What steps his Department is taking to encourage innovation in engineering. [900061]

Engineering companies are eligible for a wide range of Government-sponsored schemes designed to stimulate innovation in industry. There has been a 20 per cent. increase in the innovation budget spread over three years, the purpose being to promote and foster innovation in engineering.

Will my hon. Friend acknowledge and encourage the sort of awards that the Design Council and the Royal Academy of Engineering make? Can I draw his attention to a remarkable product made in Plymouth by British Aerospace—the silicon gyroscope, which received the Design Council award and is on the shortlist for the McRobert award?

Yes, I want to acknowledge all efforts to promote excellence and innovation in engineering. The Plymouth-based British Aerospace Systems has come up with a highly innovative silicon gyroscope, which is one of the four finalists for that prestigious Royal Academy of Engineering award. The device—which has been referred to as the transistor of the 21st century—will be used in cars, for example, to improve anti-lock braking systems and will improve safety and vehicle performance. That links in with the Government's priorities to build and blend in the cleaner, leaner, safer and smarter vehicles of the 21st century. That is what the Government and the people want.

I join the Minister in his congratulations for British technology. However, is he aware that, over the past 12 months, this country has fallen from fourth place in global competitiveness to eighth place? Studies have shown that the reasons are a combination of the strong pound, new business regulations and an underlying weakness in science and technology. I know that the Minister personally feels this way, but will he make a commitment, on behalf of the Government, to provide some joined-up Government in tackling those problems so we can nurture British industry?

I wonder where the hon. Gentleman has been. Of course there is a challenge in global competitiveness, but where was he when we boosted the science, engineering and technology budget by £1.4 billion to underpin basic research? We have £25 million for the science enterprise challenge and £20 million for the reach out fund, as well as funds for the SMART schemes and the foresight-link awards to foster engineering. We believe that we will address the shortfall not by doing things for industry, but by putting in schemes to underpin the innovative approach to competitiveness to ensure that our engineers make world-class products and can win their way forward.

Does my hon. Friend intend to have discussions with his colleagues at the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions regarding regional development agencies and the way in which they might be encouraged to promote innovation in engineering, particularly by developing mechanisms to transfer technology from the universities and colleges into industry?

My hon. Friend makes a good point. I am encouraged that the RDAs are already drawing up innovation strategies at the regional level. For example, in our region of Yorkshire, the RDA has drawn up an innovation strategy, and the same is true in the west midlands. We look for the template throughout the country, and then our schemes can be tailored in to help encourage the technology transfer to which my hon. Friend refers.

What does the Minister of State say to the director of policy at the Engineering Employers Federation, who insists that UK-based companies will shift their production facilities to other countries or will simply close down if he and his right hon. and hon. Friends persist with their plans for an energy tax? Now it is clear that that tax will discriminate against high value-added, capital-intensive firms, is certain to cost jobs and will undermine British competitiveness, why does not the hon. Gentleman cease just to be a carpet on which Treasury Ministers trample and instead go to his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer and tell him to withdraw this stupid proposal?

I seem to recall that the Conservative party imposed stupid proposals with no consultation in their Budgets. This is the first time that we have had two years of consultation. The consultation document has been put out, and there are sector meetings with the Deputy Prime Minister across Departments, including the Treasury and DTI, to work through the proposals. It has been encouraging that employers in all sectors have said that we need to do something about climate degradation and that they will come in to talk about practical measures to address it. Those details are being discussed.

If he will make a statement on his Department's policy toward the proposed Ilisu dam project in Turkey. [90007]

No decision has been taken on whether to make Export Credits Guarantee Department support available. A project of this nature is bound to give rise to major environmental and social issues and I want to be sure that they are properly addressed. That is why we have commissioned our own research, including an assessment of the views of the local population. We are working closely with other Departments, and the other export credit agencies involved, as well as with the Turkish authorities and the contractors. When we have completed our analysis, we will decide whether to make support available.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the dam is being built in an area under emergency rule, to which the Foreign Office has advised against travel unless on essential business? It is a site of on-going ethnic conflict in which the local Kurds have been subject to oppressive action by the Turkish Government. Is my hon. Friend also aware that it has been alleged that the project will flood many Kurdish towns and villages, including the ancient city of Hasankeyf, and violate the World Bank's environmental and resettlement guidelines as well as the European convention on human rights? Hon. Members are highly suspicious of the project. Will my hon. Friend help to reduce that suspicion by guaranteeing that all environmental impact assessment reports that he receives are properly placed in the House of Commons Library?

