What action her Department is taking to enforce safety legislation associated with fireworks. [136674]

The safety of fireworks is governed by the Fireworks (Safety) Regulations 1997. Enforcement is the responsibility of the trading standards service. Display and storage of fireworks are controlled by local authorities under the Health and Safety Executive's Explosives Act 1875.

I thank my hon. Friend for that long list of measures, but is not the best way of enforcing the safety regulations to tackle the antisocial behaviour that is all too often associated with fireworks? Will he ensure that those regulations, and the new regulations announced by the Secretary of State, will he strictly enforced to ensure the safety of both people and pets?

I wholeheartedly agree. I think that the House owes a debt to my hon. Friend the Member for Hamilton, South (Mr. Tynan), who introduced the Fireworks Bill as a private Member's Bill. It is important to tackle antisocial behaviour, which is why we are pleased that the regulations will ban under-18s from having fireworks in public places and double the penalties imposed on those throwing fireworks. I think that those measures accord with our strategy to deal with antisocial behaviour.

Does the Minister acknowledge that nowadays there is widespread ignorance as to who Guy Fawkes was? Apparently, the most popular candidates for the bonfire this year are President George Bush and the about-to-be-crowned leader of the Conservative party.

I accept what the hon. Gentleman says about safety. This year's safety campaign concerned sparklers. At first people did not think that appropriate, but last year 80 children were injured by sparklers, which reach a temperature of 1,000° C, 10 times the boiling point of water. They are in fact very dangerous.

I hope that the new regulations prove effective. I suspect that the number of complaints about the effects of fireworks has, if anything, been greater this year than in earlier years. If the regulations prove ineffective, what prospect will there be of a total ban on the sale of fireworks other than for publicly organised events?

My hon. Friend is entitled to his view, but I hope that he will join us in trying to ensure that the regulations do work, because they provide for dramatic improvements in safety and reductions in antisocial behaviour. I hope that he will concentrate on that aspect and work with stakeholders in his constituency. Let us see if the regulations work first; if they do not, we shall have to return to the issue.

While there is much to welcome in the Fireworks Act, can the Minister assure us that the Government will not use the section referring to potential licensing to introduce regulations requiring every local primary school, guides group or scouts group that holds an annual display to engage in a complicated licensing process?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that that will not happen. The licensing regime will concentrate on the sale of fireworks. At present there is a registration scheme for shops. The idea is to establish a licensing scheme to prevent any abuse of the rules on selling fireworks to young people.

What action she is taking to help enterprise in deprived areas. [136675]

My Department promotes the development of small enterprises and investment by larger firms, particularly in the assisted areas.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that some recent manufacturing losses have involved low-value, high-volume products, often in some of our most deprived areas? The physical inheritance of those areas from their industrial past—the mills and the pits—means that they are among the hardest to regenerate. I welcome the successful regeneration of northern cities, and I welcome the great northern cities that we now have; but does the Minister think there is a case for commissioning a special study, along with the northern regional development agencies, to investigate what more can be done to regenerate hard-to-reach northern towns?

I share my hon. Friend's concern about the loss of, in particular, traditional manufacturing areas in some of the most disadvantaged towns, including those in his constituency. Let me draw his attention, however, to what we have already been able to do, in his constituency and more generally in the north-west, through regional selective assistance and the grants—which I know he welcomed—to Patak's Foods and, more recently, Corbett Packaging, which is relocating in his constituency. Those are good examples of our commitment to modern manufacturing and to the securing of good jobs, especially in our most disadvantaged communities.

Given that in his Budget speech on 9 April the Chancellor of the Exchequer talked about adding to the incentives for small business creation, and that, whatever the merits of individual measures, the sea of regulation is now deeper and more hazardous than any with which business has previously had to contend, can the right hon. Lady now tell me and the House what assessment she has made of the merits of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 and the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 in the United States?

I always enjoy the hon. Gentleman's contributions about red tape, but in response to the rather difficult and confused metaphor that he used, I have to say that he is wrong. The number of regulations each year that impose a cost on business has fallen since 1996, and we have taken a number of steps—simplifying the VAT regime, for instance—to make life simpler and easier for small business. The hon. Gentleman referred to some good examples of practice in the United States; we did indeed look at that and learned from it in creating and strengthening the Better Regulation Task Force and our whole system of regulatory scrutiny. That is why the OECD says that we have one of the best regulation and regulatory reform regimes in the world.

