What steps he is taking to maintain a national veterinary surveillance structure. [R] [151384]

Effective veterinary surveillance is a key element of public and animal health protection. A thorough review of current veterinary surveillance measures was issued for consultation last year. We are currently developing strategy proposals that will draw on responses to the consultation, the findings of the BSE report and any lessons to be learned from recent disease outbreaks.

The Minister will appreciate that the question was tabled before the foot and mouth outbreak, in which both his and private vets are doing a splendid job.

The issue of resources at the forefront of my mind, but I am happy to give the hon. Gentleman the unqualified assurances that he seeks in response to both parts of his question. I thank him for his kind words about the state veterinary service and the veterinarians who have come from private practice and from abroad to help us with the current foot and mouth outbreak.

Will such resources as will be available in the next few months be sufficient to tackle the current crisis, and what plans does the Minister have to ensure that services continue beyond that? It seems clear from the Phillips report that one of the real problems was the run-down of the state veterinary service over many years, which needs to he reversed. What will happen when the vets who have come from abroad depart, resulting in a huge gap in the professional advice that is available to us?

The state veterinary service is about to employ almost twice as many veterinarians as it usually would, and some are employed in specialist capacities rather than as general veterinarians. The service is ably led by the chief veterinary officer, Jim Scudamore, on whose advice I rely in managing the current foot and mouth outbreak. I have told him that he is to have the resources that he needs to control the outbreak, and we will argue about where they come from afterwards. Of course, the issue of resources will have to be kept under review, and that and the findings of the Phillips report will form part of our consideration of what has happened once we have the disease under control. At the minute, however, all efforts must be focused on getting the disease under control. That is our priority.

What recent meetings he has had with the Horticultural Trades Association to discuss the impact of rules on packaging on the horticulture industry. [151385]

I last met representatives of the Horticultural Trades Association on 1 February. The meeting covered a range of issues of interest to the horticulture industry, including the question of plant pots as packaging.

Does the Minister agree that the decision of the Lord Chief Justice in the plant pot case on 29 January was potty, and that it would be much better for the Government now to introduce emergency legislation to change the regulations so that they have the same impact on our horticulture industry as the equivalent regulations introduced in Holland, France and Italy under the same EU directive? Does she further agree that the court has misinterpreted the intentions of the House when it passed the regulations, and will she take urgent action because, apart from anything else, the Government are already imposing a substantial burden on the horticulture industry through the climate change levy?

As the hon. Gentleman will know, the prime responsibility for the packaging regulations lies with the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions. In my discussions with the Horticultural Trades Association and others, I have made representations to my colleagues in the DETR, as well as to the European Commission. One of the aspects that the hon. Gentleman raises is the important one of how the regulations are being implemented throughout the EU. A number of countries have taken the same view as the British court, but a number of others have not. This is such an important matter for the horticulture industry that we need to move forward on the basis of a common approach to the regulations.

If he will make a statement on future payments of agrimonetary compensation. [151386]

Last week, my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture announced that he intends to draw down —171 million in agrimonetary compensation for the beef, sheep and dairy sectors, including all of the —156 million in optional compensation. The cost of that to the United Kingdom taxpayer is —129 million. This latest allocation of agrimonetary compensation is in addition to the —629 million already paid since 1997.

May I wholly welcome the drawing down of agrimonetary compensation? I observe, however, that the spin that suggests that it is a response to foot and mouth disease is unhelpful. The money was already necessary and was asked for long before the foot and mouth outbreak.

The hon. Gentleman asks about five questions in his so-called supplementary question. We are informing farmers about a number of issues. Entitlement relates to the current holding and to the current circumstances of farmers in the different sectors concerned. I hope that he will welcome the fact that my right hon. Friend the Minister secured European Commission agreement to make the payments to farmers much earlier than they would usually have been made. Of course, the foot and mouth disease informed our decision on the allocation of the money. Every time we have decided whether to pay out such money, we have had to consider conditions in agriculture and in the sectors that are entitled to such payments. For that reason, foot and mouth disease is an important part of the background to the compensation, especially as so much of the bill for agrimonetary payments is paid by the British taxpayer, despite the fact that they are called European payments.