I am aware of all those concerns. Some of them have been overstated and are not quite in accordance with the facts. It is precisely because such concerns exist that we have sent our own independent mission to the area to assess all aspects of the project, including of course the views of the local people.

How many jobs have been lost in manufacturing industry since 1 May 1997. [90009]

In the two years between April 1997 and April 1999, 118,000 manufacturing jobs were lost, compared with an annual average loss of 150,000 manufacturing jobs in each year between 1979 and 1996.

We have already heard how the index of the World Economic Forum, based in Geneva, has shown that we have dropped under this Government from our zenith of fourth in the world competitiveness rankings to eighth. Which of the Department's measures have most contributed to that loss of competitiveness and how many more jobs will have to be lost before they are reversed?

The hon. Gentleman ignores the fact that the labour market figures published yesterday show that more people are working in this country than ever before. I would have hoped that he would welcome this morning's report from British Chambers of Commerce showing manufacturing orders up, which is good news for the manufacturing sector. We are witnessing a clear trend of strength not only in the service sector and construction, but now in manufacturing as well. That is because we are steering a course of economic stability in an uncertain world.

It is not the past two years that bother people in Rotherham; it is the two preceding decades that they cannot forgive, when we lost nearly 12,000 manufacturing jobs in metal-working industries alone.

I am very pleased to endorse the excellent work carried out by many agencies, including those in Rotherham. During my visit to Japan, when we formally announced the decision of Toyoda Gosei to locate in Rotherham, creating about 400 jobs, it struck me that one of the reasons why it was so enthusiastic was that it could see a real sense of partnership in the agencies in Rotherham. That stands in stark contrast to the situation under the previous Government, when on average 150,000 manufacturing jobs were lost every year from 1979 to 1996. That is the Conservative record in office.

Is the Secretary of State aware that several Labour Members are calling the climate change levy the industrial equivalent of the poll tax? When will his Department argue with the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions and the Treasury that any changes must be sustainable, otherwise they are not worthwhile? Is he not aware that if those changes take place, they will mean the loss of tens of thousands of jobs and a reduction in production in this country that will lead to imports coming in that have been made by processes that would not be allowed here? When will he fight for British industry on that issue?

The climate change levy is a principle that is accepted by many businesses and the hon. Gentleman should accept that. We are consulting on the detail of its implementation and I believe that our proposals will command broad support in the House and in the business community.

Will my right hon. Friend comment on the fact that we have seen yet again this week that Britain is the No. 1 choice for overseas investors looking for the right place to manufacture and to invest in the high technology, innovative sectors? Is that not a cause for celebration, rather than the whingeing that we hear from the Opposition?

Yesterday we were pleased to announce the results from the Invest in Britain bureau for 1998, which showed clearly that the United Kingdom was an attractive place for inward investors because they support our policy on the single currency. They do not like the Opposition's policy of ruling out joining the single currency for 10 years and most of those inward investors would not have come to the United Kingdom if we had a Government with that policy. We do not, which is why we remain an attractive place for inward investors.

Office for National Statistics figures show 140,000 fewer jobs in manufacturing than this time last year. Does the Secretary of State still support the words of the Prime Minister at last year's Labour party conference, when he told business:

"your fundamental problem is not high interest rates or a high pound. It is too few first class managers. Too little investment. Too little productivity."?

I support the comments made by the Prime Minister and I hope that the hon. Lady would agree that we need to improve productivity and the management of British companies. That is certainly on the agenda of my Department and will remain there. The hon. Lady should reflect on why this country is so attractive to inward investment. Some 40 per cent. of all Japanese investment in Europe comes to the United Kingdom, because those investors recognise the positive measures we have taken. That is a strength of this country and, instead of carping on the sidelines, the Conservatives should occasionally celebrate the success of our economy.

Perhaps the Prime Minister was referring to his Front Benchers. With manufacturing jobs slumped to their lowest in six years, a north-south divide now clearly evident and a widening traded goods deficit, does the Secretary of State think that it will be of help to manufacturing for the Prime Minister to hold a conference on manufacturing to tell people how they should run their businesses?

