What further changes to workplace rights she expects to be in place by 2007. [182677]

The Government will continue to find the right balance between establishing fair standards for workers and creating more jobs. As we have already announced, we will introduce regulations on age discrimination and implement the information and consultation framework, on which we published a draft for consultation yesterday. We are committed to reviewing our family-friendly package of laws in 2006.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that response. She mentions family-friendly rights; how successful have such initiatives been, and what progress has been made on issues such as age?

The new law that we introduced last year, which gives parents with young children the right to request a change in their hours, has already been enormously successful. Nearly 1 million parents—about a quarter of all parents with children under six—asked for a change in their working hours. Eight out of 10 of those requests have been granted in full, and a compromise was agreed in respect of a further one in 10. That is extremely encouraging, and we now want to extend much greater choice to older workers, who all too often are locked out of the labour market. This is not about "work till you drop", as the press likes to suggest, but about "choose when you stop". My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and I will invite employers, employees and their unions, and others with a direct interest, to sit down with us and agree a way forward that will promote choice for older workers without imposing burdens on employers.

Conservative Members are enthusiastic supporters of developing the work-life balance, as I told the general secretary of the TUC when I met him recently, but unlike the right hon. Lady we recognise that it has to be paid for. Does she not understand that the plethora of directives, consultations and burdens under which British business is groaning today will be paid for in jobs, time and competitiveness?

As the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues have made it clear that they would cut public spending, the one thing of which we can be certain is that they would not pay for maternity pay and leave, and that they would not keep the rights that we have already introduced. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Eddisbury (Mr. O'Brien) shows that he simply does not understand that it is the Government and taxpayers who pay for statutory maternity pay. What is more, at the request of small businesses we compensate them for more than the cost of maternity pay, in order to help them cover the administrative costs. There are no burdens from us; instead, there are better rights for parents at work. If the Conservatives were in government, they would cut them.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that high-performance workplaces are those in which employers look very carefully at staff flexibility and make every attempt to allow staff to cope with their domestic, as well as their professional, responsibilities? Does that not reduce stress and absenteeism and mean that staff are more productive in the long term?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Businesses, particularly public sector employers, who organise their work flexibly are increasingly finding that doing so is good not only for their employees but for their organisation. So there is a very strong business case for family-friendly working, and that is the basis on which we have introduced the law.

What proposals she has to encourage technology startup businesses. [182678]

The university challenge seed fund, the grant for research and development and the UK high technology fund are three ways in which the Government help technology start-ups. As a result, some 17,000 start-ups are assisted every year.

Would the Minister like to comment on the report in today's edition of The Times that the Chancellor plans to cut £300 million from the DTI's business support division? Can he also confirm that flagship support for technology start-up schemes—the grant for research and development—has already been cut, that the number of grants will be reduced this year from 900 to 300, and that the waiting list for grants has already been extended from two months to five months? Does he not agree that if anything should be cut, it is the cost of running the DTI, rather than support for new start-ups?

The hon. Gentleman is wrong on both counts. On grants for research and development, over the last five years the number of applicants for grants—all accepted because the criteria were met—resulted in a 17 per cent. underspend on the allocation, and in the past two years we have been able to supplement the allocation by up to £10 million over and above what we expected to spend. The eight new products offered by the Department of Trade and Industry will guarantee future success. Our track record on start-ups is very good. On 31 March the Barclays survey of start-ups showed that 465,000 companies or businesses started up last year—a 19 per cent. increase on the previous year and the highest since Barclays started the survey in 1988. Our track record on start-ups is rather good.

Does my hon. Friend accept that there is a risk of making it too easy to start up a small business? I would like to tell him about the scandal of the start-up and rapid collapse of Classic World of Fitness, a small private health club in my constituency. Its director, Mr. Robin Brown, who lives in Warwickshire—I have his address and details if anyone is interested—appears to be refusing to pay thousands of pounds to my constituents. If I provided my hon. Friend with the full details, would he be prepared to look further into the case?

I am happy to ensure that the appropriate authorities investigate that regrettable case. I am pleased to tell my hon. Friend and the House that that sort of case is an exception, but if the allegations are corroborated, we will be able to bring down all the resources of the law on the case. In the meantime, we want to make it easy for people who have good ideas to take them to market and to start up companies. As my previous answer showed, we have been able to help record numbers of people to start companies and I am pleased to tell the House that survival rates are very strong as well, but that will not deter us from ensuring proper consumer protection.

