If he will make a statement on the disposal of redundant MOD land (a) generally and (b) with specific regard to HMS Osprey on Portland. [55877]

My Department keeps the size of the defence estate under continual review. Any property that is declared surplus to operational requirements is sold, as soon as possible, on the open market, with the benefit of planning permission.

I thank the Minister for his visit to Portland and his attention to the problem. As he knows, I wrote to him as soon as he took office to ask whether it was necessary to close the air station and whether the site could be put to an alternative use. I was told that there was no alternative use. At least three companies are willing to buy the site and create jobs, but they have been told that they cannot even talk about making a bid until March next year. I would be happy if the Minister came forward with an alternative MOD use, but it is not good enough that, at this late stage, the Ministry is halting all its negotiations with the Crown Estate, among others.

The hon. Gentleman is right to say that he has raised the issue with me, as has the local council. I thank him for his kind comments on my visit to Weymouth and Portland, where I had an excellent meeting with the local council, chaired by Councillor Kay Wilcox. I fully understand the concerns that have been expressed, but the hon. Gentleman must understand that we have to explore every other possible defence use for the site. Given the concern expressed by the community, which has rendered enormous service to the Ministry of Defence and the armed forces for many years—indeed, centuries—I have asked the Department to try to speed up the process to ensure that the site is returned to productive use, in one way or another, as soon as possible.

May I refer the Minister to the site of Trecwn in my constituency, which was declared redundant by the previous Government, and sold earlier this year? Have any discussions taken place between the Ministry of Defence and any company or individual about the possible storage of nuclear waste, including decommissioned nuclear submarines, at the site?

We are aware that the company that bought the site has submitted to the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology some proposals for the management of radioactive waste. However, the Committee is not due to report for 12 months, when we will publish a White Paper proposing a national strategy. After that, local council planning permission would have to be obtained. My hon. Friend will know that Pembrokeshire county council has revealed that it is implacably opposed to any proposals to store nuclear waste of any type at Trecwn. The matter is no longer in our hands, as the previous owner, but is in the hands of the various radiological regulation agencies and the local council. Both the local council and the local Member of Parliament have made their views clear.

What is the estimated interval between the entry into operational squadron service with the Royal Air Force of the Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft and its equipping with beyond visual range air-to-air missiles. [55878]

Eurofighter will enter service armed with the advanced medium-range air-to-air missile—AMRAAM—AIM-120B as its beyond visual range air-to-air missile. A competition is being run for the development and production of a next-generation beyond visual range air-to-air missile, but that will not enter service until a few years after Eurofighter.

Will the Secretary of State ensure that there is no hiatus between the entry into service of Eurofighter and its equipping with a genuine beyond visual range air-to-air missile, such as that provided by Raytheon, the American competitor, or by Meteor, the European solution? If an interval is caused by Treasury parsimony or a German defence review, can it be filled by an extended range version of AMRAAM, so that the Royal Air Force squadrons do not suffer a lack of capability?

Obviously, we would not want any gap in capability, but it has long been recognised that there will be a gap between the first delivery of Eurofighter in 2002 and the BVRAAM currently being examined. The hon. Gentleman mentioned one bid, but there are two, and each is being assessed in the normal way. The implications of using one system rather than the other will be examined carefully. We intend to maximise the value of Eurofighter when it comes into service, and its weaponry is therefore of acute importance.

Is the Secretary of State aware that there is some sense of a stitch-up over BVRAAM, and that it is suggested that political expediency, rather than strategic merit, is governing his Department's thinking? Will he assure competing bidders that their competing merits will be the sole criterion in determining the BVRAAM programme?

Yes, I can give the hon. Gentleman that assurance. There is no question of a stitch-up. Two bids have been made, and they will be assessed in the normal way. The only criterion that matters is the equipping of the Eurofighter with the best possible weaponry.

Notwithstanding the Secretary of State's answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip-Northwood (Mr. Wilkinson), he will acknowledge that the final bids are between a British BVRAAM and an American BVRAAM. Does the right hon. Gentleman acknowledge that, if the Ministry of Defence decided in favour of the American product, it would be possible for the United States of America to block the sale of the Eurofighter—the Typhoon—to third countries under certain circumstances, and that that would be damaging to British industrial and security interests?