The farmers of Monmouthshire do not often pay compliments to Agriculture Ministers, regardless of their party, but they are currently paying particular compliments to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture and his colleagues for the way in which they have drawn down agrimonetary compensation and handled the foot and mouth epidemic. Will my right hon. Friend consider other measures that would help the movement of ewes in lamb, including those that are on tack, to enable such sheep to be brought back home in order to lamb at this difficult time?

I very much welcome my hon. Friend's comments, which accord with those made to us by farmers and farmers' organisations throughout the country.

The Minister might be aware that some sections of the livestock industry have not been able to benefit from agrimonetary compensation. Their problems are typified by the call that I received from Mr. Tom Fare a pig farmer in my constituency. He told me that although the licensing scheme introduced by the Minister of Agriculture thankfully ensures that he is now able to market some of his pigs, he is at the mercy of a marketplace that he feels is not working to the advantage of pig farmers. He also worries about the additional costs associated with slaughter at this difficult time. Will she and the Minister of Agriculture consider those circumstances, especially with regard to those who do not benefit from agrimonetary compensation?

The right hon. Gentleman makes an important point about which Ministers have obviously been concerned. He knows the European system well and is aware that agrimonetary compensation is available to some livestock producers, but not all of them. That is why we have brought forward money that was available under the pig industry restructuring scheme to try to help pig farmers. He made the important point that we have started some movement—albeit limited—of animals to slaughter in order to help farmers, including pig farmers. Obviously, we must keep the situation constantly and sympathetically under review.

Yesterday, the Chancellor referred to a great many people and industries in his Budget speech, but he announced nothing new for farmers or farming. Will the Minister of State confirm that agrimonetary compensation is specifically designed to compensate British farmers for the weakness of the euro? It was needed long before the outbreak of foot and mouth disease was confirmed two weeks ago. Will she also confirm that agrimonetary compensation is an inadequate response to the financial damage caused by foot and mouth disease?

Agrimonetary payments are part of the response, but the Government are introducing a range of measures on foot and mouth disease. I appreciate that, on the whole, the Opposition have supported them, but they have a short memory about agrimonetary payments. They did not make such payments when in government; perhaps they believe that we have forgotten all the arguments that farmers directed against them in the late 1980s about amounts of compensation and their failure to revalue the green pound in the way in which farmers wanted. We have not forgotten, even if the hon. Gentleman has.

What steps he has taken to promote openness and transparency in his Ministry's scientific advisory committees. [151387]

As I said in last month's debate on Lord Phillips's report, I am fully committed to operating an open and transparent scientific advisory system. Even before the publication of the report, the Government demonstrated that commitment by setting up the Foods Standard Agency, which puts its advice to Ministers in the public domain.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, which will be appreciated by Pembrokeshire farmers. Will he confirm—he has done so partly—that he will make available the scientific advice that he receives on the current foot and mouth outbreak? Will he also examine the current practice of feeding commercially produced swill to pigs, and consider whether it is commensurate with the Government's policy on safe, quality food?

I give my hon. Friend an unqualified "yes" to both questions. I intend the scientific advice that informs ministerial decisions to be placed in the public domain. As we take stock of the foot and mouth outbreak, I intend to make the Ministry's findings public, and to consult on them. Although it is not up to me to make the assessment, I expect that swill feed for pigs will form part of that consultation.

When the Minister considers the advice of the scientific advisory body, will he bear in mind the fact that developments in the foot and mouth outbreak are happening incredibly quickly? Farmers look to the Minister to give answers that are more instant than he can sometimes provide. A farmer in my constituency contacted me yesterday. He had a problem with calving heifers that were three miles away from his farm. He needs to get them back to the farm, but he has been told that he cannot do that. There are animal welfare as well as scientific considerations in that case. Has the Minister any hope for him?

Yes, I have. The hon. Gentleman is right that developments in controlling foot and mouth disease are happening quickly. I have tried to get information to Members of Parliament and regional officials of the National Farmers Union daily. We inform individual hon. Members if a new outbreak occurs in their constituencies.

I welcome the use of officials such as the chief vet alongside Ministers in fielding inquiries from the media, because it helps for them to be part of the debate in the broadcast media. However, a great deal of concern was expressed when the BSE outbreak first started, because dissenting voices were coshed and not heard. Will my right hon. Friend assure me that dissenting voices today are being heard? It is important to reassure not only farmers but the public that a full range of voices is being listened to and that advice is being taken from them.

