Written Answers
Wednesday, 5th November 1997.
Foreign And Commonwealth Office: Cash Limits
asked Her Majesty's Government:What changes they propose to make in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's cash limits and running cost limits from 1997–98.
Subject to Parliamentary approval of the necessary Supplementary Estimates, the following changes will be made:The cash limit for Class II, Vote 1 (Overseas Representation) will be increased by £9,050,000 from £619,826,000 to £628,876,000. The increase is required to cover the costs of major conferences, specifically the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, the EU Presidency and the Asia Europe Meeting, which total £9,000,000. There is also a transfer in of £50,000 from the Home Office for a contribution towards the fight against international drug trafficking.The gross running costs limit on Class II, Vote 1 will be increased by £9,050,000 from £525,763,000 to £534,813,000.The cash limit for Class II, Vote 2 (Other External Relations) will be increased by £12,600,000 from £217,215,000 to £229,815,000. The increase is required to cover UK contributions to certain OSCE, United Nations and WEU Missions of £12,000,000 and also for a transfer of £600,000 from the Home Office towards certain Overseas Drugs Assistance Programmes.In addition, the cash limit for Class II, Vote 3 (BBC World Service) will be reduced by £2,558,000 from £169,906,000 to £167,348,000. This reduction takes account of transfers to the Ministry of Defence of £3,444,000 and to the Cabinet Office of £327,000 to reflect the movement of the BBC World Service Monitoring Service to subscription based funding. This is partially offset by the take up of a capital end year flexibility amount of £1,213,000 as announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 17 July (
Official Report, cols. 245 to 250).
The increases will be offset by transfers or charged to the Reserve, and will not, therefore, add to the planned total of public expenditure.
Sex Offenders:Community Protection Orders
asked Her Majesty's Government:What new measures they propose to take to protect the community from sex offenders who pose a risk to the public.
We have published today a consultation paper on Community Protection Orders. Copies are available in the Library.We propose that the chief officer of police will have the power to apply for an order in the civil courts if the behaviour of a person who has been convicted or cautioned for a sex offence, whether in this country or abroad, poses a risk of serious harm to the public.The order will require the defendant to register under the provisions of the Sex Offenders Act 1997, if he is not already required to do so. The court may also impose such other prohibitory conditions as are necessary to protect the public.
Juveniles: Secure Remand
asked Her Majesty's Government:What are their plans for implementing court-ordered secure remands for juveniles.
At present when juveniles (aged 10 to 16 years) are charged and not released on bail after a court appearance, they are remanded to local authority accommodation. The local authority may, if it can satisfy certain strict conditions, return to the court and seek a secure accommodation order to place the juvenile in local authority secure accommodation. Separate arrangements exist for 15 and 16 year-old boys, who may be remanded direct to prison, again if strict conditions are met. The courts have no power to require any juvenile in this age group to be remanded directly to local authority secure accommodation.There are, however, existing provisions on the statute book but not yet brought into force which would allow this to happen. Section 60 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 contains provision for the abolition of prison remands for 15 and 16 year-old boys, and gives courts a power to remand these boys, as well as 15 and 16 year-old girls, directly to local authority secure accommodation. Section 20 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 provides for the extension of court-ordered secure remands to 12 to 14 year-olds but only once the provision in Section 60 of the 1991 Act has been implemented for 15 and 16 year-olds.Before the Government can implement section 60 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 and the provisions in the 1994 Act, there must be available a sufficient number of places to meet the expected demand. This is not the case at the moment. Whilst a building programme was put in place to provide 170 new secure places in local authority accommodation for this purpose, the number of juveniles remanded in custody has increased significantly since the building programme began, and prison remands now typically stand within the 250 to 300 range. The demand from this group alone would significantly outstrip the capacity of the local authority secure estate even once the building programme has been completed.
The Government are keen to begin implementation of those provisions and have decided to do so in stages. The Government will, therefore, implement the provision in relation to 12 to 14 year-olds as soon as practicable.