Is it not the case that overall levels of business start-ups today are significantly lower than in the last three years of the last Conservative Government? Is not the major reason for that simply the ever-increasing burden of bureaucracy, which deters people from starting up companies?

rose—

Come on.

I am puzzled about whether the hon. Gentleman has a comprehension problem or some other problem. Let me give him the facts. The Barclays survey of start-ups, which has been operating since 1988, shows that last year record numbers of businesses started up in this country. The figure is 465,000. If it is a record number of start-up companies, it will obviously be higher than under the last three years of the Conservative Government. We all remember—and we do not have to go back much more than a decade to find out—that 422,000 manufacturing jobs were lost in one year alone. If the hon. Gentleman wants a figure higher than 465,000, he could go back to the Conservative Government's first recession, during which 900,000 manufacturing jobs were lost in a single year. We are not going to take any lessons on start-ups from the hon. Gentleman. I will send him the details if he needs them to be repeated a third time.

Let us look into the outcomes of all these breathless claims from the Minister. He did not dare to mention the Chancellor's research and development tax credit, which is not surprising because the April KPMG survey established that 48 per cent. of small and medium-sized businesses either found that the tax credit was too complicated to apply for and administer or did not know about it at all. Only 3 per cent. of respondents said that it had been a significant benefit. How does the Minister reconcile his boasts with those depressing facts?

Let us provide the hon. Gentleman with the facts—not directly from me, but from the chief executive of Isis Innovation in Oxford, who commended the Government. He told the Financial Times that the Government had done a great deal to facilitate spin-outs from universities. I recognise that there is a problem with the tax change that was necessary to close a loophole. When I spoke to Tim Cook, the chief executive whom I have just mentioned, and to the director of Exeter Innovation Centre this morning, they told me that they accepted that the loophole had to be closed and agreed with me that we must work to ensure that, in closing it, the Inland Revenue in no way restricts our excellent track record of encouraging spin-outs. We are addressing the problem directly by talking to two of our most successful academic spin-out company directors. In contrast, I do not think the hon. Gentleman has spoken to either of them.

We can all read, as well as speak to people. Interestingly, the latest comments from the academic community suggest that the system is not working as the Minister claims, because spin-out companies do not have enough connection with that community. So the Government's proposals are flawed. It is important that Ministers are good at more than reading off jargon phrases in Hewitt-speak—but yet again, we have had another smug response.

This Government have spent £3 billion on the science and innovation framework already, and that is due to increase. The Opposition propose to freeze or cut public expenditure, which means that that budget would be diminished. Over the past seven years, the Government have worked with people who have succeeded in starting important spinout companies. They tell us that they want the start that we have made, and the billions of pounds that the Government have invested, to continue and expand in the way that I have described. They do not want the cuts that the Opposition propose.

What recent steps she has taken to promote and support the United Kingdom textile industry. [182681]

The Government continue to promote and support the textile industry by working with the industry-led textiles and clothing strategy group to build a sustainable future for it in the face of globalisation. Since 1997, the Government have provided more than £100 million worth of support on a range of activities to promote productivity, competitiveness and diversification into new markets.

That is all very encouraging, but a textile firm in my constituency recently lost out on a contract for waterproof breathable garments for the Army. I learned from the correspondence that UK contractors can subcontract work to weaving companies in Pakistan.

I understand that companies in the textile and clothing industries are concerned about the problem that my hon. Friend has identified, especially as UK prime contractors increasingly source from overseas. Officials from the DTI and industry representatives recently met officials from the Ministry of Defence to achieve a better understanding of the processes involved in, and the opportunities that arise from, procurement strategy. The aim is to ensure that both Departments are able to deliver better value for money for taxpayers, and that UK producers enjoy the best possible opportunities.

