How many copies of "EMU-Practical Guidelines for Business" have to date been circulated to small businesses. [25684]

In total, about 65,000 copies of the booklet have been distributed. Copies have been sent to the regional offices of the Federation of Small Businesses and to many trade associations and other intermediary bodies.

By my reckoning, that figure is up by some 15,000 since last July, which is not a huge amount. Many small businesses are gradually realising that the euro will happen and will affect them, but they are concerned about not knowing exactly what they should be doing in practice and the fact that they may have to make expenditure for an uncertain outcome. Does the Minister accept that we need a clear timetable against which small businesses can plan the future?

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor has been extremely clear on this matter. I accept that small businesses are concerned about the nuts and bolts of what they need to do. That is why all the Government's efforts are concentrated in that direction, and why my Department and the Treasury are working very hard with business. We are compensating for the lack of information from the previous Government who, because of their splits and divisions, put party before country.

Will my hon. Friend ensure that, over the next few years, there is a continuing stream of publicity to emphasise the importance of business being ready for the single currency, so that it can take advantage of it should the Government decide that the time and the economic circumstances are right for this country to join?

As my hon. Friend suggests, it is absolutely right that business is given as much information as possible, and we shall continue to do that.

Does the Minister agree that from as early as 1 January 1999—in about 47 weeks' time—small British businesses could face additional costs from the euro, irrespective of the UK's position, as firms that export to Europe may be forced to tender in euros to maintain their competitive advantage and will then have to bear the exchange and subsequent risks to their business?

The hon. Lady doth protest too much. It is no good her complaining now, given that in the past 18 years when the Conservatives were in government they did absolutely nothing to help the business community. The DTI and the Treasury are working very hard not only with large but with small businesses, which are represented on the advisory group and in their small business organisation. I am not surprised that the hon. Lady uses a smokescreen to disguise her policy on this issue. She recently very honestly admitted that her party had lost the small business vote. She also said in a great fit of honesty—which I very much welcome—that there will be very little policy on small business coming from the Conservatives. That is why the latest quarterly survey by Office World on small business shows that the party in government, the Labour party, enjoys record support among small businesses.

What steps she is taking to assist British companies to improve their competitiveness. [25685]

What steps she is taking to improve the competitiveness of British companies. [25698]

I launched my competitiveness UK initiative last summer, and it is at the heart of my drive to build a partnership with business to identify practical policies that address business needs and help companies improve their competitiveness.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that comprehensive answer. Does it not show the stark contrast between the approach of this Government, who are prepared to support business in a practical and positive way, and that of the previous Government in the past 18 years? In 1979, manufacturing industry represented 30 per cent. of gross domestic product. That figure is now down to below 20 per cent. We have the lowest growth in manufacturing of any of our European competitors. Will the Government support manufacturing to ensure sustainable growth, because that affects employment? Our constituents vitally need the jobs that manufacturing can create.

I share my hon. Friend's view of the importance of manufacturing, and have always, both in opposition and in government, stressed how mistaken it was of the Conservative party to neglect that vital sector of the economy in the mid-1980s. My hon. Friend will be aware of the steps that the Government have taken recently, in partnership with companies such as Rolls-Royce, British Aerospace and Jaguar, to secure the high-quality employment that manufacturing can still offer this country.

Will my right hon. Friend confirm that after 18 years of Conservative government, our average company performance remains below that of our main competitors? I re-emphasise the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford, South (Mr. Sutcliffe) about manufacturing industry. Our manufacturing productivity is 25 to 30 per cent. lower than that in France, Germany and the United States. Do not those facts fully justify the Government's determination to involve industry in a new partnership with Government to improve economic performance?

My hon. Friend is entirely right. Part of the unfortunate legacy left to us by the Conservatives was that they told at best half or partial truths about the state of the economy. There have been improvements in productivity in recent years, but my hon. Friend is right that there is still a great deal of work to be done. That work can be done effectively only in partnership with the business community, and we are engaged in that process.