I wish to make it clear that one bid is European, from Matra BAe, and the other is American. We are assessing both bids using the usual criteria. We hope to announce the outcome of the competition in 1999. All the factors mentioned by the hon. Gentleman and the previous questioners will be taken into account.

If he will make a statement on his Department's policy in respect of the supply of British beef for the United Kingdom's armed forces. [55880]

I am pleased to advise the House that our food supply contractor, Booker Foodservice, is buying from British sources 100 per cent. of beef for consumption by our forces based in the United Kingdom. That follows agreement by the European Commission to proposals from me and my colleagues at the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to allow access to intervention stocks of high-quality British beef at competitive prices. We are unable to use British beef for our forces overseas at the moment because of the continuing ban on the export of British beef.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that news, which was even better than I had expected. It will be welcomed by all farmers, especially those in the two branches of the National Farmers Union in my constituency. On their behalf, and in view of my right hon. Friend's emphasis on the quality of British products, may I push the boat out by asking whether he can achieve the same for British lamb for the British armed forces?

I wish that we could do so. British lamb is the best in the world. I used to help to rear it, and I want British troops to eat it. I hope that the industry will compete to get it on troop canteen plates. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence, who has spent a lot of time and energy on this matter. An attempt was made to procure a substantial forward buy of British lamb, but that was not successful as the industry was not capable of coming forward with it. Urgent discussions continue with the farming industry and the Meat and Livestock Commission. We shall ensure that we use every effort to put the maximum amount of British lamb on British forces' plates.

Of course that is good news and we welcome it, but why has it taken so long? It was first negotiated with the commission back in February and an agreement was announced in the House in June. Six months on, fresh beef is still not to be used; the meat is out of the intervention stocks. What about getting on with British lamb? The Meat and Livestock Commission, the National Farmers Union and the contractor are willing to vary contracts and do their best with lamb. What is holding up the sale of British lamb, because at present none is used by British forces?

I know that the public get a bit tired of being reminded that a Conservative Government were in power 18 months ago, but that Government put in place the procedures that we are having to use. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary has used his energy and ingenuity to make substantial strides, despite the straitjacket that he inherited. At the start of October, the intervention stocks were released and now 100 per cent. of British troops are being supplied with British beef.

What proposals he has to encourage cadet units. [55881]

The Government recognise the value of cadet forces to both civilian and military communities. As a further demonstration of our commitment to encouraging cadet units, we intend to make a modest increase in their funding.

Does the Minister share my pride that, this Sunday, many of the Remembrance Sunday services that I and hon. Members will attend will have present not only regular and Territorial Army units but local cadet units? Has he estimated the cost of providing alternative accommodation for cadet units that use TA centres that are to be closed?

I very much share the hon. Gentleman's pride in the way in which our cadet forces attend our various commemoration services, including the commemoration of Armistice day this Sunday. I took great pleasure in attending the Trafalgar day celebrations a couple of weeks ago with them. As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will announce, a statement will be made to the House on the Territorial Army. It will include mention of the provision made for cadets. The costings on that are not yet finalised, but we gave a commitment in the debate on the strategic defence review that any cadet unit that was displaced would be reallocated to a location at least as good as the one that it left.

Although I welcome the increase in resources for the cadets, may I raise the case of the redundant minesweepers Kellington, Pagham and Iveston, the last of which is in my constituency in Tilbury dock, and is looked after by the training ship Boxer? I understand that the Ministry of Defence wishes not to renew the leases on the vessels to the cadets but to sell them to the cadets. I urge my hon. Friend to use his good offices to ensure that any sale price is a token one, bearing in mind the invaluable benefit that countless youngsters have received from the opportunity of spending time on the vessels, which would otherwise have to be towed away because they are totally redundant. They are looked after proudly by the naval cadets. I hope that my hon. Friend will use his good offices to ensure that they remain in the stewardship of the cadets.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that question. I assure him that the Government greatly value the contribution of those vessels in encouraging cadet units around the country, including his constituency. I am reviewing whether it is possible to continue the existing arrangements or whether we should try to sell them to the cadet forces. I am taking into account all factors, including health and safety, and practicability.