I strongly agree with both the points that my hon. Friend makes. The choice for Ministers is whether to keep information to ourselves and then explain it cautiously in the hope that we will not alarm the public, or to put all the information in the public domain, let the public make up their own mind and take the risk of starting scares when they are not justified by the evidence. I think that the second approach is the right one. We should trust the public, treat our fellow citizens in an adult way, put the information in the public domain and explain things candidly to them.

I fully understand the reason for having a slaughter policy in the United Kingdom in respect of foot and mouth disease—such policies have been extremely effective in the past—but the Minister has just said that he wants the public to be treated in an adult way and that he wants advice given to him by the scientists to be transparent and made available to the public. Is he aware that there is growing public concern over inoculating cattle, sheep and pigs against this disease?

There is a lot of public interest in that question. The advice being given to me is very clear indeed. The whole industry and the whole veterinary profession are speaking with one voice. They advise against the use of vaccination and against letting the disease run its course. They firmly support the Government's approach of containing the movement of animals to prevent the disease from spreading, of waiting while the disease incubates and, as we discover what is already incubating, of quarantining it and extinguishing it. There are very sound reasons for that approach.

My right hon. Friend knows the farmers in the north-east of England well. He will know that they are even less prone to throw bouquets than those in Monmouth. However, all the messages that I have had from farmers and, formally, from the National Farmers Union state that they have been enormously pleased with the way in which the Ministry has acted. There has been firm, rapid action, sensitively taken and very well communicated. I particularly want to mention the speed with which the website was updated when it was drawn to my right hon. Friend's attention on Monday that it was slightly out of date. That was very speedy action indeed.

I thank my right hon. Friend for those remarks and, considering the importance of the sheep sector in particular to his constituents and to our region generally, they are praise indeed.

Is the Minister worried that the openness and transparency to which he refers is not practised by the German authorities, which reportedly did not respond in a timely manner to a Food Standards Agency request for information about the beef being exported from Germany to Britain?

That is a BSE-food safety issue rather than a foot and mouth control issue. I fully support the work that John Krebs has undertaken with the German authorities and the Commission and I can assure the House that, from my dealings with the new German federal Minister, I know that nobody is more angry at the shortcomings of German abattoirs than that Minister.

If Germany continues to export illegal and possibly dangerous cuts of beef to Britain and declines to tell the Government's advisers in Britain what action it is taking to stop such exports, will the British Government protect British consumers by halting imports of German beef?

We protect British consumers by checking every consignment. The hon. Gentleman is right that this is a serious matter. If specified risk material is found, it is not allowed into the food chain. We have made our representations to the German federal Government, the Commission and, as I understand it, another European member state to point out that such material is a risk to European citizens. It does not matter whether they live here or in another part of Europe, the risk is the same. Specified risk material must be removed. The Commission is insisting on that and, indeed, my understanding is that it has said that abattoirs that have been found to be repeatedly at fault are to be closed, at least temporarily.

How much his Department has allocated to research and development into organic farming methods in the past 12 months. [151389]

This year's budget for research and development into organic farming methods is currently —2.1 million, nearly twice as much as it 1997–98. In addition, —2.3 million has been allocated to establish the European Centre for Organic Fruit and Nursery Stock at Horticulture Research International in Kent.

Organic farming methods are all about sustainability. Does my hon. Friend believe that any part of the foot and mouth tragedy is linked to unsustainable factory farming? Has not "pile it high, sell it cheap" in the supermarkets led inexorably to the costly piles of burning carcases in the countryside? Will not greater investment in organic farming methods help to curb the excesses of over-intensive food production, which are wreaking such havoc on farming viability in rural Britain?

It is understandable that the foot and mouth outbreak has made us focus on farming policy in this country, including intensive farming. It would be wrong, however, to blame intensive farming for the outbreak, which has been caused by a number of factors unrelated to it. Certain developments in modern agricultural practice have occurred, such as the growth in the dealer network and the increase in long-distance movement of animals. There are issues that need to be questioned on the basis of sustainability.

The Minister will be aware that Herefordshire has more organic farming per hectare than any other county in England and Wales. How much has his Department allocated to research and development? Organic farmers must be told how to protect their crops from contamination by GM trial sites, which another Department has authorised in their locality.