Having been involved in the textile industry for more than three decades, may I ask whether the Minister recognises that, in western economies, clothing industries remain successful only when a country operates a profitable textile industry—that is, spinning and weaving—where fabric is provided in domestic mills equipped with the latest high-tech machinery, which dispenses with cheap labour? Will the Minister have a word with the Chancellor of the Exchequer to see whether incentives can be given to the industry to purchase the latest equipment to compete with cheap labour outside this country?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the way forward for our textile industry—and our manufacturing industry generally—is to invest in high-tech and innovative production. That is why we have supported the Textile and Clothing Industry Forum in a four-year programme to help to engage the supply chain, manufacturers and designers; to focus on issues such as process mapping and fast fashion; and to ensure that such innovative investment happens. As previous answers have made clear, we are a Government who have focused our attention on innovation and on innovative investment. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will make a strong case to his Front-Bench colleagues that it is important to maintain such support for business, even in the face of the cuts their party proposes.

Order. I seek the co-operation of the House. We have had a classic example of long answers and long questions, and we shall not get much further down the agenda if that remains the case.

How many responses she has received to the consultation on "Proposals to Tackle the Anti-Social Use of Fireworks through the Regulation of Use and Supply." [182682]

To date we have received approximately 720 responses, the majority of which were collected from constituents of Members of Parliament both at Westminster and at the Parliament in Scotland.

I appreciate that answer. Perhaps my hon. Friend can confirm whether that figure includes the 480 responses from residents of Cleethorpes constituency, who overwhelmingly backed tougher restrictions to deal with the misuse of fireworks. I make an appeal to my hon. Friend on noise limits, because 120 dB is far too high a level for fireworks. Will he consider the noise limits, and when will the regulations become law?

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Cleethorpes (Shona McIsaac) and all her colleagues on the all-party fireworks group, who have worked with us to try to make the regulations appropriate for the firework season. The noise level is a particular problem, but we have worked with the industry and the community to establish an appropriate level. The figure of 120 dB seems to be the fairest option. We take into consideration all the recommendations put to us, and the regulations will—I hope—be announced very soon.

What steps she is taking to prohibit unfair trading practices in the travel industry. [182683]

The Government continue to do their utmost to promote the competitiveness and success of all businesses in the UK travel industry, while ensuring an appropriate level of protection for consumers and business against those who would trade unfairly.

Osprey Holidays, a travel company based in my constituency, has to pay a large sum of money as a bond every year to ensure that customers who book a package holiday with them are properly protected for flights and accommodation, whereas some of its online competitors, which offer accommodation as an add-on through their websites, do not have to provide a similar level of protection for their customers. Will my hon. Friend look into that practice, which deprives customers of adequate consumer protection and puts companies such as the one in my constituency at a competitive disadvantage?

I am grateful that my hon. Friend has raised that point, which is a concern for the industry and which was raised with me at a meeting in March. I am talking to colleagues in the Department for Transport who are considering the response to the issue of bonded travel by the Civil Aviation Authority. I hope that we will have a response for my hon. Friend in the autumn.

I know that the Department for Transport is considering the ATOL aspect and it is not in the Minister's remit, but is he aware that the European package directive is being revisited by the Commission? Would that not be a better mechanism to use to ensure that EU-wide cover is provided for both accommodation and flights if an airline goes bust?

I agree with the hon. Lady that this is an issue that needs to be addressed because of the potential damage to consumers. If that is an appropriate route, we will consider it in conjunction with the discussions with the Department for Transport.

Will the Minister tell the House how he is getting on in his consultations with the travel industry about excessive premiums charged during school holidays? In some cases, they are 50 per cent. to 100 per cent., and out of all proportion to the costs incurred by the operators. Will he also investigate the activities of holiday clubs that use high-pressure selling techniques to obtain thousands of pounds from people for activities which, if covered by the timeshare rule, would allow a cooling-off period? Indeed, under that rule, certain practices would be debarred. Does he agree that the law should be extended to include holiday clubs?

It was important in discussions with the travel industry to look into its and our concerns, one of which is the price of holidays during the school holiday period. I am happy to say that the industry indicated that it would consider what could be done. Loyalty arrangements have been developed with some travel agents, giving people a reduction in price, and that is the sort of thing we want to see. We are looking at many of the issues relating to holiday clubs and I hope to be able to report to the House in the autumn about the issues Members have raised.