Will the Minister look at links with the Territorial Army in areas where the TA unit is the only Army presence in a county, as in the case of the Somerset and Cornwall Light Infantry? Will he also look at the increasingly irrelevant and outdated distinction between local cadet forces and the independent schools' combined cadet forces? Do we want such a distinction in the present day armed forces?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that any relocation that takes place because of changes announced in the Territorial Army review will be on the basis that existing cadet units will be placed in accommodation that is at least as good as their present accommodation. That is just as true in the hon. Gentleman's constituency as it is throughout the country.

What plans he has for the Territorial Army in the Aldershot constituency. [55884]

A statement on the future of the Territorial Army will be made once Ministers have had a chance to consider the matters that have already been discussed by officials, including those matters that concern the hon. Gentleman's constituency.

We have been assured for the past two weeks that the Government will make a statement. This is a matter of great concern not only in my constituency but throughout the country. Is the Minister aware that his lack of decision making on this matter is deeply unsettling to Territorial Army units? I hope that the Minister can give me an answer before I go on an exercise with the 10th (Volunteer) Battalion the Parachute Regiment in two weeks' time.

The hon. Gentleman might like the Government to rush into a decision, but territorials throughout the country, especially in his constituency, would not want us to do so. Extensive consultations have taken place with units throughout the country, including in the hon. Gentleman's constituency. The general guidelines, which were well debated in the House two weeks ago during the strategic defence review debate, were made clear to TA units and other interested parties locally, and the prime motives of the review were emphasised. How the objectives will be implemented locally has been the subject of consultation, and we shall make a statement to the House once the matter has been assessed.

Although I accept the Government's good faith, does the Minister not realise that uncertainty over the proposals is damaging to morale and that some units are experiencing a haemorrhage of both officers and men? Why do the Government not open the books, publish the detailed proposals, declare a six-month moratorium and allow us to have a properly informed debate about the future of the TA?

I know that the hon. and learned Gentleman raises that question with the best of motives, but the consultation process has been widely received throughout the country and suggestions have been made on how the changes can be implemented. That is the proper way to proceed. A statement will be made once we have assessed what the consultation has thrown up.

The Minister complacently accuses us of trying to rush him into a decision. No decision can have hung around for longer than this one. He seems to be totally unaware of the delay's dreadful effects on motivation in the Territorial Army. Communities are desperately worried about the closure of TA halls. Moreover, the secrecy with which everything is being done has made matters much worse. Will he ensure that definitive announcements are made as soon as possible and that we do not have to wait until a convenient moment when they can be buried in the Government's news management agenda?

Of course the announcements will be made as soon as possible, but, unlike the previous Government, we believe in consulting people about our proposals before making a decision that we announce to the House.

If he will make a statement on compensation arrangements for service personnel and former service personnel who suffer from asbestos-related conditions contracted before the amendment of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947. [55885]

Compensation arrangements for service personnel and former service personnel who suffer illness as a consequence of exposure to asbestos are the same as for those killed, those injured or those who develop a disease from any other cause related to their service. The non-retrospective repeal of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947, on 15 May 1987, by the Crown Proceedings (Armed Forces) Act 1987 gave service personnel the right to claim common law compensation from the Ministry of Defence. Compensation arrangements for former service personnel for illness caused before the repeal of the 1947 Act is paid in the form of a war pension and other allowances by the War Pensions Agency of the Department of Social Security. The Government's arrangements for compensating former service personnel are broadly comparable with those for former civilian MOD employees.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the sense of injustice felt by many who are now being diagnosed as suffering from asbestos-related conditions such as mesothelioma, which is invariably fatal and invariably painful, and results in the rapid onset of symptoms leading to death? Does my hon. Friend agree that that sense of injustice is highlighted by the 1987 Act? People who were exposed to asbestos before 1987, but are experiencing symptoms now, may feel somewhat hard done by in comparison with people who have suffered other injuries since 1987.

I recognise the difficulties and distress suffered by those who have contracted this awful disease, but my hon. Friend must accept that there are complicated interlocking relationships between the war pension, the war widow's pension and compensation arrangements—and, indeed, between asbestos-related and other diseases. The Ministry of Defence is considering those matters, but there are no easy answers.

