asked Her Majesty's Government:What are the mileage allowances agreed for—

Mileage allowances are agreed separately by each body. They are currently as follows:

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether agreement has been reached, informally, politically or formally by members of the European Council of the European Union and Community, or their Permanent Representatives, to introduce measures to combat terrorism, additional to those now publicised and under consideration under the title of the European Arrest Warrant; where they have been published; and what they comprise. [HL2585]

The extraordinary European Council on 21 September 2001 agreed a plan of action in response to the terrorist attacks of 11 September. The Presidency's report to the European Council on action following the attacks (document 14919/01) and a Council document updating the "road map" of the measures and initiatives implemented under this action plan (document 14925/01) are both published on the Council's website. Key European Union legislative measures brought forward under the plan, in addition to the European Arrest Warrant, include a Framework Decision on combating terrorism, which was agreed subject to parliamentary scrutiny reserves from three member states at the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 6–7 December, and a Common Position and Regulation on the freezing of terrorist assets, adopted by the Council on 28 December. The Justice and Home Affairs Council of 6–7 December also saw approval of a Council decision establishing Eurojust, which will facilitate judicial co-operation between member states in the prosecution of terrorist and other serious crimes.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they will give effect to the recommendation by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child and reconsider the reservation made on behalf of the United Kingdom to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. [HL2588]

We have carefully reviewed the reservation in respect of Article 22 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in the light of recent requests that it should be withdrawn. However, we are convinced that it remains necessary in order to maintain an effective immigration control and in no way inhibits the discharge of our obligations under the convention.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they agree with the United Nation's Committee on the Rights of the Child that the reservation made on behalf of the United Kingdom is incompatible with the object and purposes of that convention. [HL2589]

The United Kingdom ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1991. The reservation in respect of Article 22 in no way inhibits the discharge of our obligations under the convention. There exists comprehensive provision in United Kingdom law for the care and protection of children, which applies in full to children who have been recognised as refugees in this country and to those who have sought asylum here but whose claim has not yet been determined.The reservation was entered to safeguard the right of the United Kingdom to determine its own immigration and nationality laws.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they agree with the Oxford Research Group and Saferworld that the annual cost of subsidising British arms exports is approximately £420 million (or £4,600 per person employed); whether

As I reported to noble Lords during the Second Reading of the Export Control Bill on 8 January (Official Report, col. 515) a study involving two leading independent academic economists into the economic costs and benefits of defence exports was published on 11 December 2001. It found that the benefits to government (for example, in reducing our defence equipment costs) outweigh the costs by a significant margin. The Government broadly agree with its findings, which concluded that, rather than being subsidised, defence exports represented a significant net benefit to the UK economy.It reported that defence export sales averaged about £6 billion in 1998 and 1999 and supported almost 100,000 jobs, many of them high quality jobs in cutting-edge industry. It estimated that the ending of defence exports from the UK would involve a one-off adjustment cost of between £4 billion and £5 billion, equivalent to about 0.5 per cent of one year's GDP. In addition there would be a continuous net cost to government of between £90 million and £200 million.As I made clear on 8 January, the Government's policy of supporting the legitimate efforts made by UK industry to win export orders are primarily based on their contribution to our defence and international security interests. Defence exports help support a strong UK defence industry and contribute to the security of our friends and allies.I am not aware of any recent official seminar that discussed the Oxford Research Group and Saferworld report

asked Her Majesty's Government:Which country will take over the command of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF); and what is the date when all British troops will be withdrawn. [HL2594]

It is too early to be certain which country will take over command of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), although Turkey has already expressed an interest in this. It is also too early to be certain when all British troops in the ISAF will be withdrawn. However, I expect that their numbers will reduce substantially when the UK command of the ISAF ends in mid-April 2002.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What further contacts they have had with the Commonwealth War Graves Commission on the issue of disturbance to British war graves in France and Belgium; and at what stage Ministers will be prepared to make direct interventions. [HL2658]

The Government have not had any contacts with the Commonwealth War Graves Commission on this issue since the matter was discussed in the House on 21 January (Official Report, cols. 1328–31). Officials do however keep in regular touch with commission staff.We anticipate that both the Belgian and French Governments will continue to honour our war dead as they have in the past, and we would not expect to be officially involved until either project has reached the stage of full consultation with interested parties.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What consideration they have given to the recommendations by the Trade and Industry Select Committee of the House of Commons, in paragraph 22 of their 12th report of Session 2000–01 that Ministers must not only be even handed as between the Ilisu and Yusufeli projects, but must he seen to be even-handed; and why the government response to the report makes no reference to this recommendation. [HL2489]