Does my right hon. Friend recognise that enterprise in a deprived area such as mine remains heavily dependent on the fortunes of the pottery industry, which in turn heavily depends on exports? In that context, does she share my concern about the 30 per cent. tariff on pottery imports from the United Kingdom to the United States? That swingeing tariff is having a very detrimental effect. Will she look into it with some degree of urgency, and make the necessary representations to her colleagues in the European Union?

Yes, of course I will. My hon. Friend raises an important point, and he will know, as do other hon. Members, of the enormous efforts that we have made to deal with the unlawful tariffs that the United States has imposed on imports of our steel—a matter on which we shall soon have the final ruling from the World Trade Organisation. The tariffs on pottery imports into the United States are a real hindrance to companies in my hon. Friend's constituency and elsewhere, which have quite enough problems to contend with already. I shall certainly see what we can do to help, both bilaterally and within the WTO.

What steps she has taken to control the sale and use of fireworks. [136676]

The Fireworks (Safety) Regulations 1997 prohibit the supply of consumer-type fireworks to those under 18 years of age. They also prohibit the supply of dangerous types of fireworks to the general public—bangers, fireworks of erratic flight and so on. Under the Fireworks Act 2003, we will regulate to make it an offence for under-18s to possess fireworks in a public place, and to prohibit the possession of category 4 fireworks by any person other than a professional. In the new year we will enforce in law the firework industry's current voluntary ban on air bombs.

I thank my hon. Friend for that response and for his earlier comments. Last night, London echoed to the sound of fireworks as families and communities came together in their thousands to enjoy the fun and spectacle—but for many, the misuse of fireworks blights their lives, threatens their homes, terrifies their pets and destroys their quality of life. I welcome the new proposals and, although no one wants to be a killjoy, I ask my hon. Friend to do everything he can to ensure that the police and local authorities enforce any new legislation to stop the misuse of fireworks and stamp out that menace in our communities.

I congratulate my hon. Friend, who over the years has campaigned vigorously to ensure that people do not suffer injury from fireworks. I pay tribute to his work. I was pleased to see that last year's figures showed a 25 per cent. reduction over the previous year, so the safety message is, I hope, getting through. I assure him that we shall do everything we can to ensure that people use fireworks safely.

May I take it that the extremely sensible decision to prevent under-18s from possessing fireworks indicates that the Government will take a similarly robust and sensible line on votes at 16?

I am happy to say that that is not a matter for me.

I thank the Minister for his comments, and I want to emphasise that the number of complaints about fireworks has been growing year by year. Indeed, I have received from a constituent of mine—Mr. Bill Woodward, who is 80 today—a newspaper cutting from the Tipton Herald of 1963, the year in which he started his campaign for legislation on fireworks. I seek an assurance that the Minister will introduce those elements of the Fireworks Act 2003 that can be introduced as soon as possible, preferably before Christmas, so that I can reassure Mr. Woodward that the fruits of his labour will be achieved in his lifetime.

I would be pleased if my hon. Friend would give my congratulations to Mr. Woodward on achieving his 80th birthday, and on his work on firework campaigning. We will include in regulation as soon as possible—before the new year—those elements of the 2003 Act that we can include. Hopefully, all the regulations will be in place by July of next year in readiness for the subsequent firework celebrations.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one current major problem—the British Fireworks Association is on board in this regard—is that the simplicity of the application form for an import licence is allowing unscrupulous firms to import hundreds of tonnes of fireworks and distribute them indiscriminately, which is causing many of the problems with antisocial behaviour? Will he consider changing the terms of the import licence application to make it more difficult for such companies to import fireworks?

I am happy to address that issue with my hon. Friend, to whom I earlier paid tribute for his work on firework; indeed, it is his work that has got us where we are today. I know that he has raised this issue with my ministerial colleagues. I am happy to discuss it with him, and I am sure that we can come to an arrangement. He is right—illegal fireworks are part of the problem and we need to work with the industry and to have proper regulation.

What assessment her Department has made of the impact of the recent changes in the cost of employers' liability compulsory insurance cover on UK businesses. [136677]

The Department of Trade and Industry is working closely with the Department for Work and Pensions, which oversees this insurance, and with the Treasury, which oversees insurance markets.