We make no apology for consulting the manufacturing industry, because that is important. The hon. Lady should reflect on the record of the Government for whom she was a Minister. Under them, on average, 150,000 manufacturing jobs were lost every year. We will not repeat the days of Tory boom and bust, with interest rates at 15 per cent. for a year, inflation at 10 per cent. and more than 1 million manufacturing jobs lost. That is the record of her Government, but we will not repeat those mistakes. Manufacturing industry recognises that we are putting in place the policies that will lead to long-term success and strength.

What assessment he has made of the effect on small businesses of Britain remaining outside the single European currency. [900111]

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has set out five economic tests that will have to be met before UK membership of the single European currency will be considered. These tests will assess whether it is in our national economic interest—and hence in the interests of small firms—to join. They will include an assessment of whether joining will promote higher growth, stability and a sustainable increase in jobs. The Government have said that they will make that assessment in the next Parliament.

Is the Minister aware that the chairman of the policy unit of the Federation of Small Businesses, Mr. Brian Prime, has stated that about 94 per cent. of the federation's 127,000 members are implacably opposed to membership of the single currency? Mr. Prime has stated also that membership of the single currency has little to do with economics, but is a political device for political ends. Why does the Minister think the Federation of Small Businesses can see so clearly that to which the Government are evidently blind?

What the hon. Gentleman has just revealed is an insight into the attitude to Europe not of the Federation of Small Businesses but of the Conservative party, for which the matter is purely one of politics and ideology. For Conservative Members, the matter does not depend on the national economic interest. However, if they want to say that it does, perhaps they will answer two simple questions.

Is the Minister resigning so that he can answer the question?

Order. It is normally for Ministers to answer questions.

Did the Minister see the remarkable speech by the shadow Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Horsham (Mr. Maude), reported last Monday in the Financial Times, in which he said that the euro ultimately would be a success? Whose side does my hon. Friend think the right hon. Gentleman is on?

I agree with my hon. Friend's second point. On his first, I can tell him that I did see the shadow Chancellor's remarkable speech, which revealed the Conservative party's attitude to the euro. Even if the currency is a success, the Conservatives will still rule out joining it for 10 years.

Does not the Minister accept that small firms are much more vulnerable than large firms to currency fluctuations, and that they are much less able to hedge against risk? Does he acknowledge that the present fluctuations of sterling against currencies accounting for more than half our visible trade are seriously damaging to the small firm sector?

I accept that every small firm and every business in this country has an interest in the success of the euro. It may be worth recalling that 45 per cent. of small and medium-sized companies in this country have a trading link with Europe. It is crucial that those firms are ready for the euro and to make preparations if this country decides to join.

Does my hon. Friend accept that the majority of small businesses are commercially linked, directly or indirectly, to larger multinational firms that are linked into the euro? In the same way, they are also linked to companies in Japan and China—which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State visited recently—whose inward investment depends on the belief that Britain will join the single currency when the conditions are right. Does that not suggest that it is in the interests of small business as well as big business to move towards a single currency? What advice has been provided on the medium-term impact on jobs and investment—both internal and inward—that taking up the option of joining would have?

I agree that it is in the interests of every small firm—not only those who trade in the euro, but those whose customers or suppliers trade in the eurozone—to be ready for the single currency. The Government are helping them to get ready: we have issued 380,000 national information packs of fact sheets, 100,000 euro planners and a self-help computer programme to help all businesses to prepare.

As the Minister is responsible for small businesses, what calculation has he made of the cost of the single currency to the independent retail sector? Does he expect the sector to absorb the costs, or to pass them on to customers?

A number of estimates have been made of the costs of getting ready and of joining the single currency, should we choose to do so. The costs vary.

How much are they?

If Opposition Members will be silent, I shall tell them, and they might learn something. Estimates of costs depend on the methodology used. The estimates vary, and it is too soon to tell what the costs will be. However, as Opposition Members are more eager to peddle their own prejudices than to learn anything about the single currency, I shall explain to them that discussions of costs should also involve benefits. Their unremitting emphasis on costs displays their simplistic attitude towards businesses. What matters to all businesses—small and large—is the bottom line. If Conservative Members would concentrate a little more on the opportunities that the euro may offer the UK and our companies, they might do better for themselves and their constituents.

What discussions he has held with the European Commission concerning state aids for Rover. [90014]

I have discussed the matter with Commissioner van Miert; my officials have also had detailed discussions with with Directorate-General IV.