I was with a large group of business people last night, and the main complaint on which they lobbied me was the uniform business rate. Is the right hon. Lady aware of the Conservative party's proposal at the last election to make a £1,000 deduction from the uniform business rateable value? That was extremely popular with small business men. Would she consider such proposals in the review that she is about to undertake? Would she consider particularly the unfair impact that the uniform business rate has on small businesses as compared with large businesses?

I am well aware of the profound unpopularity of the uniform business rate with small businesses, and the hon. Gentleman is right to draw attention to it. It was, of course, introduced by the Conservative Government, and small business made repeated representations to them over the years asking them to do something about it. I accept that the Conservatives underwent a belated, deathbed conversion and tried to do something about it. Proposals as to how the matter should be handled are a matter for the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, and I know that it is actively considering those proposals.

I congratulate the right hon. Lady on her choice of a very old Labour outfit to show some solidarity with the principles that she is ditching.

The right hon. Gentleman was mistaken in everything that he said. I picked out this outfit to match the departmental folder.

Why did the right hon. Lady not warn us at the time of the debate on the issue that the Government were considering exempting the armed forces? I told her that they were considering other exemptions, and she made no mention of it. Will she now tell the House categorically whether any other exemptions will be made under the Bill, or whether that is the last exemption that will be pulled out of her by the Chancellor and other Ministers?

What I actually told the House was that these were matters of considerable importance and complexity, which would be debated in full in Committee and through the legislative process of the House. That is precisely what I said, and that is precisely what has happened.

Pursuant to her answer of 18 November 1997, Official Report, column 105, on locating in Scotland, if she will make a statement on the status of the Committee on Overseas Promotion after the establishment of a Scottish Parliament. [25686]

I expect the Committee on Overseas Promotion to continue as an administrative forum which enables the Invest in Britain Bureau and all its partner agencies in the UK to liaise and to co-ordinate their activities as necessary.

Who will umpire the game of beggar-my-industrial-neighbour between Holyrood and Westminster?

My hon. Friend asked that question in my deaf ear.

The Minister seems a bit confused. The question is about overseas promotion, while the concordat is clearly about inward investment. We know that there will be a concordat on inward investment, but will there also be something akin to the concordat to ensure that there is no competition between the various parts of the United Kingdom in the promotion of exports?

The whole purpose of the Government's strategy is to promote not only inward investment but exports. That is why we have shown the way that the Government are moving forward on our competitive agenda. The body will co-operate and co-ordinate activities in these areas. That approach differs from that of the hon. Gentleman and the previous Government who did nothing to co-ordinate activities in this area.

If she will make a statement on the Government's proposals for reform of the objective 5b criteria. [25687]

We welcome the Commission's proposal for continued support for vulnerable rural areas under the new objective 2. We want to see a fair balance of the available resources between rural, industrial, urban and fisheries areas, ideally determined at the national or regional level. We will seek an overall system and detailed criteria which are fair and equitable to the UK regions and to the United Kingdom as a whole.

Can the Minister do anything to allay the fears that are circulating in the Scottish borders and in other areas of the country as a result of the rumours that have been flowing from Brussels, suggesting that the eligibility criteria for rural areas will change substantially? Would it not be perverse and unfair for the United Kingdom, which is the fifth poorest of the member states but the fifth largest net contributor, to be denied millions, if not billions, of ecu in structural funds? Will she seek to persuade her opposite number in the Commission of the need to adopt GDP per head figures rather than unemployment rates as the future eligibility. criterion for objective 5b areas?

I recognise that the Scottish borders, like many other areas, face particular social and economic problems. Of course, as the hon. Gentleman is aware, the area benefits from its objective 5b status. At this early stage, I cannot predict the areas that will be eligible for the new objective 2 status. However, we are seeking a proper balance between rural and other areas and we want to use that objective criterion to determine areas of greatest need. I know that the hon. Gentleman and the House want that. I give the hon. Gentleman the assurance that we certainly prefer a system under which the total eligible population of each country is related to national GDP. I assure him that my colleagues and I are working hard on this issue.