I am grateful to the Minister for that reply and I welcome his announcement, although the situation in my constituency, which is heavily dependent on small and medium-sized enterprises, indicates that that will not be enough. Some 25 per cent. of businesses in my constituency have reported an increase of 100 per cent. or more in the cost of employers' liability compulsory insurance premiums in the past 12 months. Can meaningful regulation be introduced to ensure that the insurance industry operates in a transparent manner and does not discriminate against SMEs in that way?

I am concerned about reports that the insurance industry has been using employers' liability compulsory insurance as a loss leader, writing premiums well below underwriting losses and making subsequent adjustments. Of course, small businesses find that very difficult to cope with. The Office of Fair Trading looked at this issue in the light of factors such as competitiveness and transparency and decided not to take action at this stage. However, the DTI always keeps such matters under review.

Is the Minister aware that SMEs in Northern Ireland are suffering a double jeopardy, in that their premiums are already beyond mainland levels? Does he understand that there has been an average increase of 500 per cent. in the past three years? The premium of one of my constituents, who has a no-claim record, was £500 three years age? now, it is £8,000. Businesses in Northern Ireland cannot sustain such increases. A fact-finding study in November 2002 reported in March 2003, but no action was taken. A further study commenced last month. SMEs in Northern Ireland cannot wait any longer—they are going out of business as I speak. Will the Minister expedite his resolution of this serious problem?

I am aware of the problems in Northern Ireland, because I discussed them on my last visit to see representatives of the Federation of Small Businesses there. The hon. Member for South Down (Mr. McGrady) highlights what appear to be unacceptable escalations in premiums. We have been working with and on the Association of British Insurers to try to ensure that proper risk assessments of companies are made. I visited several small businesses that, without experiencing circumstances that might adversely affect their claims, have seen their premiums rise to unacceptable levels. I have made it clear to the insurance industry that such rises are indeed unacceptable.

The Minister referred to the Federation of Small Businesses, but has he seen the latest "Financial Statement and Budget Report", which pointed out that 6 per cent. of its members have faced reductions in profits as a direct result of soaring insurance premiums? Furthermore, 19 per cent. are having to lay off staff, and a worrying 8 per cent. reported that they were trading without proper insurance. A year ago, the Minister said that he took that issue very seriously. We have had several reports and heard many platitudes, but when is the small firms Minister really going to listen to small firms?

I deplore any company that is trading without proper insurance, which is illegal. I advise the hon. Gentleman to supply any information on failures to hold valid insurance to the Health and Safety Executive. Since the matter was raised last year and before, the latest survey, which was last month—the Bank of Scotland has commented on it—showed that, whatever the hon. Gentleman says about returns and profits, a third of small businesses intend to recruit staff and 20 per cent. are to increase net investment. That tells me that small businesses have, in their customary way, coped with great fortitude and are not being deflected from making the necessary investment to grow. That is what I want to see.

Does my hon. Friend understand that it is not just small and medium-sized enterprises that are affected by the problem? There are several construction companies in my constituency, and in the past they prudently entered into two or three-year deals to cover insurance premiums—but when they reached the renewal date, they found that those premiums were doubling or trebling. Those companies require employers liability insurance for health and safety reasons, because the construction industry is one of the most dangerous. If they have either to cut corners or to reduce staff, it is not good for the industry as a whole. Big businesses are being hit as well as small, and who will pay for that? It will be the safety of the workers.

As the Minister responsible for construction, I know that that sector has one of the best safety records in the world, and I do not want anything to jeopardise it. I hope that my hon. Friend and the House will be pleased to learn that the DTI construction directorate has engaged an insurance industry specialist to liaise more closely with the industry to ensure that it is properly covered. The necessary steps must also be taken to ensure that building and construction sites meet the highest safety standards, which will also help to reduce their insurance premiums. I want to see them rewarded for taking such action.

May I draw the Minister's attention to a small construction company in my constituency, which, after decades of claim-free operation, has had an eightfold increase in premiums in five years? That is clearly a serious problem for companies that have taken account of the safety factors, but are still being penalised by an insurance industry that seems deaf to the claims records and the needs of small businesses.

The hon. Gentleman highlights a matter that we all find unacceptable. I am sure that he has made direct representations on behalf of his constituents to the insurance company concerned, and I am happy to add my voice as the Minister and write to the company myself.