The Minister will be aware of the great importance of this bid to my constituents who work at Longbridge and to investment and jobs in the midlands. Does he recognise the concern in the midlands that he has put the bid in jeopardy by announcing it prematurely before the Commission approved it, and that we are in an invidious position, as the Commission appears to be blackmailing us? Is the Minister aware of the Commission's double standards? Last year, the Commission agreed that France could spend £2 billion on its state industry, Air France, a decision that the European Court deemed illegal. The Minister's former leader then declared that he did not have to obey the court. Will the Minister bear in mind that double standard during his negotiations with the Commission?

For the record, and to help the hon. Lady, let me explain how applications for state aid are made to the European Commission. The procedures that we have followed are exactly those followed by our predecessor. When agreement is reached between the UK Government and the company concerned, an application is made to the European Commission. An application can only be made when the two parties agree, and that is the process in which we are involved. The previous Government went through the same process towards successful applications.

May I assure my right hon. Friend that after months of uncertainty and negotiation, my constituents at Longbridge were pleased that the Government shared the details of the deal with them—as was their right—and that, now that uncertainty has ended, Rover can move to achieve its potential? Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is most important for west midlands Members of Parliament to try to contribute to stability rather than talking down Rover's success?

This is one of those opportunities for all Members of Parliament, who have an interest in, and a concern for, the future of Rover—especially at Longbridge—to celebrate the fact that, this week, BMW began a £400 million investment in the new Mini line at Longbridge. In the months and years ahead, the company will build on that within its investment of more than £3 billion in Rover in the UK generally. We were able to secure that investment with £129 million of regional selective assistance, linked to improving skills and raising productivity. That is the new way for regional selective assistance in the future. Rover now has a real opportunity to become a world leader in car production. I urge all Members of the House—whichever party they represent—to celebrate the success that we have been able to achieve, and to work together to ensure that Rover has a real future as a major player in the world car market.

On how many occasions since electricity privatisation (a) Her Majesty's Government and (b) the regulator have brought a prosecution against an electricity company and on what grounds. [90016]

There have been three prosecutions by the Department for breaches of the regulatory framework governing overhead lines and related equipment. Two of those were for breaches of the safety requirements for overhead lines and ancillary equipment, and one was for a breach of the overhead lines approvals regime under section 37 of the Electricity Act 1989. There have been none by the regulator.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply, and for the personal interest that he has taken in the long-running saga of the Hadley pylon in my constituency. About 18 months ago, the Midlands electricity board erected the pylon, without seeking or receiving consent. Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating the Hadley pylon action group—especially Mrs. Sandra Hodnett and Mrs. Ann West—on the sustained campaign that has been waged during the past 18 months? Does he share my concern about the utter contempt with which MEB approached the matter—in its dealings with the community, the local authority and, latterly, the DTI? Can he give me and the campaign group an undertaking that, in the absence of a complete, valid retrospective application for consent from MEB, he will institute legal proceedings against the company?

I compliment my hon. Friend on the tenacious and patient way in which he has raised the Hadley pylon case, both with the company and with the Department, on behalf of his constituents. I have urged the Department to investigate the case, to insist on the information that is required from the company, and to take the necessary steps to call the company to legal account. As my hon. Friend will understand, it is for solicitors to take counsel's advice with regard to prosecution, but I certainly intend to keep a close eye on the case. It is a saga that has gone on for far too long.

This is the first time that I have had the pleasure of questioning the hon. Gentleman; I very much hope that, despite press briefings to the contrary, it will not be the last.

I am not sure how that question connects to pylons. The hon. Gentleman mentioned the privatisation of electricity. We have spent two years in government sorting out the botched job that the Conservatives did on privatising the electricity industry. That is why we are now trying to sort out the wholesale market, and introducing proposals to improve regulation and put the consumer first—which the Conservatives manifestly failed to do.

In fact, it was my written question earlier in the week that provoked the statement from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, whom I congratulate on his interesting and skilful announcement on the future of BNFL.

I thank my hon. Friend for those questions, and I can reassure him on all three counts. Yes, there will be full consultation. There has already been full consultation with those who work at the plant and the trade unions, as my hon. Friend will be aware from their comments, and that consultation is now being widened. The lessons to be learned from the previous Administration have been spelt out in the comments of the Public Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office. They are as plain as day and we are not going down that route, which is why our proposals are innovative and different. I can give absolute assurances on health and safety at the plant. The changes will be good and beneficial.