If she will make a statement on how public procurement affects productivity and innovation in the UK's manufacturing sector. [182684]

The Government spend £109 billion a year on goods and services, which can be a powerful incentive to businesses to develop new products, processes and services. That is why I have brought together industry leaders and trade unions, to ensure, with the Government, that innovation is in fact supported and encouraged by the procurement system.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that response. Does she agree that, in terms of the £109 billion procurement budget, a successful strategy to support manufacturing must make full use of both EU and international law? Does she also agree that the basis for the award of the procurement contracts should not just be the cheapest option, but should take into account the benefits to the British taxpayer, British industry and, most important, British workers?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend that instead of looking at the cheapest price the criterion has to be, as it is, best value for money. We shall not abandon competition in public procurement, because it delivers best value to the taxpayer and the best result for public services, but I agree that the ideal outcome is to get best value for money and to have the goods made in Britain. That is why we are bringing together manufacturing industry and the Ministers and officials who make procurement decisions. That is why we are backing British manufacturing.

There is a growing manufacturing industry in this country in terms of renewable energy. Can my right hon. Friend do anything to encourage the use of renewable energy in public buildings for their heat and power supplies?

My hon. Friend raises an extremely important point. As I think he knows, we have put renewable energy, along with energy efficiency, at the heart of the new energy policy. We are investing substantially in the renewables sector and we are of course encouraging and, in some cases, requiring the public sector to improve its energy efficiency and thus to make more use of renewables.

How much inward investment there has been into the UK in each of the last five years. [182685]

UK Trade and Investment published the following numbers for inward investment decisions by foreign-owned companies to invest in the UK. In 1999–2000, there were 757 projects; in 2000–01, 869 projects; in 2001–02, 764 projects; in 2002–03, 709 projects and in 2003–04, there were 811 projects.

I am grateful to the Minister for that response. Does not the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development report showing that inward investment to the eurozone is poor while inward investment to the UK—which of course is outside the eurozone—is relatively good, show how wise it is for this country to keep the pound?

We believe that long-term investment in the UK, especially foreign direct investment or FDI, would improve if Britain were a member of the euro. However, that would depend on the circumstances in which the UK entered the euro. If we entered at the right time and in the right circumstances we would obviously benefit substantially, but we have learned from the failure of the Conservatives in 1992, when they entered the exchange rate mechanism at the wrong time, for the wrong reasons and certainly at the wrong exchange rate. We have our five economic tests, which will, I am sure, enable us to make the right decision at the right time and for the right reasons.

Does my hon. Friend agree that it is not only the extra, new foreign direct investment that is important, but continuing investment by foreign companies in existing UK plants? Is he aware that when members of the Trade and Industry Committee visited the United States last week, we received the impression both in Chicago and in Silicon Valley that Britain is still the preferred European location for inward investment from the US, for all the obvious reasons?

My hon. Friend is entirely right. There were 285 expansions by existing investors—up 22 per cent. on 2002–03—so, as he says, we are seeing that the economic stability; the investment in skills and education; the support provided by the DTI to industry, which is very much a factor that foreign investors see as welcoming for Britain; and the flexible labour market that we have created all ensure that the United States and other countries continue to see Britain as the place to do business. The US improved its investment projects in the UK by 11 per cent. last year, so the US and other foreign investors reckon that Labour has made Britain a good place to do business, which is why the economy is so successful today.

What an incredibly complacent answer. The OECD report last month, to which my hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Bob Spink) referred, said that the foreign direct investment

"flows into the United Kingdom fell almost by half in 2003, from a level that was already unimpressive by historical standards."—

The statistic from the OECD that the right hon. Gentleman quoted relates to investment flows. Under those statistics, Luxembourg, not the UK, is the country that benefits, but no one tends to use those statistics to compare foreign direct investment. No one does. Under the method of collating statistics that considers stocks, the UK is clearly the country in Europe to which most foreign investors want to go. We can compare the statistics under the Conservatives: whereas, this year, 811 projects from abroad have been invested in the UK, 10 years ago under the Conservatives the figure was 431—less than half. Under the Conservatives, when we also saw the disease of Euroscepticism putting Britain at the margins, causing squabbling with European partners and internal divisions in the Government, FDI was going elsewhere. Under Labour, stability is ensuring that foreign direct investment comes to this country.