What recent representations her Department has made to HM Treasury concerning the impact of stamp duty land tax on small businesses. [136678]

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry made representations to the Treasury concerning the potential impact of the proposed changes on businesses. She was pleased that the change announced on 20 October will assist small and medium-sized enterprises and business start-ups, and she welcomed the Chancellor's decision to more than double exemption for businesses with a net present value of less than £150,000.

The Minister knows that businesses small and large remain bitterly opposed to the fourfold increase in tax on their leases. Is he also aware that business feels strongly that that will distort the leasehold market and restrain small business investment? Would he, as the Minister for Small Business and Enterprise, agree to meet a small delegation of businesses so that they can express their concerns on a matter that may well distort the leasehold market for small business right across the country?

I do not accept that. Almost two thirds of commercial leases signed by small businesses will be exempt. Previously, in most cases, stamp duty was paid, if at all, on 2 per cent. of one year's rent. Now the first £150,000 is exempt, and thereafter the rate is 1 per cent. The entire House should welcome this measure to close a tax loophole. I regularly meet the key federations and organisations representing small businesses, and I shall be happy to discuss the matter with them.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the sheer difficulty experienced by those who apply for grants? Would he contact the Association of Marine Scientific Industries, which is particularly concerned about Natural Environment Research Council applications?

I am happy to respond in writing to my hon. Friend.

What action she is taking to ensure greater rights to consultation in the workplace. [136679]

The information and consultation directive which comes into force in March 2005 will give new rights to employees to consultation about matters that affect them in the workplace.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it would make a great deal of sense if companies did not wait for the deadline of 2005, and if companies and trade unions co-operated—like Tesco and Asda, for example—to ensure that there is effective consultation long before 2005?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend and I am delighted to say that we have already been working closely with both the CBI and the TUC. I pay tribute to Digby Jones and Brendan Barber for the work that they have done in agreeing a framework for implementation. Now that that is in place, well in advance of the directive coming into effect, I hope that many more businesses will take advantage of the opportunity to create an effective partnership with their work force and its representatives.

Given that Britain faces more acute competition—[Interruption.] I shall take three minutes over this question. Given that Britain faces more acute competition internationally for both investment and jobs, will the Secretary of State undertake, whenever additional obligations are placed on British employers, to carry out an assessment of the likely impact of those obligations, regardless of how desirable or well-intended they may be, on the job prospects over the next 10 years of less-skilled workers?

I am delighted that the hon. Gentleman is in favour of competition, if not for the leadership of his own party. He raises a serious matter—the impact upon the least-skilled workers in our community of the enormous process of restructuring that is taking place not just in the United Kingdom and Europe, but right across the world. It is therefore central to our skills strategy, to the work that we are doing in the regional development agencies—which I think the Opposition intend to abolish—and to the work that we are doing in the most disadvantaged areas that we help those low-skilled workers, who are most vulnerable to displacement in the global economy, to get the skills and the jobs that they need. I remind the hon. Gentleman that despite all those global changes, we have 1.5 million more people in work than we had six years ago.

What action her Department is taking to tackle antisocial behaviour and nuisance caused by fireworks. [136680]

My Department has had discussions with a range of stakeholders, including the fireworks industry, the police and environmental health officers to formulate proposals for regulations under the Fireworks Act 2003 on antisocial behaviour and nuisance matters. Areas covered include the prohibition of air bombs and a curfew.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Does he agree that ensuring that we enforce those regulations will be crucial to deciding the future of the firework industry? Constituents continually complain about the noise of fireworks. If we cannot get the issue right in the next 24 months, our constituents will come back time and again to ask for further regulations or even an outright ban on fireworks. Many of us who enjoy peaceful fireworks would not want that to happen. We are not killjoys, but we recognise the real concerns felt by our constituents.

I welcome my hon. Friend's remarks. The firework industry has been very responsible in the work that it undertook alongside my hon. Friend the Member for Hamilton, South (Mr. Tynan). A balance has to be struck between the industry, operating responsibly, and the safety of consumers. The regulations will work and will provide the balance that we need so that people can enjoy the firework season. The regulations will ensure that antisocial behaviour is not accepted.

I welcome what the Secretary of State and the Minister have done so far, but will they go further? We must face the fact that all fireworks are dangerous. In the wrong hands, some are dangerous weapons. Is it time to introduce a licensing system, so that only responsible organisations would have a licence to use fireworks because they would do so properly?