I listened with interest to my hon. Friend's answer on structural funding. In view of the devastating news that has just been announced that we have not been successful with a viable package for the last tin mine in Europe, South Crofty in Cornwall, does she agree that perhaps objective 5b has not delivered for Cornwall in the way that many of us had hoped? Will she and the Government seriously consider objective 1 funding for Cornwall?

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for her leadership in the campaign to save South Crofty. I know that that sentiment is shared by hon. Members in all parts of the House. My officials and I have worked hard, in hand with my hon. Friend and with local management and the work force at South Crony on the application for regional selective assistance. I regret that the application has had to be rejected as the proposal would not lead to a viable business. I think that that is understood by all the relevant parties. The Government are looking hard to see how the local economy can be regenerated, and we recognise Cornwall's strong arguments for objective 1 status. The House may be assured that the Government will push hard to secure the best outcome for Cornwall and for other parts of the UK in the reform of the structural funds.

Moving from one metal to another and from the real problems of Cornish tin miners, may I ask the Minister whether she concedes that her answers will go down like a lead balloon in rural areas where farmers already face a record slump in their incomes? The Rural Development Commission has been filleted and there are threats to country sports and concerns about an overall right of access. There is a profound belief that the Government do not care about rural areas and will not provide continuing support for them—and that all they are going to do is build houses all over them.

I have considerable respect and admiration for the hon. Gentleman, and I am sorry that he takes that view. Plainly, he did not listen to my reply to the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood) when I stressed the importance of rural areas. We are keen to achieve the right balance and a fair deal for all areas. Rural areas are close to our hearts, particularly, of course, because Labour Members represent so many rural areas as a result of the last election.

If the Multilateral Agreement on Investment will include a legal requirement for parties not to lower environmental and labour standards in order to attract foreign investment. [25688]

Draft text on that issue has been discussed at the negotiations of the Multilateral Agreement on Investment in Paris. The UK is at the forefront of widespread but not universal support for such a legal requirement. We will continue to press the case up to the conclusion of the negotiations in April 1998.

Does the Minister accept that his Department gave full support to the aims of the White Paper on international development? Indeed, does he recall that, in a recent written answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and St. Austell (Mr. Taylor), the Department pledged to sustain development, to protect the environment and to protect labour standards in relation to the agreement? Does the Minister accept that if there are no legal constraints on both parties in the agreement, it should be delayed?

The agreement should not be delayed. It is an opportunity, not a threat. It is the first major investment treaty to have substantive provisions on the environment and labour. The sooner we can conclude it and partners recognise it, the better it will be for many millions of people throughout the world.

I agree with the Minister's last point. Does he accept that the worldwide backlash against globalisation—whether the crisis in Asia, the failure of President Clinton to achieve fast-track trade negotiations or the riots in France—show that free trade and foreign direct investment that does not take social considerations into account is a dead-end street? Will he therefore assure the House that the Government will not be signing any multilateral agreement on investment that does not include exactly the aims that he has been stressing?

The Government are totally committed to international and national standards in these sectors. Those standards are vital to us and, as a consequence, we are trying our best to conclude this agreement to ensure that the objectives as set out are carried through practically.

Yesterday, I had the pleasure of reading the hon. Gentleman's speech on age limitations and age discrimination in the labour market in the UK. Have the Government and the Minister done a complete U-turn on this issue—I hope that he will re-read his speech, which was made just a year or so ago—because he wants inward investment to the UK, or simply because the Labour party no longer has any principles?

It is the hon. Gentleman's arguments that are aging. This week, the Government have made it absolutely clear that we oppose age discrimination at work in all its forms. My right hon. and hon. Friends at the Department for Education and Employment are proceeding with their work to ensure better practice and better standards. I am absolutely certain that, by the end of their five-year term, the Government will have done more than the previous Government did in 18 years to tackle age discrimination.