Does my hon. Friend agree that inward investment into the regions of this country is very important? If we choose to have elected regional assemblies, will they not, in fact, give us more power in the north-west to ensure that more of that inward investment comes to the north-west to create jobs in the manufacturing sector?

My hon. Friend is entirely right: if we support regional development, as we have been doing, foreign direct investment will flow to the regions, and regional assemblies would certainly enhance that prospect. Our work with the regional development agencies has shown that they are an enormous success. We want to continue that success in the regions.

It was intriguing that the Minister used the number of projects as a measure of inward investment, rather than the impact on the economy of the jobs involved or the value of those investments. Obviously, one large project can have more impact than several small projects that do not add up to the same impact on the economy. Will he explain why the Department considers the number of projects?

One reason why we consider the increasing number of new projects that find their way into the UK is that they are often high-tech and the number of jobs involved in the UK will expand in the years to come, and the quality of the jobs that we are getting is improving enormously. For example, a manufacturing plant, Abbott Laboratories in Dartford, has set up a substantial new project—one third of new projects coming to the UK from foreign direct investment are in manufacturing—in which 80 per cent. of the employees must be graduates, and 20 per cent. of them are PhDs. Those are high-tech, highly paid jobs, and that is why getting large numbers of new projects into the UK is so important.

If she will make a statement on the progress of coal miners' compensation claims. [182686]

To date, more than 353,000 payments have been made to former miners and their families under the main health schemes, totalling more than £2.1 billion. We continue to pay out a further £1.8 million a day, and I am grateful to all hon. Members for their help in ensuring that we are delivering the biggest health compensation scheme in history.

I am grateful for that reply, and I congratulate the Government on what they have achieved so far on coal health claims. Has any progress been made in negotiating settlements for those categories of workers who are currently excluded from compensation claims, such as surface workers who contracted chronic bronchitis and emphysema through working in dusty conditions, albeit on a colliery surface?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving me the chance to update the House on that. Mr. Justice Turner asked the miners' solicitors for evidence to support claims for compensation for surface workers. I made sure that the solicitors had our full co-operation and access to all the British Coal dust records. I understand that the solicitors have identified lead cases, which they intend to present to Mr. Justice Turner next week or the week after. As always, the DTI will meet the full liability to any miner determined by the courts.

Undoubtedly, compensation claims and compensation are flowing through the system. Apart from surface workers, however, there are real problems for miners who worked in small private mines, particularly those who fall outside the qualifying period and who are finding it difficult to have that period disregarded and their claims considered. Will the Minister assure us that those miners will have their claims considered quickly?

I share with other hon. Members concerns about the small mines. I am happy to say that the claimants' group representing the miners reached agreement with the small mines representatives on their outstanding issues in February. Measures are being put in place to ensure that the necessary systems exist to make full and final offers, and those include amendments to the claims handling agreement, software adjustments to the calendar models and other things. I should appreciate it if the hon. Gentleman and others kept me posted on the impact that that is having on their constituents. We have a common aim.

The miners helped to make this country the wealthy place it is today. Many became ill in the process because of the negligence of the coal board. It is to the Government's great credit that they have secured the largest compensation package in history, resulting in more than £30 million being paid out in Hemsworth alone.

Yes, I should of course be grateful to hear about that. We want to rectify any outstanding injustice. My hon. Friend takes a close interest in these matters and will realise that we need some evidence, although records may not be available. We are going as wide as possible in accepting evidence, but I shall be happy to examine in some detail the case that my hon. Friend mentioned.

What assessment she has made of the security of energy supply. [182687]

We set out our market-based approach to the delivery of energy in last year's White Paper. It worked well to deliver secure energy supplies last winter, and we expect it to continue to do so. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has tabled an amendment to the Energy Bill, which has attracted wide support, requiring an annual report on security of supply for debate in Parliament.

I am sure that my hon. Friend agrees that the renewables agenda is laudable; however, if the wind does not blow, we are snookered. My constituency has Torness power station, which guarantees a regular supply, and Cockenzie power station, which has the flexibility to kick in and generate when security of supply is at risk—indeed, it is a flagship power station in Britain and Europe for its capacity to do that. Does my hon. Friend agree that security of supply is paramount, even if new nuclear replacement is required?

I agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of security of supply, which is one of the four key goals set out in the energy White Paper. I also agree with her about the flexibility that we enjoy, with coal-fired generation and with an important contribution made by nuclear power stations such as Torness. The White Paper stated that we should not become over-dependent on any one fuel, but I believe that the development of renewables will help us by providing another independent source of power. On that basis, I think that we can look forward with confidence to continuing security in future.

The Government have used security of supply arguments to justify subsidising nuclear power, but now that energy prices, especially power prices, have recovered strongly, how can they justify placing hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers' money at risk through a continuing line of credit?

It is important that we enjoy continuing security. British Energy is working through a restructuring, which we all hope will be successful, and the Government provided a line of credit to facilitate that process. The European Commission is examining the state aid implications of that and we expect its decision before long. Our approach to British Energy's restructuring is the right one. It provides good grounds for optimism about—to echo my hon. Friend the Member for East Lothian (Anne Picking)—the security that we need in future.

I am sure that my hon. Friend is aware of the Prime Minister's recent remarks about nuclear energy. Can he confirm that it remains Government policy—as set out in the White Paper—to retain the basic engineering skills in the sector, so that if a decision were made to embark on a new nuclear programme, we would be able to carry it through?

I can confirm that earlier this week my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister repeated the statement in the energy White Paper that we need to keep the nuclear option open, including by ensuring that we maintain the necessary skills, because we may well need new nuclear power stations in future. He also pointed out that we had first to overcome two major barriers. First, the economics of nuclear are pretty unattractive at present. Secondly, we need good answers to the question of what becomes of nuclear waste; work on that is ongoing. None the less, I agree that it is important that we keep the option open.

What assessment she has made of the future contribution of carbon capture and storage to the power generation process. [182688]

We published last year the conclusions of our "Review of the Feasibility of Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage in the UK". We see the technology as potentially playing an important role in the long term, but the report identified a number of major hurdles that still need to be overcome.

Is it not the case that even if we meet the difficult target of generating 20 per cent. of our electricity from renewable sources by 2020, there will still be a gap in meeting our carbon dioxide emissions target? Is it not vital that the Government act now to develop carbon capture and storage technology in order to bridge that gap? That would be compatible with investment in renewables, but if the Government do not—

Order. The hon. Gentleman asked at least two questions, which is sufficient.

The programme that we have set out for achieving our ambitious goals on reducing CO₂ emissions includes the development of renewables, as my hon. Friend said, big programmes, ambitious efforts on energy efficiency and other initiatives. CO₂ capture in power generation needs considerable research and development, as it is still rather costly. The USA's FutureGen project, for example, will cost about $1 billion, but will not be ready until 2015. There are important opportunities, but it is difficult to envisage carbon capture and storage becoming viable before 2020.

What recent representations she has had asking for an increase in the number of bank holidays. [182689]

The Department receives a variety of requests for new bank holidays. Over the past three months, we have received six requests to make St. George's day a bank holiday, one request for a UN day of peace, and one request to recognise a Bengali religious holiday. Only one request was received asking for a one-day increase to the number of bank holidays on an unspecified date.

Given that it is many weeks before the next bank holiday, that most European countries have far more bank holidays than we do and Ministers' emphasis on the work-life balance, is it not time that they show they retain their joie de vivre and launch a consultation on the number and nature of our bank holidays?

May I congratulate my hon. Friend on his linguistic talents? The notion of extra holidays is attractive, and he will acknowledge that this Government, unlike the previous one, introduced the concept of four weeks paid annual leave. We have to balance the issue of bank holidays with the costs for businesses, which are about £2 billion a day. There is a balance between costs and extra bank holidays, but we will keep the matter under consideration.

I am glad that St. George has at least six supporters, but may I make a bid for St. David? The National Assembly for Wales recently supported a proposal to make St. David's day a national public holiday in Wales, so will the Minister agree to meet a small delegation from the Assembly to discuss that proposal?

I am always happy to meet delegations, but I fear that I could meet large numbers of them if I gave way on this issue. People feel strongly about St. David's day, as they do about St. George's day, and if they and the hon. Gentleman write to me, I will provide a response.

What recent representations she has received about difficulties in accessing broadband technology in rural areas; and if she will make a statement. [182691]

My Department has received over 100 items of correspondence on this subject since January. The proportion of rural households within reach of a broadband service is rising quickly, and there is a realistic prospect that every community in the country will have broadband by the end of next year.