The licensing regime is important and that is why it is included in the regulations to be made under the Fireworks Act 2003. However, people must make sound judgments. Fireworks are explosives and are dangerous. We need a balance between what people enjoy—safe firework displays around bonfires or for Diwali—and ensuring that people know how to use fireworks. That is why the regulations will say that people must be trained in the safe use of particular fireworks. It is a question of balance and the regulations are appropriate. I hope that they will work and that my hon. Friend will welcome them.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in some situations antisocial behaviour with fireworks borders on acts of terrorism? In an incident in my constituency, a powerful firework, packed with nuts and bolts and other shrapnel, was detonated in a telephone box, parts of which blew into a housing estate. Such fireworks need to be banned before serious injury is caused by those people, not necessarily under-18s, who use them to cause criminal damage.

My hon. Friend really does point to a serious issue and the dilemma that we face. If we ban fireworks completely, we will be faced with illegal and home-made fireworks. They could cause all sorts of damage to the individual using them and to others in the community. It is a question of balance, but we hope that the antisocial behaviour orders will stop youngsters under 18—who are the main culprits—misusing fireworks.

How many urban post offices have been (a) proposed and (b) approved for closure since the inception of the network reinvention scheme. [136683]

I am understand from Post Office Ltd. that to the end of September, it had entered into public consultation on 886 closure proposals and that 540 branches had closed under the programme.

I thank the Minister for his reply and the attention that he has paid to the concerns of my constituents about post office closures in recent days. He told the House yesterday that

"there is a properly managed process for the Post Office to configure its network to meet the needs of the communities that it serves".—[Official Report, 5 November 2000; Vol. 412, c. 909.]

It is vital that such a strategic view is taken. Indeed, that is one of the benefits of the new arrangements being put in place, about which the hon. Gentleman knows well. The Post Office will consult on the ultimate configuration of the post office network in a constituency or group of constituencies, instead of consulting on individual closures.

Is the Minister aware of the sheer inadequacy of the Post Office's consultation process? When people make representations, they are likely to receive a letter 80 per cent. of which is devoted to the argument about why massive changes must take place, which pre-empts the decision to be made. That happened in Coal Aston in my constituency, where the branch is to close on 6 December. I hope that the matter will be looked at closely before that date, with a view to reconsideration. The considerable number of representations that were made had various unique characteristics, and they must be taken seriously. In that way, I hope that we can still stop the closure.

It is important that such representations are taken seriously. That is why we have given Postwatch the funding and resources to do an effective job on behalf of the Post Office's customers. Of just over 1,100 proposals submitted to Postwatch by the end of October, 43 were withdrawn and 60 were modified before public consultation. Of those that went to consultation, 48 were modified and 13 were withdrawn for further consideration. That shows that there is effective protection of the interests of Post Office customers. The role of Postwatch is key in that.

Will the Minister confirm that Labour's policy of ending the cash payment of pensions and social security benefits at post offices is cutting the income of many sub-post offices by as much as 40 per cent? Will he also confirm that Labour approves of the policy of paying bonuses to the management of Post Office Network for accelerating the programme of post office closures? Will he further confirm that, once Labour has decimated the urban network, it will set about carving up the rural network as well?

The hon. Gentleman is quite wrong on all those scores. May I wish him well in the reshuffle that we understand is planned for the Conservative Front Bench this afternoon, and express the hope that he will not be sacked by text message? For far too long, the Post Office has been locked in a declining market. Even now—and persistently under the previous Conservative Government—that market has been based on ration-book technology. Our investment of £500 million has given the network the technology to tackle the much larger, and growing, market for banking services. Those developments open up the prospect of a commercially successful future for the post office network, based on today's needs instead of yesterday's.

Will the Minister acknowledge that residents in my Brighton and Hove constituency—[HON. MEMBERS: "Brighton and Hove?"]—in the Brighton, Pavilion constituency that I represent are now two weeks into a consultation period on six post office closures? Other offices across the city are also to be closed, but none of the evidence underlying the Post Office's closure proposals has yet been published. That severely undermines people's ability to respond meaningfully to a consultation exercise. Will my hon. Friend join me in urging the Post Office to publish in full the evidence that underlies all its proposed closures, in my constituency and elsewhere?