What are the latest figures for recruitment to the armed forces from Britain's ethnic minorities. [55887]

Between 1 April 1998 and 31 August 1998, the latest date for which figures are available, 147 armed forces recruits came from the ethnic minorities, representing 1.7 per cent. of the total intake. The latest figures for MOD civilians show that, between 1 April 1997 and 31 March 1998, 117 recruits identified themselves as being of ethnic minority background, representing 1.4 per cent. of the total intake.

My constituency has an unemployment rate of 7.5 per cent., higher than the Bolton, the north-west or the national average. We also have a large Asian community, but I have yet to meet a member of that community who has joined the armed forces. Has my hon. Friend conducted any detailed and serious research to find out why members of the Asian community are not joining the armed forces? Is the reason cultural, a fear of discrimination, or what?

My hon. Friend is right to raise the importance of armed forces recruitment in areas where there is high unemployment among black and Asian people. Both black and Asian people have the opportunity of a first-choice career in the armed forces. A number of studies have been carried out to establish why both black and Asian people are reluctant to join the forces, and those studies are continuing. We have tried to make changes where possible, and to convey to members of the black and Asian communities that they can have a good career and a good education. We have also given them a guarantee that all possible action will be taken to outlaw discrimination and racism.

Is the Minister aware that the only substantial adult organisation that attracts a large number of people from ethnic minorities into uniform is the Territorial Army? In many territorial units, recruitment from ethnic minorities amounts to 15 or 20 per cent. Indeed, there is an officer from an ethnic minority in the 5th Battalion of my local regiment, the Princess of Wales Royal Regiment. May I suggest to the Minister that, if he wishes the Army as a whole to be closer to the community, hitting its part-time community element in the way that the Government plan will ruin his best intentions?

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. The Territorial Army makes a valuable contribution in attracting both black and Asian people into the armed forces at all ranks. It is a factor that I have taken into account in the review and an important factor in the footprint. I think that, when the decision is announced to the House in due course, the hon. Gentleman will find that it has been a main determining factor.

What steps his Department is taking to encourage humanitarian demining. [55888]

Following my announcement a year ago, good progress has been made in increasing the assistance that the Ministry of Defence provides to humanitarian demining, notably through the establishment of a mine information and training centre at Minley and through the gifting of surplus military equipment to the Halo trust. To maintain the momentum, my Department recently organised a seminar to consider what more the armed forces might contribute.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply. What help is he giving to support United Nations initiatives in this sector? Does he think that there is any scope for developing new demining technologies through the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency?

My hon. Friend is right to highlight the UN's role in demining. Demining those parts of the world that have become contaminated by these weapons is a serious issue, into which the UN is putting all its efforts. To help it, a senior officer has been loaned by the MOD to the UN to provide specialist demining expertise to its humanitarian mine action programmes. We hope that that will have a major effect on what the UN can do.

Will the unarmed military observers in Kosovo oversee humanitarian demining operations? If so, are contingency plans in place for their withdrawal in the event of attack? Will the implementation of such plans require a resolution of the UN?

The verification mission that will go to Kosovo will have no role whatever in supervising or getting involved in humanitarian demining. It will, of course, face a hazard that was put in place by the Belgrade authorities in certain locations in Kosovo: they have put mines there. The verification mission will obviously take judicious care.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the time has come when the ingenuity that has gone into making land mines can apply to their demining? Does he envisage a further special role for the expertise of the Royal Engineers?

The hon. Gentleman of course has substantial military experience, which brings authority to his remarks on these matters. I have taken the strong view that military expertise in this sector is unequalled and that, if it can be shared in the humanitarian sector, it will do a lot of good in dealing with a problem that mankind increasingly faces. The Royal Engineers have expertise in this sector, which we have already used, but I am ensuring through the mine information and training centre at Minley that we bring together all the components in the British Army to ensure that they contribute. I have found no greater enthusiasm than among the military for dealing with this, the legacy of wars.

If the final reduced Territorial Army establishment will include civilian support staff and non-regular permanent Staff. [55889]

Following the current restructuring exercise, the Territorial Army establishment will be reduced to approximately 40,000. Civilian support staff and non-regular permanent staff will not be included in that figure and their establishments will be considered separately.