The Government, therefore, propose
Under the existing legislation, court-ordered secure remands for 12 to 14 year-olds cannot be implemented without first doing the same for 15 and 16 year-olds. The Government intend to use this Session's Crime and Disorder Bill to make the necessary legislative changes; Royal Assent is unlikely before summer 1998. The Government remain committed to implementing the provisions in full and will keep the position under review but we believe that our current approach is the most practical and effective way forward.
As part of the Government's Comprehensive Spending Review, we are also conducting a study of the whole range of secure accommodation for young people, including the local authority secure units. The Government wish to ensure that the assets and other resources employed in the accommodation and care of accused, convicted and other juveniles who need secure accommodation are used to best effect, including in meeting their educational needs and, where relevant, in tackling their offending behaviour. We will want to see how the proposed court-ordered remands and the associated accommodation fit into our plans for coming to grips with the present range of facilities which make up the juvenile secure estate. Our aim is to press on with this work as quickly as possible.
On 15 October, Directors of Social Services in England and Wales and the representative bodies of the local government associations and the directors of social services were informed of the Government's decision to implement these existing provisions. It was also suggested that there should be a meeting to discuss these proposals and the study of the juvenile secure estate. It is hoped that this meeting will take place shortly.
Animals: Use In Scientific Procedures
asked Her Majesty's Government:What developments there have been in the use of animals in scientific procedures.
We will tomorrow at 10.30 am place in the Library a supplementary note to my right honourable friend's response to the Animal Procedures Committee's interim report on its review of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.
Mr Reginald Buckland
asked Her Majesty's Government:Further to the Written Answer by Lord Williams of Mostyn on 21 October (
WA205–206), whether they will reconsider their reply in the light of the letter of Ian McColl BEM, the Firearms and Explosives Licensing Manager of Cambridge Constabulary, to Reginald Buckland on 13 March 1996; and
Further to the Written Answer by Lord Williams of Mostyn on 21 October ( WA205–206), whether they will reconsider their reply in the light of the letter of Assistant Chief Constable D R Winser to Reginald Buckland on 6 June 1996.
In the judgment in this case there is a reference to the Home Office view that conditions cannot be varied on application and that no right of appeal existed. In fact this was our general interpretation of the existing law that we had held for some time. It was not expressed specifically in this particular case. We are from time to time asked for our views on the law and procedures and we would usually give them whilst making clear that it is for the courts to interpret the law, not the Executive. To this extent there is nothing to add to my previous reply.
Vitamin B6: Dosage
asked Her Majesty's Government:What is the maximum daily dose of Vitamin B6, taken for what period, that is considered safe by the European Union Scientific Committee for Food.
The report of the European Union Scientific Committee for Food (31st series) states that intakes of more than 50 mg/day of Vitamin B6 are potentially harmful in adults. This is consistent with the interpretation of the evidence carried out by the Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment.The European Union Scientific Committee for Food has not advised on a maximum dose of Vitamin B6 that is considered safe.
Economic And Monetary Union
asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they have notified their European partners that the UK will not move to the third stage of economic and monetary union on 1 January 1999.
Following the Chancellor of the Exchequer's statement to the House of Commons on 27 October and in accordance with paragraph 1 of Protocol (No. 11) of the Maastricht Treaty, the Government formally notified the Council of the European Union on 30 October 1997 that the United Kingdom does not intend to move to the third stage of economic and monetary union on 1 January 1999. The Treaty enables the United Kingdom to reverse this notification after the beginning of the third stage.
Economically Significant Work
asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether, in the light of the work being produced by the National Statistical Office on all economically significant work done, in contradistinction to work only paid for and recorded, they will now measure the Gross Domestic/National Product with the greater accuracy these statistical techniques permit, and, in order to obviate the distortions which current Gross Product measurement methods insert into comparative studies of international economic well-being, whether they will seek to introduce this new accuracy into international measurements of "growth".
The information requested falls within the responsibility of the Chief Executive of the Office for National Statistics, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.
Letter to Lord Kennet from the Director of the Office for National Statistics, Dr. T. Holt.