I think my hon. Friend will agree that the new procedure that he has described, which allows him to see what the ultimate configuration of post offices in his constituency will be, is better than dealing with proposed closures one by one, as used to be the case. I urge my hon. Friend, and other hon. Members concerned about proposals in their areas, to draw their concerns to the attention of Postwatch, a major part of whose work consists of protecting customer interests, in all constituencies. If my hon. Friend does that, I think he will find a ready ear for the concerns he has expressed.

If she will make a statement on the late payment of debts to small businesses. [136684]

As a result of action taken by the Government since 1998, including the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998, the creation of the better payment practice group, the provision for small businesses to claim debt recovery costs and giving small and medium enterprise organisations rights to challenge unfair contract terms on behalf of their members, I am pleased to tell the House that the average time taken to settle debts in the UK has reduced by more than a week, and is nine days less than the European average.

I am pleased to hear that the Government are taking a robust line on late payers, but what are they doing about one of the worst of all late payers, namely, themselves? Only last week, for example, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs admitted that £50 million is still owed to contractors who were involved in the clean-up after foot and mouth two years ago. Many of those companies are perilously close to bankruptcy, so when will the matter be cleared up, and will the companies be entitled to a statutory right to charge interest on those late payments?

Let me tell the hon. Gentleman which companies will not be entitled to claim that statutory right: those who are perpetrating or seeking to perpetrate fraud against DEFRA. The hon. Gentleman and the House will know that my colleagues in DEFRA have paid out many hundreds of millions of pounds, but they are challenging the many fraudulent claims. I am happy to tell the hon. Gentleman that in general the Government's payment record is 94.83 per cent. on time—up 3 per cent. in the past seven years.

In a far-off life when the working week was only 60 or so hours, I had a good number of clients who were in the construction, textile and haulage industries. In terms of late payment, their main difficulty was that most of their income derived from a single client. Will my hon. Friend tell the House how, in those circumstances, the worthwhile changes that have been made can actually be used to extract faster payment? People are unlikely to bite too quickly the hand that is feeding them with most of their revenue.

That is a real concern and I am sure that all hon. Members are aware of it. That is why we have taken several specific actions. The first is to allow representative organisations to take what might be considered a class action—I use the term loosely—on behalf of the companies, to overcome the fear factor. Secondly, when hon. Members raise cases with me I have undertaken to write to the large and powerful organisations that appear to be delaying payment. I am pleased to see that, in general, payment times are speeding up. We keep the matter under review, and the better payment practice group meets regularly to advise us on improvements.

But in spite of the Minister's judicious and careful use of statistics, he knows perfectly well that Departments are among the worst offenders. In the interests of open government, will he publish a league table to name and shame those Departments that are the worst offenders in this respect?

I am not sure where the hon. Gentleman has been: such information is published. It is put in the public domain and in the Library. I completely reject the hon. Gentleman's assertion about Government payment. As I said, the record is 3 per cent. better than under the last Administration, so perhaps the hon. Gentleman can tell the House what he did at that time to make it so bad then.

What action she is taking to increase the availability of (a) the internet and (b) broadband services within the U? and if she will make a statement. [136685]

I welcome the recent news from Oftel that half of UK households are now connected to the internet. The network of 6,000 UK Online centres was completed last year. The Oxford Internet Institute reports that only 4 per cent. of the population lacks ready access to the internet.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer and commend him and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for their continued enthusiasm for the spread of internet and broadband, which are, in a sense, the highway of the 21st century as rail and road were in the 19th century. However, the problem for my constituents—for example, in Grangemouth—is that a number of households or small and medium-sized enterprises are applying but no account is being taken of the fact that, in Grangemouth, we have BP, Syngenta, Avecia, GE Plastics and ENI Chemicals. They are all large users of the internet and broadband, yet they count as only one user. That means that SMEs cannot easily reach BT's targets. Can my hon. Friend take the question up with BT, to ensure that in industrial communities large users count as more than one unit?

My hon. Friend makes an interesting point. The Office for National Statistics said that, in July, 48 per cent. of households had access to the internet, but that 56 per cent. of people have used the internet in the past three months, reflecting the fact that a lot of people are using the internet at work, at school and elsewhere. Many big companies will already have made their own arrangements, so they are not dependent on the upgrading of local exchanges. Nevertheless, I will ensure that the interesting point that my hon. Friend makes is drawn to the attention of BT. I will meet the chief executive of BT shortly, and I will put the point to him when I do so.