What action he is taking to ensure that employers comply with national minimum wage regulations. [90017]

The Inland Revenue is enforcing the national minimum wage with inspectors who respond to complaints from workers and employers. The inspectors have powers to inspect records and to issue enforcement and penalty notices. They can prosecute the worst offenders for the criminal offence of refusal or wilful neglect to pay the minimum wage, and for offences relating to record keeping and obstruction of officers.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. A strong enforcement mechanism is clearly welcome, but do not the figures so far tell an interesting story, namely that the vast majority of employers have fully and quickly embraced the national minimum wage, in clear contrast to the Conservative party?

I am delighted that the implementation of the minimum wage, which makes such a fundamental change, has gone through so smoothly. It will be interesting to learn how the hon. Member for Tiverton and Honiton (Mrs. Browning), now that she has responsibility for these matters, views the minimum wage and whether she now supports the principle. In the past, she was fundamentally opposed to its introduction—

We voted against it.

The hon. Lady is saying that she voted against it. I am sure that we have all noted that that remains the Conservatives' position.

Does the Secretary of State agree that compliance will be greater the more reasonable the regulations are? Will he undertake to examine the regulations as they affect the provision of lodgings, for it is unlikely that he would be able to find lodgings anywhere in this country for less than £20 a week? Will he also examine the regulations as they affect the provision of full board, of which the minimum wage takes no account?

Both issues are currently being considered by the Low Pay Commission, which is due to report to me in December with its views on how those items are having an impact on the national minimum wage.

Does the Secretary of State share my view that one of the most important aspects of the national minimum wage is that, coupled with the working families tax credit, it means that parents with young children do not have to work all hours to make ends meet? What plans does he have to monitor another important aspect of the Government's family-friendly policies—the forthcoming rights to parental and family leave?

My right hon. Friend makes an important point. We intend to ensure that there is compliance with the national minimum wage, which is why I can inform the House that we have received 1,900 complaints of underpayment since its introduction. Of those, 800 have been settled, and the remaining 1,100 are now being pursued; we shall ensure that there is compliance by the employers concerned. That is part of our family-friendly approach to employment provisions.

I presume that the Secretary of State will agree that the Government are the employer of all locally engaged staff in every British embassy and high commission throughout the world. Are all those staff paid above or at the national minimum wage?

They are employed in line with the normal civil service provisions.

What estimate his Department has made of the number of jobs in the United Kingdom dependent on biotechnology. [90018]

Although that information is not available from official sources because biotechnology cuts across traditional standard industrial classification categories, a report published earlier this year by the Biolndustry Association, entitled "Industrial markets for UK biotechnology—trends and issues", estimates that dedicated bioscience companies employ between 35,000 and 40,000 highly skilled people.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Is he aware that the latest Ernst and Young European life sciences report revealed that this country is home to the largest number of biotech companies in the European Union, and that those companies are largely focused around Oxford and Cambridge and in Scotland? What is his Department doing to ensure that we build on those regional concentrations? May I point out that my constituency is midway between Oxford and Cambridge and is well placed to be part of a biotech innovation corridor?

My hon. Friend had much experience in her former life in that sector and brings wisdom to the House in her campaigning for and championing of it. Ernst and Young estimates that the number of UK specialist biotechnology small and medium-sized enterprises has increased from 135 in 1995 to more than 270 in 1999. The sector is burgeoning. We are leading in Europe in that sector with our top-quality expertise.

From this side of the House I wish the Minister well, but, in seeking to increase the number of jobs in the important biotechnology sector, he should focus not only on the areas referred to by the hon. Member for Milton Keynes, South-West (Dr. Starkey), but on Macclesfield. The town boasts an extremely go-ahead biotechnology company called Proteus International plc, which is based at the Lyme Green business park in Macclesfield. What help and advice would the Minister give Proteus, which has developed a BSE diagnostic testing technology which could prove of very great benefit to this country, to help the company to market and develop that technology, to the advantage of our beef and cattle industry and of the whole country?