What action she is taking to tackle unfair contract terms in consumer contracts. [25689]

On 26 January, I issued a consultation paper on proposals to strengthen consumer protection. We proposed that, for the first time, a range of bodies representing consumer interests, including the Consumers Association, trading standards officers and the utility regulators, will have power to take action in the courts to stop the use of unfair contract terms.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on taking that important new initiative. Will he confirm that the change in the regulations will make life much tougher for the rogue trader and improve consumer standards, which will be widely welcomed by consumers?

Consumers will indeed benefit considerably if more bodies are empowered to act. Widening the scope for ction will provide consumer bodies with a powerful weapon to tackle unfair contract terms. The 1994 regulations were deliberately framed to block such action.

Is the Minister aware that there is growing evidence that the new licensing arrangements introduced by Ofgas to protect consumers from predatory selling and enforcement of contracts by the various gas supply companies are not working? To give just one example—I hope that he is aware of it, but he can tell me if he is not—recently, in the Eastleigh area, where this is becoming current practice, an elderly person with cataracts who is blind was conned into signing a gas contract which he thought was a request for further information. There have been dozens of such examples in the past three or four weeks and they clearly show that the new regulations are not working. Will the Minister assure the House that he will take action to bring predatory selling of these contracts and protection of the consumer to the fore as soon as possible.

I know that the hon. Gentleman and certainly Labour Members will welcome the action that has been taken since the election to ensure that, for the first time, after years of most blatant mis-selling, conditions on selling and mis-selling are included in the licence. If that should prove not to be adequate—evidence has been coming in only during the past few days and weeks—we shall revisit it, and primary legislation cannot be ruled out.

What measures her Department has taken since 1 May to help British exporters; and if she will make a statement. [25690]

In accordance with our manifesto, we established the Export Forum, which recommended a series of improvements to our export promotion effort, which we are now implementing. In addition, we have reversed our predecessors' decision to abolish the trade fairs support scheme and have announced the largest ever programme of trade fairs and missions overseas. I plan to increase funding for my Department's export promotion work for 1998–99 by around £1 million compared with this year. I expect shortly to be able to announce a series of new measures to help British exporters.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer—and particularly for the trade fairs, which my local chamber of commerce will welcome. On Monday, I shall be visiting the Bostrom group, an extremely successful firm in my constituency which exports its products around the world, to talk about its current problems, which it attributes to the strength of the pound. What message does my right hon. Friend have for that company about the importance of the Government's long-term strategy for securing economic stability and the way in which that will resolve its short-term problems?

My hon. Friend is entirely right, and I am glad to learn that, like so many Labour Members, she continues to cultivate her links with the business community. We fully recognise the anxieties that are expressed, although, as I am sure she is well aware, the picture is not uniform—different sectors are affected to different degrees and in different ways. However, we accept the long-term need for a stable and competitive exchange rate and believe that the Government's actions to achieve long-term low inflation and stability will contribute to that end.

Has the President of the Board of Trade studied the most recent survey of the British chambers of commerce which reveals that a balance of firms is still losing exports? If she has, why is she alone in failing to understand that all the steps that she is taking to help exporters are grossly outweighed by the massively damaging effects of an overvalued exchange rate caused by the precipitate five interest rate rises perpetrated by her Government?

I wonder where the hon. Gentleman was during the 1980s when the previous Government deliberately pursued a policy of a high exchange rate in defiance of economic reality and threw many firms out of business. Some firms have been disadvantaged to a degree, but it remains the case that the figure is somewhat patchy. In the three months to November, the volume of manufacturing exports was 6 per cent. higher than a year earlier and exports of goods and services in total are expected to grow by around 5 per cent. in 1998.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that at present around one third of exports come from companies that have settled in Britain as a result of inward investment and employ roughly about 18 per cent. of the work force. There is evidence that during the past 18 years the Tory Administration failed to nurture indigenous industry. Therefore, will she consider what mechanisms might be introduced to transfer technology from universities to British companies so as to strengthen British indigenous industry?