Part of the reason for establishing GM trial sites is to examine such issues as pollen spread. Of course that has implications for organic farmers, which is why the organic organisations have been involved in consultations with the supply chain initiative on modified agricultural crops on setting up and monitoring those trials, separation distances and the implications. That is right and proper and makes for a stronger argument for having field scale trials to examine such issues.

Does my hon. Friend accept that we must be sure that produce labelled "organic" is not seen to be good where produce labelled "ordinary farming" is seen to be bad? Is not it important that research concentrates on which of the organic methods of farming produce safe food and benefit the environment? Should not the Government encourage outcomes, rather than labels?

Any claim made for any food must be substantiated and based on accurate science. There has been detailed research into organic production, especially in connection with environmental benefits. It is clear that environmental benefits arise from organic farming. We expect all food, whether produced by organic or conventional means, to be safe and to meet the standards set by the Government. Those standards are carefully and rigorously enforced.

What assessment he has made of the impact of regulations on economic links of fisheries vessels on the British fisheries sector. [151391]

A full report on the operation of the economic link licence condition in 1999 was published in November 2000 and placed in the Library of the House. The policy is working well. There was almost total compliance; foreign-owned UK vessels increased their landings and expenditure in the UK, and additional quota was made available to inshore fishermen in the under-10-metre fleet and the non-sector. A further report on compliance in 2000 will be published later this year.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the regulations have been warmly welcomed by my constituents in Fleetwood? They have resulted in more than 30 Anglo-Spanish vessels joining Fleetwood's fish producers organisation, and in a very large increase in landings in the port that otherwise would have gone to foreign ports. However, will my hon. Friend look at the role of designated ports such as Fleetwood in the further application of these very welcome regulations?

I am well aware that my hon. Friend has done an awful lot of work with the Fleetwood fish forum to promote Fleetwood and to address issues concerning its fishing industry. The economic link condition has meant that about 300 tonnes of quota have been returned to the UK inshore fleet from foreign-owned UK vessels. Landings in ports are up by 300 per cent., and an additional sum of an estimated —3 million has been spent on goods and services in our fishing ports around the coast.

The Minister knows that Liberal Democrats support the economic link measures. Will he say what further compensation is likely to be paid beyond the —55 million that he just mentioned? That compensation arises from the botched fiasco that was the Tory attempt to remove quota hoppers from the UK register. If the Minister had that money available for the UK fleet, would he direct it towards the lay-up problems in Scotland and the rest of the country, or would he use it on a decommissioning programme?

I can certainly think of far more constructive uses for that —55 million than using it to pay compensation. That sum is the full and total settlement of the claims made against the UK, although some legal costs remain to be settled. However, I assure the hon. Gentleman that compensation claims have been settled in full, and the total cost is about a quarter of the original claim.

When my hon. Friend looks at the economic links regulations intended to regulate quota hoppers, will he bear it in mind that there will be many more quota hoppers unless he provides an urgent support package for the British fishing industry? Many British—and especially English—fishing vessels are not financially viable. If they go bust, the licences and quotas will be bought up by fishermen from countries that have provided aid packages to their fishing industry. Nearly every other European country has provided such a package for its industry. When will my hon. Friend be able to announce a generous aid package for the British fishing industry?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the economic link measures, and other factors, have caused the number of quota hoppers on the UK register to decline significantly. The number continues to decline. There has been no sign that foreign-owned fishing companies or vessels are interested in buying UK licences.

Does the Minister realise that his trumpeting of his success regarding the economic links regulations for fishing vessels in the British fisheries sector will be exposed as both futile and worthless given the crisis that is facing the British fishing industry? Without his immediate financial intervention to offset the North sea cod closure area, the UK fleet, particularly that in Scotland, faces financial disaster. Is it now the Government's policy to stand idly by and witness a substantial UK fleet reduction, which will make it easier, as has been pointed out, for vessels from southern EU countries to gain access to our northern waters after the common fisheries policy review in 2002?