I should tell the hon. Gentleman that biotechnology companies are developing in practically every constituency. Biotechnology really is an industry of the future. It is the engineering of the future, and it will be not a small niche but a major segment of our economy in the 21st century.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the term "biotechnology" is widely misused? The agricultural component, involving genetically modified foods, is highly controversial and does not receive the support of the general public, but much the larger component consists of applications to medicine—to health. In that sphere—the design of new drugs, taking a molecular approach to medicine—the prospects for the 21st century are extremely promising, and Britain, given the record of our excellent pharmaceutical companies, is very well placed to exploit those applications.

My hon. Friend makes an important point. It is important to emphasise the full range of biotechnologies in the plural. My hon. Friend the Member for Milton Keynes, South-West (Dr. Starkey) asked about the number of jobs. The number of jobs in diagnostics—the medical area that my hon. Friend the Member for East Carmarthen and Dinefwr (Mr. Williams) refers to—is estimated to be about 9,000. There are about 6,000 jobs in environmental clean-up, using what is called bio-remediation. There are 4,500 jobs in food biotechnology. It is important that we keep a sense of proportion while appreciating the full range of the sector, which can improve health and revitalise some of the traditional manufacturing sectors of our economy.

What representations he has received about the Government's proposed legislation on electronic communications. [90019]

I am delighted to tell the House that our recent consultation—"Building Confidence in Electronic Commerce"—announced by my right honourable Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry on 5 March, resulted in more than 240 responses from industry and other interested parties.

I am surprised that the Minister cannot tell us yet that he is going to publish his electronic communications Bill, at least in draft, because he knows that the last time that the Government produced a draft Bill on electronic commerce, the comments of industry and the Opposition enabled them to modify it enormously. He knows that, in the Queen's Speech, the Government announced that they would introduce a Bill that would become an Act in this Parliament. I hope that he will take the opportunity to publish the draft Bill, which is in a rather unformed state at the moment, so that industry can comment on it during the summer, thus enabling the Government to fulfil in the next Queen's Speech the intentions that they stated in the last Queen's Speech.

I recognise the hon. Gentleman's keen interest in the matter. As he is probably aware, discussions are under way through the usual channels about the best way of bringing that measure forward. It will be brought forward as soon as possible.

Not for the first time, the Tories seem to be putting party advantage ahead of the country's interests. However, the Minister will be aware that biotechnology is a very fast-moving industry, in which six months' delay is the equivalent of two years' delay in any other industry. Given the need to keep Britain ahead in this industry, we cannot afford a six-month delay. Will the Minister outline what steps he will take over the summer, such as consultations with Oftel, to advance measures that will keep Britain ahead in e-commerce? If the price that the Tories want is just digital signatures, may we just have those now and the rest of the Bill in the next Queen's Speech?

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments. We are moving ahead on the Bill as quickly as possible. From his keen interest in and in-depth knowledge of the subject, my hon. Friend will be well aware that we are moving ahead on a range of measures to promote e-commerce in Britain. In the past six months we have laid the foundations for a world-class infrastructure. We have announced a consultation on the introduction of broad-band wireless through making available two large packages of spectrum at 28 and 40 GHz. A few days ago, Oftel announced the results of its consultation on unbundling the local loop, which will be a crucial plank in building the access to broad-band that this country will need for effective e-commerce.

I fear that the Minister rather evaded the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for South Dorset (Mr. Bruce). Does the Minister accept that we want a short, simple Bill to establish the law of electronic signature and contract? It seems that he is to publish a long, cumbersome blancmange of a Bill, which risks being a drag anchor on e-business. Will he drop his proposed voluntary licensing scheme for encryption service providers in favour of a voluntary code? Will he put clauses dealing with interception in a different Bill? Above all, as my hon. Friend asked earlier, will he publish the Bill now, albeit only in draft form, so that he can hear representations over the summer? Regardless of any carry-over procedure, that would be the speediest way of getting good e-communications law onto the statute book for the benefit of Britain's position in this important commercial sector.

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman does not seriously expect me to discuss the content of the Bill before it is introduced in the House. I am sure timt you would not appreciate that, Madam Speaker. I have already given my answer on the publication. The hon. Gentleman will just have to be patient a few days longer.

When he plans to meet representatives of the engineering manufacturing industry to discuss the levels of business activity. [90020]

DTI Ministers are in regular contact with firms and representative organisations in the engineering manufacturing industry to discuss their industry's affairs, including activity levels.