My hon. Friend is entirely right that Britain has a tremendous potential competitive advantage in the creativity and innovation of the British people and in the work that is done in our universities and other research establishments. We continue—partly by promoting the foresight programme and partly by other means—to work with those in such establishments to build better links between them and British companies. We fully realise that Britain's future competitive advantage lies in creativity and innovation rather than in the sweatshop mentality of the Conservative party.

I agree with the right hon. Lady that we made mistakes in the early 1990s. We have learnt from them and we have apologised for them. Will she now learn both from that experience and from the current experience of manufacturing and exporting industries? I do not think that she has realised how serious it is out there for people who are trying to make things and sell them abroad. Will she tell the Chancellor of the Exchequer that there is grave damage from high sterling and high interest rates, that his Monetary Policy Committee has caused that damage and that he has added gravely to it by taxing savings and taxing business? Will the right hon. Lady get him to change policy before manufacturers and exporters go under because of her policies?

As I am sure the right hon. Gentleman is aware, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor is reducing taxes on business, so we are heading for the lowest corporation tax rate in the developed world. It is nonsense to suggest that the Government are complacent. We are well aware of the private sector's anxieties and concerns, and we are in continuing discussions with them about the issues on which we can support and be of assistance to them. I am rather surprised to hear the right hon. Gentleman being so critical of the Monetary Policy Committee and of the Bank of England. My impression was that many Conservative Members supported moves towards the type of independence for the Bank of England on interest rates that my right hon. Friend has introduced.

What assessment she has made of the European Union Green Paper on convergence of the telecommunications, media and information technology sectors. [25692]

Both the Department of Culture, Media and Sport and the Department of Trade and Industry have circulated the Commission Green Paper for consultation to a wide range of United Kingdom interests. The Government intend to prepare a response to the Commission Green Paper on the basis of the replies that we receive to our consultation. Getting the framework right is vital for development of the information super-highway.

I think that my hon. Friend will agree that the offer made by BT and the cable companies to connect every school in the United Kingdom to the information super-highway demonstrates that the Government are grasping the huge potential benefits of the changes described in the Green Paper. In the months ahead, as she discusses those matters with her European counterparts, will she impress on them the benefits of maximum choice for users of telecommunications services—as demonstrated, for example, by the fact that UK telecommunications charges are considerably less than those in other European nations.

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. I congratulate both the cable industry and BT on their imaginative offers to schools for internet access—which is another example of the Government working in partnership with industry to improve United Kingdom competitiveness. I shall certainly continue to impress on my European colleagues the benefits of choice in telecommunications, which has resulted in huge benefits to United Kingdom consumers.

What discussions she has had with the European Union Commissioner, Mr. van Miert, about his investigations into the request by the formula one motor racing industry for exemption from regulations relating to EU competition law. [25695]

None; does the hon. Gentleman think that there should have been?

What—or who—has induced the Government to be so indulgent towards blatantly anti-competitive practices in formula one motor sport? Is the Minister unaware that the position of the generous benefactor, Bernie Ecclestone, is highly invidious in as much as he sits on the board of the regulatory body—the HA—while running his own company, Formula One Holdings? Has not the European Commissioner, Mr. van Miert, said that

"the whole set up is layer upon layer of exclusive deals'?

"Unlike national governments the European Commission would not bow to pressure from the sport'?

I have not followed the proceedings of the Belgian Parliament as closely as the hon. Gentleman, but we support the full and fair application of European Community competition rules. The involvement of particular individuals does not affect our position?