At the beginning of this year, the Government announced with some fanfare the broadband aggregation scheme—under which, for example, if there is a hospital, school or whatever in a rural area, there might be justification to provide broadband to those points. The Government went on to say—logically, I thought at the time—that that could enable broadband to be given to subscribers, but that has not happened. Nothing has happened? it has been all talk and no do. Will the Minister prove me wrong and tell me precisely when the first exchange will be enabled under that scheme?

The hon. Gentleman is right to suggest that that initiative is very important. A great deal of progress has been made. All the regional aggregation bodies—he will be aware of them will be—established by the end of this month, and procurement through those bodies will start at the beginning of next year. That will be an effective way to change the basis for the service providers to invest in the provision of broadband in rural areas. Aggregation will take place at regional level, so we will be using the market as a powerful lever to improve private sector performance, but in a framework managed in the public interest by the public sector. The procurements will start in January, and I would expect the benefits to be felt very soon after that.

Can my hon. Friend give an assurance that there will not be the equivalent of planning blight as people wait for the regional aggregation bodies to come into effect before they make decisions, and that public sector bodies such as local authorities can still honour the existing contracts?

Yes, I think I can give that assurance. Of course, we are seeing a very rapid growth in broadband at the moment. Something like 150,000 extra connections are made each month, and there is no sign at all of that tailing off. Indeed, we hope it will accelerate. I think I can give an assurance that there will not be a hiatus as a result of the new arrangements being introduced; indeed, they will contribute to further acceleration and growth.

What assessment she has made of the implications of the working time directive on (a) the service sector and (b) manufacturing industry. [136686]

The Department of Trade and Industry has commissioned research into the implementation of the working time regulations that considered a range of organisations, including those in the manufacturing and service sectors. The general conclusions drawn were that the regulations had marginal or no impact in 10 of the 20 organisations interviewed and that, where an impact was felt, it acted as an impetus to review work practices and work smarter. A recent follow-up study, published in July 2003, of a subset of those firms concluded that the recent legislative changes have not been problematic for most employers interviewed.

Will the Minister confirm the figure given by the British Chambers of Commerce showing that the total cost to industry of implementing the working time directive is £2.3 billion? Will he give a commitment today that he will meet the 23 November deadline to negotiate an opt-out from the 48-hour limit? Will he stand up for British business and resist the working time directive?

I cannot help but notice that the hon. Lady is the only Back Bencher sitting on the Conservative Benches—perhaps lots of job application forms are going in after the coronation of the right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard).

Answer the question.

The right hon. and learned Gentleman needs a mention because he refused to accept the working time directive in 1991. The working time directive is important to employees and employers because it gives people four weeks holiday and an appropriate working week. Good employer-employee relations develop from the working time directive. We are happy to ensure that the United Kingdom's position remains as it is.

Is my hon. Friend aware that for the second time in just a few weeks, the Nestle Rowntree factory in my constituency announced a large number of redundancies, in three figures? The working time directive is important in the confectionery industry because of the Easter and Christmas production peaks. The factory supplies throughout the EU, in the eurozone as well as the UK. It is essential that we have a level playing field so that we compete fairly with the Nestle Rowntree factories in Hamburg and Dijon. Does my hon. Friend agree that the regulations must be applied in exactly the same way in all factories?

I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend that it is important to have a level playing field. I am sorry to learn of the situation with Nestle Rowntree, which has been in his constituency for many years in a variety of guises. I am happy to report that I work with Employment Ministers across the EU and the new accession countries. It is necessary to have a flexible approach to labour markets while ensuring that there are minimum standards for employees.

What steps she is taking to improve access to child care for women. [136666]

The Government are committed to improving access to good-quality child care for all parents seeking places for their children. We are spending record amounts on child care, with a £1.5 billion budget by 2006 for sure start, early years and child care.

I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. Is she aware that child care facilities provided by employers—necessarily larger employers—are tax deductible, whereas those who work for small employers and use child care facilities pay tax? In areas such as mine, people predominantly work for small employers, are on low incomes and pay a disproportionate amount of their income on child care. Do the Government have plans to address that and equalise the mismatch?