I thank the Minister for that answer. It is, of course, very sad that the TA is to suffer such a savage attack. As the Chancellor of the Exchequer is back in the borrowing business and as it seems apparent that, if rumours are to be believed, TA units covering the 7th (Volunteer) Battalion the Royal Anglian Regiment in Hertfordshire—at Hertford, Dunstable and Hemel Hempstead—are to be closed, affecting civilian staff as well, will the Minister approach the Chancellor and ask for a little of that borrowing to maintain a TA presence of some sort in Hertfordshire? A county of that size should have a TA presence.

As I have already said to hon. Members today, we shall be looking at the footprint of the Territorial Army throughout the country, and will consider the hon. Gentleman's points in relation to his area. I cannot say any more than that; he will have to wait until the statement is made. However, I assure him that consideration will be given to the question of civilians and non-regular permanent staff, as I acknowledge that they do important subsidiary and support jobs for the Territorial Army.

If he will make a statement on the progress on the millennium readiness of computer systems relating to the defence and security of the United Kingdom and its allies. [55891]

The Ministry of Defence has a comprehensive programme for addressing the impact on defence capability posed by the potential failure of computer systems over the millennium period and beyond. That includes both rectifying MOD systems and developing contingency plans where necessary.

In the light of that comprehensive reply, will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that Britain and its NATO and Western European Union allies will not be rendered defenceless by the millennium bug, as was originally feared a couple of years ago? Can he guarantee that the millennium bug will cause no problems for defence-related information technologies? If he cannot give that guarantee, will he ensure that contingency plans are put into place, and that they are thoroughly tested in time for the millennium?

Few Departments are more aware than the MOD of the dangers and problems that might arise with the millennium. Indeed, few countries in Europe have, so far, done as much as Britain to deal with the problems. My Department is spending £200 million addressing the problems for technology that could arise over the year 2000.

What assessment he has made of recent evidence relating to Gulf war syndrome. [55892]

We continue to keep new information about Gulf veterans' illnesses under review. It is encouraging that recently published scientific research is making progress on this subject and I look forward to seeing the first results from the epidemiological studies of UK Gulf veterans at around the turn of the year.

Is not the evidence a long time coming? We have been raising the issue in the House for more than a year. Does not the evidence point towards one common biochemical activation of molecules, which is induced by different chemicals either singly or together? Might that not have different clinical outcomes in individuals? Has not the time come to pay up and to prevent other people from being subjected to those dangerous chemicals?

I thank my hon. Friend for that question, which deals with an important issue. We owe a heavy debt to those who served in the Gulf on our behalf. There are a number of interesting developments in research and I anticipate that three pieces of British research will be published in the coming months. There are also interesting pieces of research in the United States, in particular from the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, in Atlanta, which continues to cover new ground. It believes that it is close to defining what sort of illnesses are being suffered by those who served in the Gulf. I look forward to being able to assess the various pieces of research when they are available to me, around the turn of the year. It is essential that, where there is illness, we try to identify the causes and how to remove them, as well as dealing with other important questions.

If he will make a statement on the future of the defence establishments at Shoeburyness. [55893]

The Horseshoe barracks, old ranges and Gunners park at Shoeburyness have been declared surplus to Ministry of Defence requirements and are being prepared for disposal. A draft planning brief has been agreed with the borough council and has been issued for public consultation. The MOD still has a requirement for the new ranges at Shoeburyness, and the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency is seeking to enter into partnership with industry to operate those facilities. It is hoped that such a partnership will create new employment opportunities at Shoeburyness through increased exploitation of the site for non-defence purposes.

As DERA's rather surprising decision—supported by the Government—to change its policy on the new ranges will lead to an unemployment increase in an area that already has a high unemployment rate, will the Minister assure the House that the Department will work closely with Southend borough council to ensure that the land that becomes available will be used for attracting useful job opportunities to the area?

I can certainly give the hon. Gentleman that assurance. The borough council is keen to obtain local views on the matter and will review the draft planning brief in the light of any comments received. We are working in co-operation with the council, and will be working closely with it precisely because we want the site to be returned to useful economic use and to offer employment possibilities.