If she will list the construction contracts won by United Kingdom-based offshore fabrication yards in the past two years. [25696]

I have placed in the Library of the House a detailed list of all construction contracts worked on or secured by UK offshore fabrication yards in 1996 and 1997 and known to the Department. My hon. Friend will note that it is an extensive list running to some 130 contracts. It reflects the current competitiveness of the UK fabrication industry, which is winning orders for UK engineering and technology and underpinning jobs.

I am sure that my hon. Friend agrees that our fabrication yards are among the best in the world. One such company is UIE, which is now located at an excellent facility in my constituency. What assistance is given to yards in respect of the international market for offshore structures? Is not much of the foreign competition underpinned by state and regional government subsidies?

The former Scott Lithgow shipyard in my hon. Friend's constituency is currently being used for offshore construction work and has won orders. There has been a shift in the industry away from fixed rigs and towards floating platform systems. The Department recently launched the fabricators forum to enhance the UK fabrication industry. At the outset, the oil industry was told that 18 per cent. of its work would be within the United Kingdom. The figure has now reached 17 per cent. Significant fabrication requirements for Norway, Denmark, Canada, America and other international markets are being won by the expertise in our shipyards to which my hon. Friend referred.

I wonder whether my hon. Friend will tell me about another offshore fabrication? Will he tell me why an offshore fabrication document has gone to hundreds of thousands of retired miners and miners' widows saying that they have to use another form of fuel and that they will lose 12, 14 or 16 bags of coal? The Minister is responsible, so will he give a guarantee—

Order. The Minister might be responsible, but the question is out of order.

It was a good try.

It was not even a good try. I do not mind when it is, but it was a very poor one.

What plans she has to promote investment in new technology within the electricity industry. [25700]

My Department is heavily committed to research in the new technologies for the electricity industry and their use. The foresight programme, to which my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and Industry referred, has identified opportunities that we are considering with the electricity generation industry. This year, DTI and research council budgets for research, particularly into new and renewable energy items such as advanced fuel cells and photovoltaics, have been supported to the tune of more than £18 million. We also support the non-fossil fuel levy orders in respect of renewable energy technologies to ensure that we take forward renewable energy in electricity generation in accordance with the targets that we have set.

I am grateful to the Minister for that response, but I was thinking more in terms of domestic users. Does he agree that, in respect of domestic metering, the United Kingdom is still living in the dark ages and that new meters are now available that enable and encourage users to make much better use of electricity and perhaps reduce waste? The introduction of such metering systems will probably depend on the Minister's introducing a national standard. That would allow suppliers to invest in meters while retaining competition between them.

As electricity competition opens up, electricity companies will see what can be done to improve metering. The technology exists and I hope that companies are not waiting to see how the market pans out before introducing it, as it could make a significant contribution to—dare I say it—reducing the price of electricity. I take the hon. Gentleman's point. I shall refer the question of standards to the regulator, who is responsible for such matters.

Will my hon. Friend look into new technology for answering the telephones in the electricity industry? Norweb and Manweb fail on that.

I compliment my hon. Friend on his ingenuity. He championed his constituents and intervened on their behalf during the difficult period over Christmas when the weather brought down lines. I take his point. He said during an Adjournment debate that communication with people whose electricity supply is cut off is vital throughout the industry. I hope that the industry hears what he has said. The regulator has been asked to report on the issue.

What will take priority in the Government's strategy for the British electricity industry: providing the cheapest possible electricity to the consumer; honouring the commitments of Kyoto; or protecting jobs in the coal industry? I asked a similar question at the most recent Trade and Industry questions. Several of my constituents commented on the unsatisfactory answer that I received.

Our policy is clear: competition where possible and regulation where necessary. Rather than simply directing regulators to focus on competition, we intend to put consumers at the heart of the process. That will be a great change from the approach of the Conservatives when they opened up the markets.