I have been asked to reply, as Director of the Office for National Statistics (ONS), to your recent question on work being produced by ONS on all economically significant work done.
The ONS estimate of unpaid work is presented in a satellite account. This should be read alongside measures of paid activity in Gross Domestic Product. The article entitled A Household Satellite Account for the UK, a copy of which is enclosed, argues on pages 63 and 64 that such parallel presentation is preferable to trying to produce a single index. This article appeared in the October edition of the ONS publication Economic Trends, a copy of which is available in the House of Lords Library. Since unpaid work is unpaid, we feel that to create a single measure based on the assumption of some market valuation would create a meaningless magnitude. The wide range of estimates shown in the article also underlines the judgmental nature of any estimate. Rather than attempt to construct a single measure of "wider GDP" we have taken the view that it would be preferable to see GDP as normally defined in the context of a small set of indicators reflecting elements excluded from national accounts such as unpaid work. The same principle is applied to satellite accounts used in the context of the environment.
There is now a wide range of industrial countries which have constructed similar accounts. There may exist some basis for international comparison of such a set of summary indicators.
Building Societies: Treasury Supervision
asked Her Majesty's Government:How many officials in HM Treasury are concerned with affairs of building societies; what is the grade of the most senior official involved; and what were the management objectives of these officials for the year 1996–97.
Building society matters form a substantial part of the responsibilities of five Treasury officials. But, depending on the nature of the issue, many others, including members of the Treasury Management Board, will become involved.The objective most relevant to their work is the ninth identified in the Government's Expenditure Plans for the Chancellor's Departments, 1996–97 to 1998–99 (Cm 3217): "maintaining a regime for the regulation of financial services which preserves a stable financial system, honest markets and the confidence of investors and depositors, while promoting an open, efficient and competitive financial services sector".
Transport Council, 9 October
asked Her Majesty's Government:What were the results of the Transport Council held in Luxembourg on 9 October.
The Transport Council met in Luxembourg on 9 October. My right honourable friend the Minister for Transport represented the United Kingdom.The Council opened with a session of structured dialogue with Transport Ministers of the applicant Central European countries (CECs). A report by the Commission on the recent Pan-European Conference in Helsinki was followed by discussion of issues relating to market access. Three areas for future work were identified: the need to strengthen co-operation between the Community and the CECs; developing the mobility of citizens; and the need to take account of all modes of transport in negotiations in market access.The Council discussed air transport negotiations with the US. The Commission's view was that, although Community discussions with the US on regulatory issues had been useful, further progress would not be made unless market access was brought within the scope of the negotiations. The UK noted that success in its current bilateral negotiations with the US would bring benefits for passengers from the UK and the rest of the EU. The UK and other member states expressed doubts about the Commission's approach. The Presidency concluded that there should be further work by the Commission, and a report back to the December Council.The Council took note of the Commission's progress report on air transport negotiations with the CECs.
The Council debated a draft directive on airport charges. The debate focused on two aspects of the directive; the use of charges for cross-subsidy of smaller regional airports; and the variability of charges to reflect environmental considerations. The Council invited the Committee of Permanent Representatives to continue its examination of the proposal.
The Council reached unanimous political agreement on a directive on access to the occupation of road transport operator. This directive will raise the standards required of lorry, bus and coach operators in the Community.
The Council agreed conclusions urging greater emphasis on the Public Private Partnerships approach to Trans-European Network projects.
The Commission presented its White Paper on extension of the provisions of working time legislation to excluded sectors, including transport. It was noted that consultation with interested parties was still in progress. The UK, with some other member states, urged a case by case approach to the extension to transport, taking account of the needs of each form of transport.
The Commission presented the case for a Community-wide blood alcohol limit of 50 mg per 100 ml. The UK expressed its determination to further reduce alcohol-related road deaths, and noted that it was important to consider other ways of reducing drink-drive accidents as well.
There was a discussion of weekend lorry bans in member states; the Commission undertook to produce draft legislation on this issue by the end of the year. The Commission also presented its draft regulation extending the Community's competition rules to air services to third countries.