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. I am glad to say that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor and his colleagues in the Treasury are considering the issue of employer-supported child care. I draw to the hon. Gentleman's attention the existence—not widely enough known—of child care vouchers that employers can provide to their employees. Those are particularly suitable for small businesses and relieve the employer of the cost of employers' national insurance contributions.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that it is important for both parents and employers to have access to good information about child care as well having access to child care itself? Will she commend the work of Opportunity Links in my constituency, of which I am the unpaid chair, and, of course, Childcare Links, the Government's website, which gives information on child care and I understand receives about 7 million hits a month?

I am delighted to have the opportunity to congratulate my hon. Friend on Cambridge Opportunity Links, which she started before 1997. It was so successful that it formed the basis for the national roll-out of Opportunity Links and it provides an invaluable service. I am delighted to congratulate not only my hon. Friend but everyone else associated with it.

For the benefit of hon. Members, perhaps I should explain that there is meeting of the 1922 committee of the Conservative party, which explains the absence of my Back-Bench colleagues. I think I can, with some confidence, be the first to record officially my congratulations to my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard), who I assume will be successful.

I wish the hon. Lady well in the coming reshuffle and thank her for her remarks. I am clear—I have been advancing this argument for longer than I care to remember, and certainly for the past 15 years or more—that it is the role of Government to support parents and families in choosing how they can best balance the care of their children and earning a living. That is what we are doing with our investment in child care, with the support that we are giving through child care tax credit and children's tax credit, and with the package of family-friendly measures that we introduced in April—which I hope the new leader of the Conservative party will not seek to abolish, given that he opposed all the social chapter measures when he was a member of the Cabinet.

I am sure that my right hon. Friend is aware that most parents want local child care. One of the problems for women in some poor areas has been an absence of childminders. What progress has been made in spreading the availability of childminders to all areas?

As we put in place the children centres—we have already announced the first 32 or so—which will be focused on the most disadvantaged communities, we will provide a base for day-care centres and also a base where childminders can come to get support and extra resources to improve the services that they can offer within their own homes or in the homes of the parents for whose children they are caring. That is the approach that will meet the different needs of families, especially in our poorest communities.

Despite the increase in child care places, there is still an unmet demand. Does the Minister share my concern that more and more families are having to resort to the use of au pair agencies? Au pairs are untrained, unchecked and often exploited. If the right hon. Lady shares my concern, will she tell the House what she plans to do?

There have been situations where au pairs have found themselves expected to take on far too much responsibility within the home, particularly for the care of a very small child, and where they have been exploited by their employers. I share the hon. Lady's concern about the position of some au pairs, although others do an outstanding job. I know that that is a matter that my right hon. Friend the Minister for Children is considering.

What action has been taken to (a) monitor and (b) increase the take up of the Government's measures to help mothers of (i) small children and (ii) disabled children. [136667]

The package of new laws implemented this April provides parents with more choice and more support in deciding how they balance work and child care in ways that benefit everyone—employers, employees and children. Monitoring is important and we are working to develop a comprehensive range of information, both qualitative and quantitative. That includes the results of the second work-life balance study of employers which we published on Monday; monitoring changes in the workforce through the labour force surve; monitoring the number of calls to the ACAS helpline; and working with other bodies to survey specific target groups.

I welcome my hon. Friend's reply. Schemes such as sure start have been a tremendous success in my constituency and in others, but may I ask my hon. Friend to look at the public service agreements and cross-departmental and individual departmental targets, which interacting together can sometimes impede some of the objectives that she has set out. Will she consider that and have regard to blockages within individual targets and PSA agreements?

I hope that the targets set by the Government are not impeding the important progress that we have made in promoting the work-life balance both within and outside Government. As my hon. Friend rightly points out, the range of policies to support children, from sure start to improved tax benefits and investment in health and education, are important in ensuring that we have the right policies in place for families and the right choices in place for parents.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Government's measures to help mothers of disabled children are as much about addressing problems as about recognising potential? Given that a number of children with disabilities, especially those with autism, have great talents in music and art for example, will she and her colleagues do their utmost on an interdepartmental basis to ensure that those children's potential is fully realised?

My right hon. Friend has a proud record of supporting disabled children, and he has made an important point—the workplace flexibilities that we can offer the parents of disabled children are important if the children are to achieve their potential. My right hon. Friends the Minister for Children and the Secretary of State for Education and Skills put the need to maximise opportunities for disabled children at the centre of their work on the better integration of support services for disabled children. We need to make sure that we design services around disabled children to enable them to maximise their chances, not make them fit into administrative structures.