I am grateful for that answer. Trigger levels have been set for all the exchanges in my constituency, and they have all been reached, so does the Minister agree that the next big issue—he did not really address this in his reply—is how we get broadband to homes, farms and businesses that are some distance from the exchanges? Many groups such as Oxfordshire Rural Broadband provide community service solutions, but how will the Government help to tackle a pressing problem that will become more acute in rural areas as businesses and farms realise that they cannot get the service that the Minister talked about?

The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point. Some 87 per cent. of UK homes and businesses have access to broadband, but only 72 per cent. in market towns, and 22 per cent. in rural villages. There is still a big job to do, which is why the DTI and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs jointly set up a rural broadband unit that has carried out important work. The hon. Gentleman will be encouraged by British Telecom's progress in extending the distance over which its exchanges can support an asymmetric digital subscriber line. We are working closely with regional development agencies on the issue, and the rural broadband unit is working through the community broadband network to support communitybased providers such as the one in his constituency to which he referred. I very much support that work and we are, in a variety of ways, encouraging and promoting further progress.

I wonder if my—

Order. At this stage, the hon. Lady just has to ask Question 15.

If she will take steps to stop the practice of continuing to reward company directors who fail to fulfil their duties. [182692]

Directors' remuneration is a matter for companies and their shareholders. It is a provision of the combined code that remuneration committees should avoid rewarding poor performance. Best practice guidance issued by the Association of British Insurers, the National Association of Pension Funds and the Confederation of British Industry also makes it clear that that is unacceptable.

I apologise, Mr. Deputy Speaker, for my mistake. I was watching the clock instead of looking at the list of questions.

I agree with my hon. Friend. She will acknowledge the work that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has done on issues relating to the Higgs report on corporate governance and the Tyson report about the make-up of boards of directors. Clearly, failure should not be rewarded, and that should act as a motivation to make sure that people who are productive get their just rewards. That should apply in the boardroom, as well as on the shop floor.

What assessment she has made of the services available for women fleeing domestic violence or abuse. [182669]

Domestic violence accounts for one fifth of all violent crimes, affects one in four women and causes the death of two women each week. Those are shocking statistics that we are determined to tackle. Our hand will be strengthened by the new Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Bill, which includes a range of measures and services that will provide additional protection and support for victims and help to bring perpetrators to justice.

Could the Minister ensure that the services that must be available to women in those circumstances always take children into consideration, and that women, particularly those with children, who have to flee from violence, perhaps to a women's refuge, can get on to the local council's housing register without any impediment?

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. Frequently, children, too, are victims of domestic violence. That is why we need more refuges and why the increase in Government support of between £7 million and £9 million this year and next year will be important. The hon. Gentleman is right—I am sure he has had constituency cases, as I have—that we need to ensure that our housing authorities are open and responsive to the needs of women fleeing domestic violence, especially those with children.

Does not the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Bill, together with the Children's Bill, mark a unique step forward in protection and security for families in their home? In addition to that legislative framework, should not the inter-ministerial group consider the wider social context and encourage collaborative and partnership working not just with local authorities, but right across the social framework, in order that the legislation can do its work effectively?

My hon. Friend is right. There is a series of responsibilities at national and local level, in the voluntary sector and more broadly for ensuring that the widest framework of support is available, helped by additional Government investment through the supporting people programme, which received £57 million this year for housing-related support services. That is backed up by the activities of housing associations and other support organisations, and by the important work of voluntary organisations in this area, particularly Women's Aid and Refuge, which are working together to provide a single national 24-hour freephone helpline.

If she will make a statement on the representation of women in positions of power in the new Iraqi Government. [182670]

I am delighted to say that six women have been appointed as Ministers and seven women as Deputy Ministers in the new Iraqi Interim Government. That includes a Minister for Women.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that encouraging list of appointments in Iraq. Will she have any input into the organisation of elections to the National Assembly, which I understand may well have a reserved list for women, perhaps even of 25 per cent.? Will she have a word with Members of the National Assembly of Pakistan, who were elected on such a list and who are pretty well disregarded by their colleagues because of the way in which they were elected?