If he will make a statement on the future of the Royal hospital, Haslar. [55895]

The future of the Royal hospital, Haslar is still under review. We shall make an announcement when final decisions have been made.

Is the Minister aware that it is not only my constituents who are aghast at the threat hanging over Haslar? Many hon. Members from both sides of the House, members and former members of the Defence Committee and service personnel are horrified that the Government cannot confirm that Haslar's role will be continued. Does he realise that we must have a centre of excellence in the defence medical services, and that even Government publications have said that uncertainty would be the worst of all options? Will he confirm Haslar's role soon?

I hope to be able to confirm Haslar's role soon. However, as the hon. Gentleman is aware from our previous correspondence, a major gap in medical provision in the armed forces was identified during the previous Government's period in office. We have been trying to put that gap right, so that we can guarantee that we have the back-up support necessary when our forces go into battle. We have to have the right number of consultants, nurses and ancillary staff based in centres of excellence—to which staff are attracted, and at which they receive the right training and provide essential services. I have an implementation team examining the matter, on which I hope to be able to make an announcement soon.

Is it not important that we get the issue absolutely right? The defence medical services suffered an enormous blow under the previous Government. Although there are great difficulties at Haslar, and there will be much discomfort until the issue is settled, is it not crucial that, this time, we get it right?

I agree with my hon. Friend, who clearly makes her point that the problem has existed for a long time. I am not saying that the previous Government did not attempt to address the issue. However, they were unsuccessful in making long-lasting proposals to meet the well-identified shortcomings. It is crucial that, this time, we get it right, which is why I have asked an implementation team to examine the options.

As other hon. Members have said, the problem with the Royal hospital, Haslar exemplifies the difficulties generally with the defence medical services, and specifically with Territorial and reserve medical forces. What will the Government do about preserving the strength of the Territorial defence medical services?

Again, the hon. and learned Gentleman raises an important issue. Shortcomings in our medical provision were identified under the previous Government, one of the main areas being the Territorial Army. By any estimate, the TA is thousands short in the necessary provision. One of the central features and guiding principles of our review of the TA is that we should try to put that right. The hon. and learned Gentleman makes a key point, and he will find that, when a statement is made to the House, it will have been well taken into account in our proposals.

What steps the Government are taking to improve the United Kingdom's ability to contribute to the United Nations peace support operations in the future. [55897]

I announced, as part of the strategic defence review, our intention to sign an agreement with the UN that will boost our military support for its operations in future. The new memorandum of understanding, which will be signed by March next year, will revise and update our existing declaration under the UN standby forces arrangements. It will include those capabilities that we have strengthened as a result of the SDR and that are most relevant to UN needs: more and better-equipped rapid reaction forces, additional strategic lift and improved logistics support.

In thanking my right hon. Friend for his comprehensive reply, may I acknowledge the distinguished contribution that he and his Department make in support of the UN in that important sphere? In his efforts to have even better military support, has it crossed his mind that he would have a better force at his disposal if he had some 40 to 50 of the Airbus future large aircraft at his command? May I urge him to consider that and tell him that, if he did, my constituents would help build that aircraft?

As ever, I admire my hon. Friend's ingenious way of promoting the interests of his constituents, which he always does with enthusiasm, dedication and complete justification. As it strengthens the future additional strategic lift capability of the Royal Air Force, the future large aircraft project is very much in our sights for long-term supply. It will become increasingly important in terms of our commitment to the UN, because it is clear that, yet again, Saddam Hussein is intent on engineering another confrontation with the UN. Force was an option in February this year and brought a climb-down by Saddam. Force must again be an option on this occasion because, regrettably, it seems to be the only thing that Saddam understands. He still represents a threat, not only to his neighbours and to the region but to international stability. The international community must stand united and firm in making sure that he complies with yesterday's unanimous view of the UN Security Council.

Will the right hon. Gentleman join me in recognising the role played by the Territorial Army and other reserve forces in peacekeeping operations in, for example, Bosnia, and in congratulating them on that role? Will he confirm that, with the cuts envisaged in the SDR, this country will be able to meet its commitments in respect of the TA and other reserves in future operations?