That is a bit rich coming from the party that opened the door to quota hoppers. Under Conservative policies, the number of quota hoppers increased; under ours, the number has decreased. Of course, there is some difficulty with the availability of fish stocks and the impact of the cod closure area, but I make no apology for introducing that scheme. Indeed, it was introduced with the full support and involvement of representatives of the fishing industry because action had to be taken to deal with the pressure on fish stocks and the dire state that they are in.

What action he is taking to increase woodland cover. [151392]

We give grants for planting more than 5,000 hectares of new woodland in England each year and the Forestry Commission is also planting new woods in the national forest and the community forests. Those initiatives and others, such as challenge funds, are targeted to meet our priorities and programmes for forestry as set out in our England forestry strategy.

I am grateful for that reply. Is my hon. Friend aware of announcement by the Woodland Trust that the impact of the Department's farmed woodland premium scheme over the past eight or nine years has been to create new fanned woodlands that are usually small, inaccessible to the public and not linked to other woodland in the vicinity? Given the purposes of the excellent English forestry strategy, will he consider reviewing the workings of the premium scheme to ensure that it more effectively increases woodland cover in the United Kingdom?

My hon. Friend makes a good point; there are strong arguments in the way in which support is targeted. Larger forests have a wider range of benefits and are much more cost-effective. That fact has been identified by the Forestry Commission and the forestry forum that has been set up as part of the English forestry strategy. I pay tribute to all the organisations that have joined the forum, which represents the private, the public and the voluntary sectors. It has had a tremendous input into forestry policy. It is committed to increasing forest cover in England, and I am glad to say that we have a budget that will increase spending on forestry by 50 per cent. in the next seven years.

The Minister will be aware that trees take a long time to grow and so a woodland takes some years to achieve. Therefore, does he share my concern at the number of trees and the amount of woodland cover that will be lost because of the proposed line of pylons from Lakenby to Picton, Shipton and Beningbrough, which goes right through the heart of the vale of York? Will he join me to press the National Grid to take the route of the pylons away from the woodland in question, in particular that part of it that is in an area of special scientific interest?

I understand the hon. Lady's concern. Discussions about pylons are often controversial, as I experienced in my constituency some years ago. She will be aware that a planning issue is involved, which is the responsibility of the local authority. It is reasonable for local people to argue that pylons should be kept away from established woodland wherever possible. If it is not possible, it is not unreasonable to ask, as one of the planning conditions, for new woodland to be planted in compensation for any that is lost.

How many persons are employed on all forms of contract at the cattle traceability centre in Workington. [151394]

At the end of February, 618 people were employed on all forms of contract at the British cattle movement service in Workington.

The centre is one of the great success stories of west Cumbria. Will my right hon. Friend scour the whole of MAFF to see whether any more jobs can be transferred to the area? In particular, meat product export licensing work—which will, I suspect, have to be expanded over the coming years—could be transferred, as could sheep, pig and goat movements registration work. As that work expands, will my right hon. Friend look seriously at transferring it to my constituency and also to that of my right hon. Friend the Member for Copeland (Dr. Cunningham)? We have the workers and they are keen to take on those tasks.

My hon. Friend is second to no one in his determination to look for job opportunities for his constituents in Workington and I very much applaud his work. I hope that he will feel that, as regards work that is already available in the area, we have responded to some of the representations made by him and his constituents. As he knows, following a better quality service review it was decided that the work of the BCMS should remain in the public sector ant that there was certainly no case for moving that work away from his constituency.

While, like the Minister, I am glad that there is that traceability expertise in Workington, does she agree that traceability in this country is of precious little use unless we know precisely where imported beef comes from? Recently, there were worrying reports about beef imported with the spinal cord left in. Which European Union countries have traceability standards that match the excellence of those at Workington?

On the point about imports, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will join me in applauding the vigilance of the Food Standards Agency. It has rigorously checked imported meat in order to detect traces of specified risk material and any trace spinal column still attached to the meat. The agency's efforts should be applauded; they are extremely important for safeguarding consumer health in this country.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the work of the Ministry's civil servants is very much valued? She knows that in my constituency we are most anxious that none of the jobs should be lost. When she is considering the employment and the extension of MAFF services, I am sure that she will understand that any attempt to move the work of the Ministry into the private sector without extremely wide consultation—or worse, any attempt to concentrate such jobs outside the existing regional offices—will be met if not with vigorous responses, certainly with a lack of amusement.