My hon. Friend raises an extremely important point. As she knows, we have throughout supported Iraqi women who want and, I believe, deserve a strong voice in the future government of their country. I am delighted to say that two of the seven commissioners on the Independent Electoral Commission for Iraq are women. There is indeed a commitment that 25 per cent. of the candidates for the new Transitional National Assembly should be women. That is being taken forward by the United Nations, which will facilitate that election and electoral system.

Although it is welcome that women are involved in the new Government, the role of women in the new Iraq needs to be at least as good as it was under the previous regime, which ironically, in its general treatment of women, was better than many other states in the middle east. With regard to the question from the hon. Member for Keighley (Mrs. Cryer), is not the problem the fact that we have transferred sovereignty to the people of Iraq? Our job is not to tell the people of Iraq how to organise their society, but to ensure that there is a democratic framework that enables women to prosper and thrive in that society and in its Administration.

I must say that the Iraqi women with whom I have worked closely over the past 12 months would not recognise the hon. Gentleman's description of the previous regime, under which many of them and their families suffered and from which several of them were forced to flee. We do not seek to dictate how the Iraqi people should shape their future society and Government, and we support Iraqi people, and in this case Iraqi women, in having their voices heard. Iraqi women insisted on the transitional council withdrawing its proposal to reinstate sharia law, and they also insisted—we supported them—on the inclusion of women in all the new power structures. Many of those strong and courageous women will be elected to the Transitional National Assembly, and they will play an important role in building a strong, stable and democratic Iraq.

What support the Government are providing for women returning to work who want to acquire professional qualifications. [182671]

We recognise the barriers that women face in returning to work and acquiring professional qualifications, and consequently we have introduced a raft of measures to help ease the transition. Those measures include the new deal for partners, the new deal for lone parents, the new deal 50-plus, new rights for working parents, a national child care strategy, tax credits and financial support as part of the lifelong learning programme.

Is my hon. Friend aware that University college Northampton in my constituency runs very good nursing and teaching courses? However, women find it difficult to complete those courses and return to work because they have problems paying for child care, and other problems arise during holidays. Such women say that the schemes help them return to work to stack shelves, but not to do professional jobs. Will she talk to her colleagues in the Department for Work and Pensions and the Department for Education and Skills—some of them are sitting on the Front Bench—about integrating benefits and the student support system to allow women to qualify as nurses and teachers and to take degree courses rather than just diplomas? [Interruption.]

Order. I do not want advice from Opposition Front Benchers. The hon. Lady knows that her question was far too long and rambling.

My hon. Friend rightly identified not only the challenges faced by those who want to return to teaching or the health service, but the importance of bringing back into those sectors those women and their skills. Progress has been made on bursaries and child care support in both education and the national health service, and I shall bear my hon. Friend's comments in mind and report them to my colleagues.

Is the Minister aware that it takes a long time to obtain a professional qualification in child care and that the need for more people to work in child care is urgent? Does she agree that a mother who has successfully brought up a child to school age has effectively served a rigorous apprenticeship in child care? Will she consider accrediting that experience towards a professional qualification for mothers who want to return to work in the child care profession?

The hon. Lady is right. The massive expansion in child care under this Government has placed child care workers' skills at a premium. The hon. Lady makes a fair point about the skills that women gain by bringing up their own children. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Children and other ministerial colleagues are examining how we can recognise those skills, while also recognising the importance of high quality training for our child care workers.

What action she is taking on gender and trade issues.[182672]

Yesterday, I published a White Paper on trade and investment that makes the case for global trade that is fair, as well as free, and stresses the need for trade policies in developing countries to be integrated with programmes for development and poverty reduction and to ensure that the position of women, who are the majority of the poor in those countries, is taken fully into account.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that women are often more adversely affected than men by trade globalisation issues? For instance, they are more likely to be affected by the transfer of call centres abroad. Will she ensure that her policies take account of gender issues and that our trade rules mean that globalisation is good for women as well as for men?

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend that we have to consider the differing impact that growing trade and technology can have on men and on women. It can work in both directions. The manufacturing jobs that we have lost to global trade have often been male jobs, but the new jobs created in developing countries have often been taken by women. The point is to take such factors into account to ensure that women as well as men, in developing as well as developed countries, can benefit from the growth in the world economy.