We will be even-handed in our treatment of Ilisu and Yusufeli.We shall require the same level of satisfaction about the impacts of the Yusufeli dam as we do for all other applications for ECGD support. This means that support will be considered against ECGD's published business principles (which appear on ECGD's website: http://www.ecgd.gov.uk. The criteria for assessing 'the project impacts arising from cases on which ECGD is approached for cover can also be found on the webs] te, in the "Introduction to ECGD's Impact Screening and Analysis Procedures" in the "Impact Questionnaire".The government reponses to the Trade and Industry Select Committee's 12th report specifically addressed the committee's recommendations as set out in the summary of conclusions and recommendations.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What arrangements were made in the United Kingdom for publicising and distributing the Presidential Conclusions and Appendices of the Laeken European Council; whether they will ensure that the whole text of these conclusions is reproduced in the forthcoming six-monthly report on events in the European Union and Community July-December 2001; and when they expect it to be available. [HL2582]

More than 500 copies of the conclusions of the Laeken European Council were sent to Parliament, including to the House of Lords Printed Paper Office, on the first working day following the European Council meeting. In addition, the conclusions were made available in full on the website of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The contents of the conclusions have since been scrutinised and debated at length in both Houses of Parliament.The next White Paper on developments in the European Union, which is currently being produced and will be available shortly, will not contain the European Council conclusions or its annexes. These are lengthy documents and have already been made available as set out.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What arrangements already exist, or are contemplated, for the Committee of Permanent Representatives of member governments of the states in current membership of the European Union and Community to confer and come to provisional agreement about matters on the agenda of formal meetings of the Heads of Government Council at their usual six-monthly meetings, or on other occasions. [HL2583]

It is the head of state or government holding the Presidency who decides on the agenda of European Council meetings and writes to colleagues to inform them. This often happens at short notice just before the European Council meets. It is therefore difficult for COREPER to prepare these agenda items in great detail.Some of the items on the agenda have been the subject of considerable discussion and negotiation in COREPER and other Council formations and are put to the European Council for attention or for resolution. Other agenda items are for political orientation and do not need extensive preparation or are new initiatives which are given political approval before going to working level for negotiation.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What arrangements exist, or have been agreed by the Government, for pre-scrutiny of items expected or formally tabled at the meetings of the Council of the European Union and Community; whether any distinction is made within those meetings on actions or decisions made on powers contained in the Union and Community treaties respectively; and whether they consider that any such arrangements comply with the standards of visibility and transparency expected in the United Kingdom and the European Union respectively. [HL2584]

The Government are committed to effective scrutiny. New arrangements were introduced to extend and improve scrutiny on 17 November 1998. Information is provided to the Scrutiny Committees of both Houses about items on the agenda of forthcoming Council meetings. The Government also send to Parliament proposals for European legislation coming before the Council of Ministers as well as other documents which may have important policy, legislative or financial implications, under all three pillars of EU activity.The long preparation of decisions coming to Council meetings means that the differing procedures and powers under each of the treaties is fully taken in account, and it is clear under which treaty the action is being taken. Most Councils, with the exception of the General Affairs Council, deal with areas which fall either under the Treaty on European Union or the Community treaties, but not both.The Government believe that Parliament is now more fully and promptly informed about forthcoming decisions and published documents, and that UK scrutiny arrangements compare favourably with arrangements in many other EU member states.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Who are the United Kingdom's representatives on the European Union's Committee of the Regions. [HL2747]

We have submitted to the Council Secretariat details of the United Kingdom's 24 nominees for full membership of the Committee of the Regions, along with 24 alternate nominees. They are:

asked Her Majesty's Government:What additional resources have been allocated to Heathrow airport in the way of financial aid and personnel to monitor imported meats coming into the United Kingdom since the outbreak of foot and mouth disease. [HL2482]