I believe that we shall be able to meet those commitments much more efficiently. I visited our troops, including the TA reserves, in theatre in Bosnia last week. I was enormously impressed by their bravery, skill and dedication in rebuilding that country. The whole purpose of the restructuring and updating of the TA is to make sure that the TA can play an even bigger and better part in the sort of operation that it has carried out so well in Bosnia.

If he will make a statement on the future of the Archer project. [55898]

I am pleased to announce that we have now signed a contract worth £185 million with the Bowman prime contractor, Archer Communications Systems Ltd., for the next stage of the Bowman programme. This will cover further risk reduction work, the completion of system definition, initial system integration and initial conversion planning. Subject to satisfactory progress by Archer, it is intended to place a production contract in late 1999. This marks a major commitment by the Ministry of Defence to Archer and to the delivery of the Bowman system.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Will he consider the remarks that I made in the debate on the strategic defence review last week about the award of the local area sub-system contract to Thomson rather than to British Aerospace? That has caused some unhappiness in my constituency, where we have excellent facilities and where people are willing to play a full part in the future of the Archer programme as it develops. I hope that the Government will support the future development of the facility in Ilford.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his assiduous lobbying on behalf of the plant in Ilford and his constituents. British Aerospace and Racal are not only the prime contractors, but were involved in the local area sub-system competition. Therefore, it is fair to say that they would have made a proper evaluation on technical grounds and in terms of value for money. The excellent manufacturing facility in my hon. Friend's constituency is well recognised not only by us, but by the manufacturers.

What plans she has to ensure that recesses in the autumn and spring coincide with school half-term holidays. [55913]

The Government proposed to the Modernisation Committee that we should attempt to arrange business to allow constituency weeks to coincide with school half-term in February and October.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Did she see the large number of children, including my own, who were in the House for part of last week because the House came back on 19 October and half-term was the week after? I am sure that many right hon. and hon. Members on both sides of the House would be grateful for better long-term arrangements that might allow us to spend time with our children instead of parading them around the Tea Room and other places in the building.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making it clear in the latter part of his remarks that he did not consider that a good idea, as I was not quite sure at the beginning. We are taking all issues into account and certainly will bear in mind concerns such as those he expressed. However, he will recognise that, although the Government have made a proposal to the Modernisation Committee, as yet, the Committee has neither agreed nor reported the matter to the House.

I sympathise with the right hon. Lady's general point of view, but is not the most important thing about the parliamentary programme that it should give right hon. and hon. Members a proper opportunity to hold the Executive to account and to scrutinise the business placed before the House? Although we would welcome a more structured parliamentary year, we would not agree to anything that inhibited the rights of hon. Members on either of those fronts.

I agree entirely with the hon. Gentleman that it is the purpose of the House to hold the Government to account and scrutinise parliamentary business properly. It is an error that some of the suggestions that have been made for improving the way in which we handle business in the House are sometimes described in other terms. The underlying motive of those who seek, in some cases to preserve and in other cases to change and modernise our procedures, is to preserve scrutiny. Some might argue that, much as they enjoy spending time with their children, attempting to do so and at the same time to hold the Government to account may not be easy.

What plans there are to implement the recommendation of the Select Committee on the Modernisation of the House of Commons to establish a National Parliament Office in Brussels. [55916]

The hon. Lady rightly draws attention to the recommendation of the Modernisation Committee. I understand that some work is being done by the House authorities on the implications and the practical problems associated with it, which no doubt will be reported to the House in due course.

I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for that answer. Given the greater powers afforded the European Parliament by the Amsterdam treaty and the desire of the House—and, I believe, the Government—for greater co-operation, mutual understanding and partnership between the House and the European Parliament, does the right hon. Lady agree that such an office should be set up as a matter of urgency to train our very able officers in the House to prepare for when the Amsterdam treaty comes into force?

It is important that we should do everything that we can to improve the liaison between the European Parliament and this Parliament. In particular, we should use whatever channels we can to get advance information for hon. Members so that we can be well aware of what is being proposed, the full implications for the House and how we should respond. The proposed National Parliament Office would be one means to achieve that, but it is not the only proposal.