What additional help she proposes to provide to assist the promotion of manufacturing exports. [25701]

I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton, North (Ms Keeble), in which I referred to our expansion of support for trade fairs and missions, as well as general export promotion.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that British Aerospace is a fine exporter for Britain, earning an average of £4 billion each year and creating and sustaining some 40,000 skilled and well-paid jobs? May I thank my right hon. Friend for the magnificent part that she played recently in ensuring that £120 million of launch aid came to my constituency for British Aerospace? I invite her to come to my constituency and see the development of wing technology at the Airbus factory. We would like to say a proper and sincere thank you for all her help to the industry.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. He is right: the programme of launch investment that the Government have agreed with British Aerospace will secure 2,000 high-tech and innovative jobs in the United Kingdom. With the engine supply work that Rolls-Royce has secured, almost 50 per cent. of the Airbus 340X will come from the United Kingdom—a further example of British technological success and achievement.

Will the right hon. Lady comment on the damage that the strength of the pound is doing to manufacturing industries that export? Is she aware of the damage to morale and business confidence, which a survey in my area showed were falling because of the Government's inability or unwillingness to deal with the strength of the pound? What proposals does she have to tackle those problems?

I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman was in the Chamber earlier, but I have already answered that question several times. The Government are well aware of the concerns in some sectors of industry. We have put in place policies that we believe will produce low inflation and sustainable growth in the long term. We also believe that our policies will secure a stable and competitive exchange rate over time.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that one of the most effective ways of increasing the export potential of small and medium firms is to put together those who export and those who have not yet exported? Is she aware of the success of export clubs across the country? We welcome the money that she announced in answer to a previous question. Will some of that flow towards the greater stimulation of export clubs and the transmission of knowledge, which is vital for us to ensure export development?

My hon. Friend is entirely right. He gives a very good example. The process of mentoring and learning from other best practice is now widespread in British business, where it has a great deal to contribute. I entirely share his view that such advice and support can increase our exports.

What representations she has received from small businesses regarding the impact of the introduction of the minimum wage. [25702]

I have received a number of representations from organisations representing small businesses about the introduction of a national minimum wage.

Will the Minister note that, in a survey of small and medium business men in my constituency, the overwhelming majority opposed the national minimum wage? When will the Minister finally start listening to small and medium business men?

I should point out that the Federation of Small Businesses voted overwhelmingly in support of a national minimum wage. I should also point out that successive business surveys have favoured a sensibly set national minimum wage. The only people in Britain who are opposed to it are apologists for low pay and Conservative Members.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the national minimum wage policy possesses four characteristics that often go hand in hand these days: it is morally right, economically right, popular with the voters and opposed by the Tories?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Those of us who are running the Bill in Committee have managed to get rid of the Tories' filibuster and are well on the way to ensuring that a minimum wage will become law.

What representations she has received from her ministerial colleagues with regard to the exclusion of groups of workers, occupations or sectors of industry from the scope of the national minimum wage. [25703]

The national minimum wage aims to cover all workers. The limited scope for exemptions is set out in the Bill and reflects the result of discussions between Ministers.

The Minister has not answered my question. The House will be aware that the Government suffered a humiliating U-turn this morning in having to disapply the Bill to the armed forces as a result of the Secretary of State for Defence's spectacular victory in his battle against the Department of Trade and Industry. Many employers in the agriculture sector are hoping that the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has made similarly successful representations that will persuade the Government to reconsider the way in which agriculture workers are treated and allow agricultural wages councils to continue outside the scope of the minimum wage. Even at this late stage, will the Minister consider changing the Bill to allow that?

The hon. Gentleman and I must stop meeting like this; people will start to talk. He is a member of the Standing Committee on the National Minimum Wage Bill. The Government have not made a humiliating U-turn; we are well on the way to establishing a minimum wage regime to cover all workers of all status. The arrangements for the armed forces mean that they will be covered by the pay review body. That means that every worker in Britain will have some form of pay body to determine their pay and ensure that they receive proper minimum standards of pay. For the first time in Britain, special arrangements have been made, in the National Minimum Wage Bill, for home and agency workers. Agriculture workers, including farmers, agree on minimum wages for agriculture workers.