I know that my hon. Friend has had meetings with my right hon. Friend the Minister to express her concerns, quite rightly, about the future of employment in MAFF in her constituency. I also know that a good amount of work has been done on identifying the services that will be retained in her area. It is important that the Ministry plays its full part in the regionalised system of government that we have in the United Kingdom. It is also important that, especially through the England rural development programme, we deliver many services effectively at regional level, and that allows us to identify employment opportunities.

What his assessment is of the performance of the Crown Prosecution Service in Berkshire. [151415]

The Crown Prosecution Service has been working with the police and the East Berkshire magistrates court to introduce the Narey proposals. All defendants charged with a criminal offence in East Berkshire should now make their first appearance before Slough magistrates court within 72 hours of arrest. The agencies have also been working together to speed up youth justice.

I thank my hon. and learned Friend for his reply. I am glad to hear about those initiatives, but I want to draw his attention to my concern about basic inefficiency in the CPS in Berkshire. I shall cite just one of a number of examples involving constituents who have come to me about crimes that have not been properly prosecuted, not because of a decision not to prosecute, but because witnesses or the police were not informed of the date of the prosecution.

"I am twenty-four years old. I have the whole of my life in front of me. I feel like what should be my best years have been blighted. Jason committed a crime for which at the very least he should have been made aware he did wrong. What is to stop him doing this to his next girlfriend …?"

My hon. Friend is second to none in tenaciously pursuing cases raised by her constituents. There is no doubt that something went horribly wrong in that case, and the CPS has apologised to her and, in particular, to the victim. I understand that assistance has been given so that she might be able to bring a civil injunction in that case. Things did go wrong, but given the substantial increase in the budget for the CPS, there will be more lawyers and caseworkers in the Thames valley. The increase for next year's budget in my hon. Friend's area is about 11 per cent.

If there was an outbreak in Berkshire of a virulently contagious animal disease, the CPS presumably would have a role in assisting the trading standards officers and the Meat Hygiene Service. Is the Solicitor-General satisfied that there is sufficient preparation and liaison between the CPS and those agencies to enable the activities of rogue traders and operators to be closed down without delay?

There is no doubt that, as a result of the measures that we have taken over the last couple of years, the CPS is working much more closely with other agencies. That has been one of the great benefits of the youth justice pledge. Now, the CPS meets regularly with the police, social services and others. In the hypothetical case that the hon. Gentleman raised, the CPS would liaise with other agencies. I should emphasise, however, that the CPS only gets cases that are brought to it by other agencies. It can and does give advice to the police and other agencies when that is asked for, but it is up to agencies to initiate cases and for the CPS then to take them forward.

What the impact on the Crown Prosecution Service in north Wales will be of the extra funding recently announced. [151417]

The budget for the CPS in north Wales for the year 2001–02 shows an increase on the previous year's budget by —147,000. It will allow the area to recruit staff to fill posts kept vacant during the current year and to continue to push ahead with its proposals to implement the Glidewell reforms. In addition, installation of the new CPS IT system, Connect 42, into north Wales will be completed during April 2001.

I thank my hon. and learned Friend for that answer. I welcome the content of his reply. My local CPS seems to have long-term lawyer vacancies, which puts pressures on other staff members. Will this extra money solve the problem and help them to meet Government targets?

Certainly, additional staff will be employed as a result of the increase in the budget. I assure my hon. Friend that north Wales is an area with few problems. It was almost a joy to visit the area recently because it is meeting the youth justice pledge and is a pilot for a number of projects, such as the Narey project. As I said in my written reply, it is also the first area to introduce the new system for informing victims. When I visited I saw that in operation and I was most impressed.

No doubt the —147,000 increase in the CPS budget in north Wales will be welcome, but will not CPS work be hindered by the closure of courts in Wales? Is the Solicitor-General aware that the other day a defendant in Wales had to walk 50 miles to the nearest court, following the closure of his local court? Is he further aware that in Oswestry, right on the borders of north Wales, the Court Service spent —350,000 renovating a school building and converting it into a court five years ago and it is now having to spend a further —197,450 to comply with Human Rights Act 1998 demands, which apparently prevent prisoners in handcuffs from being seen by the public? Is that good use of Government and taxpayers money? Will it not inhibit the work of the CPS which, despite the small increase in its budget in north Wales, is cash strapped?

