asked Her Majesty's Government:What criteria they use in selecting persons to become members of boards of prison visitors; and whether there are any significant differences in the criteria used in respect of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, and if so, why.

Members of boards of visitors are appointed separately in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. In considering appointments to boards of visitors in England and Wales my right honourable friend seeks to select members from as wide a range of backgrounds as possible; and to achieve a broad balance on each board between JP and lay members and of members' ages, sex, skills and experience and social background. I understand that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland uses similar criteria in selecting members for boards of visitors of prisons and visiting committees for young offender centres, except that he is required by statute to appoint at least two women members to the board of each women's prison and a minimum of six members to the committee for each young offender centre. In the case of all establishments he is careful to ensure that boards and committees draw their membership from all the geographical areas of Northern Ireland and that they are representative of the community in as many respects as possible.The position in Scotland is a matter for my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, but I understand from him that the number of members for each visiting committee is specified by statute. Members of visiting committees for adult prisons are selected by the regional and district councils and not by my right honourable friend, but he appoints additional women members if the councils fail to select the statutory number of women members specified for each committee. He also appoints all members of committees for establishments for offenders under the age of 21. In making these appointments he uses the same criteria as in England and Wales. The slight differences in the methods of appointment reflect historical development rather than policy decision.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they consider the violent urban disturbances such as have occurred in recent months receiving great widespread international adverse publicity would have occurred had there been much less non-British ethnic content in those areas of population.

The causes of the recent disturbances are complex and varied and the Government do not consider it helpful to speculate on how far the composition of the population in particular areas may have been a contributory factor.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they will ensure that no decision is taken on the proposal by the local internal drainage board for a new drainage scheme affecting Halvergate marshes in Norfolk until after the Wildlife and Countryside Bill has become law.

I cannot give an undertaking about the timing of the Government's decision on this proposal. As I have previously explained to the House, a decision will not be taken until the negotiations between the various interests are completed.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Why Amersham International Limited has been described by two other names in the Atomic Energy (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, namely, the Radiochemical Centre Limited and the Radiochemical Company.

In the Atomic Energy Authority Act 1971, Section 1 and 2 of which transferred parts of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority's undertaking to British Nuclear Fuels Limited (BNFL) and the Radiochemical Centre Limited (TRC) respectively, those companies are referred to as "the Nuclear Fuels Company" and "the Radiochemical Company" (Sections 1(1) and 2(1)). They are also jointly referred to as "the Companies" (see Section 24(1) of the 1971 Act). This was done for reasons of brevity because the companies are referred to several times in the Act.The draftsman of the current Bill followed this terminology in the body of the Bill in order to be consistent with the 1971 Act. Section 11(3) of that Act, which is in part disapplied by Clause 1 of the Bill, refers to "either of the Companies". Because of the partial nature of the provision it is necessary to refer to the companies separately. Clause 4(1), the interpretation clause, makes it clear that "the Nuclear Fuels Company" and "the Radiochemical Company" are BNFL and TRC respectively. TRC changed its name to Amersham International Limited on 5th May 1981, that is to say after the Bill had passed the Commons Committee stage. An amendment to the definition of "the Radiochemical Company", in Clause 4(1), was carried at Report stage in the other place making it clear that that company was now called Amersham International Limited. Amending this part of the Bill meant that other references in the Bill to "the Radiochemical Company" did not need to be amended and makes it clear that all the references in the legislation are to the same company. If the words "Amersham International Limited" were to be substituted without explanation that would not be clear. After the change of name the company continued as before and as the same legal person, albeit under a new name.Section 18 of the Companies Act 1948 makes it plain that a company may change its name and that if it does so under that section its rights and obligations remain precisely the same as they were before the name was changed.House adjourned at seventeen minutes before midnight.