Would not it be interesting to know the total income of Tory Members of Parliament who, on every occasion, oppose the national minimum wage? Why do not they declare their income, since they believe in starvation wages for others?

My hon. Friend will not be surprised to know that, in Committee, Opposition Members have spent hours filibustering, supporting low-pay employers who pay home workers as little as 30p an hour. Opposition Members have been exposed for what they are: apologists for low pay. We shall end low pay by introducing a minimum wage as soon as we can.

Does the Minister agree that there are very strong grounds for arguing for exclusion of workers in hotels and the tourism industry generally? Their work is seasonal, and insisting on a minimum wage in that sector would lead to higher unemployment.

As a former low-paid catering worker, I can tell the hon. Lady that there are absolutely no grounds to continue poverty pay in the hotel and catering industry. Large and small companies now recognise that a minimum wage will be as good for their business as it is for their employees.

If she will make a statement about the implementation of the working time directive. [25704]

Our aim is to publish draft regulations, for consultation, around the end of March and complete the consultation in time to have regulations in force by 1 October.

Does my hon. Friend agree that this directive is a sensible and flexible measure which introduces minimum standards that already apply in Europe? Will he share my hope that the Opposition will stop scaremongering about the impact of the directive and recognise that British workers deserve the same rights as workers in the rest of Europe?

My hon. Friend is absolutely correct. For the first time in Britain, some 2.5 million low-paid workers will be entitled to paid holidays. Millions of other workers will gain the right to consultation with their employers before being forced to work unsociable, unhealthy and long hours. Some employees—mainly low-paid workers—work 80 or 90 hours a week on some occasions. The directive will give them minimum standards and protection and the ability to negotiate with their company a sensible package in terms of their working hours and the right to paid holiday leave.

In view of the vital contribution made to our economy by the offshore industry, what guarantees will be given to that industry that it will be protected from this measure? I ask the Minister because the Government have given up the protection of Maastricht and embraced the social chapter.

The current directive excludes that industry, which is playing a part in the discussions about the further extensions of the directive. The industry is committed to high standards of employment practice. It will work with the Government and the European Commission to ensure that, whatever arrangements are put in place, it will remain at the forefront in terms of high standards of employment and conditions.

What action she is taking to provide information relating to the work of her Department to small and medium companies. [25705]

My Department provides more than 1,100 publications giving information and detailing the initiatives and programmes carried out across all parts of the DTI. All titles are listed in our "Publications in Print" catalogue, which is also on the internet. Included is a series of booklets and factsheets produced specifically for small businesses.

I acknowledge the work being done in the Department on the use of information technology. Does my hon. Friend recognise that nothing is more important for a small business to succeed in the new millennium than investing in IT? What is the Department doing to encourage that? Will she take to our right hon. Friend the Chancellor a clear message that any help that can be given in his Budget this year to small firms to invest in IT will be most welcome?

I absolutely agree that the use of IT by small and medium enterprises is essential. In the Department, we are focusing our efforts on the promotion and uptake of the new information technologies, spearheaded through the information society initiative programme for business. I have seen for myself a number of businesses—particularly small businesses—coming in to use the local support centres, which is impressive. The message that we need to get across to small businesses is that the use of IT is not a luxury or an add-on; it is essential for their competitiveness and vital for British companies in an increasingly global marketplace.

If the Minister is so committed to the use of information technology, would she care to comment on the rumour circulating Whitehall that the backlog of unopened red boxes in the Secretary of State's office is such that extra shelves have had to be built in her office? She is simply not opening them, far less dealing with their contents.

Order. That question was a total waste of time.

Can my hon. Friend or any other Minister in the Department of Trade and Industry shed any light on that other little bit of information that is being sent out to small and medium companies, concerning the delivery of concessionary coal to the 55,000 miners who look like losing up to 16 bags of coal? Will she reverse the contents of that circular?

Order. I think that we shall now move on to the statement/