Unlike the previous Government, we have properly funded the CPS. In the hon. and learned Gentleman's constituency in Leicestershire, the budget has increased substantially by some 25 per cent. It has increased nationwide. There will be more prosecutors and more caseworkers. As for the courts, as I have said previously, there is always a tension between efficiency and providing access locally. In many cases the smaller courts, to which the hon. and learned Gentleman alluded, are too small to work efficiently and the Lord Chancellor's Department, in consultation with local people, has decided to close a number of them.

What impact the Human Rights Act 1998 has had on the work of the Crown Prosecution Service. [151418]

Crown prosecutors must apply the principles of the European convention on human rights in accordance with the Human Rights Act 1998. Prosecutors have been well trained and prepared for that and are applying convention principles with increasing confidence, both during the prosecution review process and when meeting convention challenges in court.

I thank my hon. and learned Friend for that reply. I visited my local magistrates courts on the day that the Human Rights Act came into force. Lawyers and magistrates had received training, but were slightly apprehensive about the Act's impact. Will my hon. and learned Friend tell the House how extensive the impact of the Act has been and whether the dire warnings that were issued by the Opposition that there would be chaos in the courts and that the Act would be a criminals charter have, in fact, materialised?

The sky has certainly not fallen in as the Opposition suggested it would. The Human Rights Act is now operating, points are being raised and argued. It is interesting that the number of cases going to the Court of Appeal criminal division has fallen overall. In the magistrates courts, human rights points are occasionally raised, but magistrates deal with them efficiently. My hon. Friend has taken an interest in these matters and in equal opportunities for a long time. She knows that it is a question not simply of what the courts do, but of changing the culture in organisations so that public agencies appreciate the human rights of the citizens with whom they dial.

I am grateful for this opportunity to question the hon. and learned Gentleman, who gives every impression, in the provision of his answers, that he is paid by the word. What has been the cost of the training provided to prepare prosecutors for the advent of the Human Rights Act? How many people have been involved in its delivery? Does he intend to conduct a continuing assessment of the number of staff who opt for early retirement?

As I have said, the Act is bedding down well. It is not as though cases are taking longer in court. Occasionally, human rights issues are raised, but they are dealt with efficiently and speedily. The fast-track procedure that we established to get contentious cases on appeal into the Court of Appeal has worked very well.

What arrangements exist between the Crown Prosecution Service and the police to ensure that victims are kept informed as to the progress of criminal proceedings in which they are involved. [151419]

What role the Crown Prosecution Service has in assisting victims in providing victim impact statements; and when these will be introduced. [151420]

Those two initiatives are part of a range of measures designed to improve the service provided to victims of crime and to enable victims, if they wish, to have a greater involvement in the criminal justice process.

I am grateful to my hon. and learned Friend for that answer. I am sure that he is well aware that one of the most frustrating things for victims of crime is when they feel that they have not been informed of the process of the trial and, often, of its outcome. Victims feel that there are representatives for everybody else, but that no one represents them. Will he assure the House that the responsibility to notify victims of what is happening will not fall between the stools of the police force and the CPS, and that there will be effective communication with victims about what is happening?

My hon. Friend raises a very good point. That concern was first mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart). In the case to which she referred, the victim was not informed of what had happened. The procedure that we are introducing will enable the CPS to take on that responsibility, and I saw that happening in north Wales during my recent visit there. The victim will be informed directly by letter. If the victim then wants to see the prosecutor or, in important cases, the chief Crown prosecutor, that will happen.

I am grateful to my hon. and learned Friend. There is no doubt that many victims often believe that not only are they not kept informed about what is going on, but the crime's impact on them is not taken into account by the courts in passing sentence. Although I am satisfied with the way in which my local police service deals with victims of racially aggravated crime, is there not a case for statements on offences such as race hate crimes to be taken by the CPS when a more detailed statement is often required to get to all the facts?

The victim personal statement will enable a victim of a racially aggravated crime to set out its consequences, including the distress that it has caused. On racist crime, my hon. Friend might have seen that last week the CPS published figures that show that the number of prosecutions of racist crimes has increased significantly. In addition, the police are identifying racist crimes to a much greater extent. Much work has to be done, but our approach is bearing fruit.