The Minister heard the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) with regard to the Engineering Employers Federation. Does the Minister accept that the success of engineering depends to some extent on the success of retail trade in Britain? He will have heard the news this morning that Marks and Spencer's sales are down 10 per cent., although some of the company's problems are not related to the sort of frocks that it sells. Is he aware that the John Lewis Partnership is reporting a 3.2 per cent. drop in sales, in cash terms, compared to the same period last year? The Secretary of State said earlier that we should be celebrating the success of our economy. In any other place, would we not describe the economy now as being in recession?

I shall revert briefly to engineering, which was the subject of the hon. Gentleman's original question. Of course I recognise the importance of that sector, and I am delighted to see that it is growing at 2.2 per cent. at an annualised rate, compared to the equivalent quarter last year. All hon. Members will welcome that evidence of growth in engineering.

Does my hon. Friend accept that a prime example of successful engineering manufacturing is the aerospace industry? With that in mind. may I persuade him to make available only £550 million investment launch aid for the Airbus 3XX project? That will create thousands of new jobs. By scheduling my constituency as an assisted area, our right hon. Friend is giving a tremendous boost to engineering manufacturing in my constituency for the next century, and my people thank him for that.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for those remarks. I know that the application for launch aid is now in, and I can assure him that it will be considered carefully and in great detail as he would expect.

What is the reaction of the Government, who made a lot of noise about competitiveness when they were in opposition, to the sharp fall in the United Kingdom's place in the world competitiveness league announced in Switzerland this week?

Of course we are doing everything we can to make sure that this country improves its competitive position. We inherited from the Conservative party not a golden legacy, but a situation that was severely threatening to all our manufacturing industry and businesses. We are taking every step to ensure that that is put right. Having put an end to the boom and bust that characterised the years that the Conservative party spent in government, we have created a new climate of stability, which is the core foundation for economic success. We have cut corporation tax to the lowest levels ever and we are creating a properly competitive environment in which business can flourish and prosper.

Is my hon. Friend aware that he has brought real hope to the manufacturing industry of Lancaster with the announcement that he has made today about levels 2 and 3 assisted area status for the city? Is he further aware that there is singing and celebration throughout the streets of that glorious city because of the coupling of that announcement with the fine announcement on single regeneration budget funding for the Luneside regeneration project? Is he looking forward to his visit to Lancaster on 5 October? Not only will he be celebrated throughout the entire city for putting the benighted Tory years behind us, but he will hear evidence and information about how we intend to use the money well to bring Lancaster back to full employment and prosperity.

I have listened to my hon. Friend's eulogies about Lancaster for many months and I am delighted that I am to visit that great city. I am looking forward to that and I welcome his words of thanks about the work that we have put in on the assisted areas map. We have tried to address real need throughout the United Kingdom and I am delighted to hear that we have succeeded.

The policies being pursued by the Government have safeguarded existing jobs in Northern Ireland, and indeed have helped it to attract new investment, but will the Minister and his Department be very conscious of the fact that electricity costs in Northern Ireland are the highest of any region of the United Kingdom? We in Northern Ireland have reached our emissions target through the introduction and use of gas, but will he consider seriously the adverse impact—and the damage to stability, prosperity and peace that could be caused if jobs were to be lost—of increased costs for manufacturing industry caused by the climate change levy?

I recognise the hon. Gentleman's concerns. I understand that there is now connection through an interconnector, which ought to bring costs down in the future. Let me say three things in relation to the climate change levy. First, there will be no overall increase in taxation. Secondly, of course we need to promote competitiveness, but we also need to balance that goal with the need to promote sustainable development. Thirdly, we recognise that the energy-intensive sectors have a special case and we intend to set significantly lower rates for them.

What plans he has to increase the penalties for disqualified directors who run businesses. [90021]

There are no restrictions on disqualified directors running businesses on their own account. Accordingly, there are no penalties arising. There are no plans to change that. The penalties for directors who act in contravention of disqualification orders are imprisonment for up to two years or a fine, or both. There are no plans to increase those penalties.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. How can disqualified directors acting behind the scenes in the management of companies best be detected?

As my hon. Friend might expect, we are doing a great deal about that. In January 1998, the Insolvency Service launched a telephone hotline for the public and the business community to report disqualified directors who continue to act while banned. There has been a good response: 925 calls were made to the hotline and 125 cases were referred to solicitors for consideration. Companies House checks have also been introduced to ensure that all disqualified directors resign from all current directorships and are not appointed to any new ones. A great deal is being done to curb the activities of rogue directors.