the public to all board or committee meetings and (c) hold open meetings for the public; and if in each case this is (i) under a statutory requirement or (ii) voluntarily. [16175]

There are no executive non-departmental public bodies sponsored by the Treasury.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his policy in respect of disposal of seized alcoholic drinks and tobacco products. [17172]

Customs has carried out a review of its policy on the disposal of seized excise goods. The policy to destroy small seizures of alcohol, in an

Claims paid by ECGD in£ millions by financial year from 1 April 1988
Country	1988–89	1989–90	1990–91	1991–92	1992–93	1993–94	1994–95	11995–96
Indonesia	5	5	3	2	0	1	1	4
Iraq	28	56	193	181	104	61	46	14
Jordan	1	28	49	50	46	41	36	31
Nigeria	291	242	157	131	98	48	28	5
Oman	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Other countries in Gulf Co-operation Council group	5	3	12	7	0	0	0	0
1To 31 January 1996.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will update his answer to the hon. Member for Blaenau Gwent of 20 January 1994, Official Report, columns 748–50, on membership of the exports credits guarantee advisory service. [15623]

There have been no further appointments to the Export Credits Guarantee Advisory Council since 20 January 1994. The following members, however, how now retired from service:

• A. G. Gormly, Esq., CBE
• C. Smallwood Esq.
• Sir Robert Davidson
• Sir Frank Lampl.

Further appointments will be made in due course.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the role played by Crescent International Petroleum in trading with Iraq. [15967]

No.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the factors included under the heading "other elements" contributing to ECGD exposure in Nigeria and Brazil as outlined on page 6 of the annual report of ECGD. [15174]

The other elements are made up entirely of claims paid not yet recovered.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list for each year since 1988 the total amount of claims paid by ECGD broken down to show those paid in respect (a) Iraq, (b) Jordan, (c) Nigeria, (d) Oman, (e) Indonesia, and (f) other countries in the Gulf Co-operation Council group. [15177]

The following is the information:

To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what were the main components of the pay off to the former chief executive of the Post Office; [15915](2) what early retirement or voluntary severance schemes are currently in place for employees of the Post Office; [15916](3) what were the principal factors in his decision to approve the early retirement of the chief executive of the Post Office. [15924]

[holding answer 19 February 1996]: The details of the payments made to Mr. Cockburn, the former chief executive, on leaving the Post Office were set out in the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Manchester, Blackley (Mr. Eastham) on 5 December 1995, Official Report, column 162. The Post Office is responsible for the early retirement and voluntary severance schemes in place for its employees.There are two principal pension schemes in operation within the Post Office: the Post Office staff superannuation scheme and the Post Office pension scheme. Mr. Cockburn is a member of the former. The provisions and administration of each are the responsibility of the Post Office and the trustees.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will take steps to ensure that no arms are exported to Nigeria from (a) the United Kingdom and (b) other EU states, under licences which were granted prior to the current embargo; and if he will make a statement. [16260]

[holding answer 21 February 1996]: At the end of last year, the European Union decided to strengthen its measures against the military regime in response to adverse developments in Nigeria. Among these measures was strengthening of the existing restrictions on the sale of military equipment, though there was no agreement to extend these measures to existing contracts and therefore export licences which were issued against those contracts were not revoked.So far as future exports are concerned, in common with arms embargoes against other countries, the embargo against Nigeria will include all military, security and paramilitary goods and arms, ammunition and related material which is listed in group 1 of part III of schedule 1 to the Export of Goods (Control) Order 1994, available from HMSO. The rules do not distinguish between items intended for the military and for the police, nor has any exception been allowed for international peacekeeping operations in which the Nigerians might be involved.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many wind turbines were erected in (i) each year since 1993, (ii) 1994, (iii) 1995 and (iv) 1996 to date. [16417]