What plans she has for reviewing the length of the summer recess; and if she will make a statement. [55917]

The length of the summer recess is one of the issues that the Modernisation Committee can consider in its inquiry into the parliamentary calendar. As the House knows, the length of the summer recess is affected by several external factors and I do not envisage any change in the immediate future.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is not healthy in a democracy for the Government to enjoy a holiday from scrutiny that amounts to the best part of three months every summer? A possible solution, which may also meet the concerns of those who want us not to sit during half terms, would be for us to sit for a couple of weeks in early September and then not sit during half terms.

I am aware of my hon. Friend's views. I understand his anxiety to ensure that the House properly holds the Executive to account. However, as anyone who has ever considered changing such arrangements has discovered, there are eminently sound and practical reasons for the shape of the parliamentary term as it has emerged. Changes frequently cause substantial inconvenience not only to Members of Parliament and their ability to hold the Executive to account, but to other organisations, such as political parties that hold party conferences.

What recent representations she has received on the arrangements for Prime Minister's questions. [55918]

I have received occasional letters about the content of Prime Minister's questions, but no recent proposals to alter the arrangements.

Now that we have 18 months' experience of the new-style Prime Minister's Question Time, will the right hon. Lady consider reverting to the original arrangements? Is she aware that many hon. Members feel that the weekly visitation means that the Executive are no longer being properly scrutinised? There is also some frustration that, although the Opposition keep asking questions, they receive no answers.

I am afraid that those who believe that a return to the previous system would be better are allowing their prejudices to triumph over an examination of the facts. Since my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister got rid of the preamble, there is far more—probably almost twice as much—substance in the answers than there was before. My right hon. Friend has missed only one Prime Minister's Question Time since May 1997—when the Belfast agreement was being negotiated. He has also made more statements to the House than his predecessor over a comparable period. Those who are insinuating that the Prime Minister comes to the House less often or is less accountable have not studied the facts.

Perhaps my right hon. Friend will consider the number of questions asked by the Leader of the Opposition. His six in succession tend to be repetitive and miss the point. If we want a sharp, clear exchange of views, perhaps short, sharp questions, limited in number, are the solution.

I certainly would not venture to give advice to the Leader of the Opposition on how he should conduct himself. I know from experience that that post requires considerable skill.

What plans she has to set up a Standing Committee for the English regions. [55920]

The Standing Orders already provide for a Standing Committee on Regional Affairs, although it has not met for many years. I am considering whether the Committee might serve a useful purpose in future and how it might be convened.

I am delighted to hear that. With the establishment of regional development agencies and the possibility of regional devolution, we are clearly moving in a regional direction. It would be useful if each English region—particularly Yorkshire and Humberside, which is the best of them and has a population equal to that of Scotland and problems that are, in many respects, more severe than those of Scotland—should have its own Committee to study its problems.

I am well aware of the strong regional loyalties in the House. As I say, I am considering whether changes can be made to improve the scrutiny of business. As we all agree, that is what we are here for.

If such a Standing Committee were established, would its locus be to find out how regional governments can possibly be paid for without demanding extra from the taxpayer, as has been claimed? Does the right hon. Lady agree that people do not want regional governments in England? Would that not cost the taxpayer money? Is it not another example of jobs for the boys?

As no one has the smallest intention of forcing regional government on anybody, the hon. Gentleman's remarks are interesting but not precisely relevant.

If she will make a statement about progress in modernising the work of the House. [55921]

Better information for Members of Parliament is being provided through improving the content of the Order Paper, normally giving advance notice of business two weeks ahead, and publishing, from the start of next Session, the new-style explanatory notes for Bills. On Wednesday, the Social Security Committee reported on pre-legislative scrutiny of the first Bill published in draft, on pension sharing on divorce. The House has approved a report on conduct in the Chamber, to dispense with some of our outdated practices. The parliamentary calendar is being considered by the Modernisation Committee. The report on improving European Union scrutiny procedures will be debated soon.

I thank my right hon. Friend for her answer. Given the Government's commitment to family-friendly policies, will she give the House some idea of development in that area, other than the very welcome reference to half-term holidays?

The balance that the House is striving to achieve between better and more productive scrutiny of Parliament's business while wishing, of course, to do as we encourage others to do and to promote family-friendly policies, is one with which the Modernisation Committee is, struggling almost even as we speak.