All products of animal origin imported from third countries into the UK must enter at designated UK border inspection posts (Bar's) where they are subject to veterinary inspections. The inspection services at a BIP are the responsibility of the local authority or port health authority, in the case of Heathrow, the London Borough of Hillingdon. It is their responsibility to deploy appropriate inspection staff at the B1P in response to the volume and nature of the products imported through the BIP. At the Heathrow BIP, there are currently 10 environmental health officers, three official veterinary surgeons and 10 other staff involved in the monitoring of imported meats coming into the UK but these figures will vary.London Borough of Hillingdon environmental health officers and H M Customs officers also carry out checks for the presence of illegally imported meat and other animal products in passengers' luggage. in addition, State Veterinary Service staff, who are present at Heathrow to check imported live animals, are also empowered to deal with illegally imported animal products when they are found. No additional resources have been allocated since February 2001 but there has been greater coordination between the authorities at Heathrow in conducting checks and other duties.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether the red tractor symbol can be legitimately displayed on products that originate outside the United Kingdom. [HL2642]

The red tractor is a private industry-led initiative which is administered by Assured Food Standards. Imported products produced to standards equivalent to those of qualifying British assurance schemes would be eligible to carry the symbol. This is in line with the requirements of EU single market and competition rules. We understand that currently no non-UK products are carrying the symbol.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether the Assured Food Standards (AFS) recognises food or crops assurance scheme awards made by non-United Kingdom organisations; and, if they do, which are these organisations. [HL2643]

We are not aware of any food or crops assurance scheme awards made by non-United Kingdom organisations that have been recognised by Assured Food Standards. However, one non-UK producer has applied to be recognised as complying with the standards of the Assured Chicken Production Scheme.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 10 December 2001 (

The publication referred to, Environment Claims in Advertising: a single guide to all the applicable advertising codes, was published by the Incorporated Society of British Advertisers in conjunction with the DTI and the regulatory authorities for advertising. We have no plans to revise the publication which was intended to provide advertising professionals with an accessible source of information on the codes of practice relevant to environmental claims. All of this information is now readily available on the websites of the regulatory authorities. Detailed advice for advertisers and companies wishing to make an environmental claim for their goods or services is contained in the Green Claim Code, published by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, copies of which are available in the Library of the House.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Falconer of Thoroton on 17 January (

It is important that we get the regulations right. We will consult as soon as possible.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they plan to fit cup and cone override protection on Mark 1 rolling stock both (a) between individual coaches in a multiple unit; and (b) at the end of multiple units. [HL2567]

The industry is still in discussion with the Health and Safety Executive about the precise details of the cup and cone modification.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What is the estimated cost of fitting cup and cone override protection to Mark 1 rolling stock; the number of coaches they plan to fit with cup and cone override protection; the date by which this work must be completed; and the last date when such trains will be permitted to operate. [HL2568]

Under the Railway Regulations 1999, Mark 1 passenger rolling stock must be modified by 31 December 2002 unless an exemption is granted. Any Mark 1 rolling stock which is modified in the way specified by these regulations can be operated until 1 January 2005. The regulatory impact assessment tabled with the regulations in 1999 estimated the cost of fitting cup and cone to Mark 1 rolling stock at between £7,000 and £11,000 per carriage in 1999. There are some 1,500 passenger Mark 1 carriages still operating. The number of these to be fitted with cup and cone override protection will depend on how many carriages are withdrawn from service before the end of 2002, and on the Health and Safety Executive's decision on any case for exemption which train operators may make.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What additional protection cup and cone override protection will provide in the event of a collision between (a) two Mark 1 coaches in the same multiple unit; (b) two Mark 1 coaches in adjacent multiple units; and (c) one Mark 1 coach and another type of passenger coach. [HL2569]

The Health and Safety Executive advises that the cup and cone modification will provide substantial protection against two Mark 1 multiple units overriding one another, at speeds of up to about 35 mph. Individual carriages within a Mark 1 multiple unit are unlikely to override one another, with or without the modification. The modification is not intended to give override protection in the event of a Mark 1 unit colliding with another type of train.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What is their estimate of the number of lives which will be saved as a result of fitting cup and cone override protection to Mark 1 coaches. [HL2570]

The Health and Safety Executive has advised that in 1999, it was estimated that 0.5 equivalent fatalities per year would be prevented.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What percentage of visitors from overseas use (a) London airports and (b) Manchester airport. [HL2629]

Overseas residents made 25 million visits to the UK in 2000. 60 per cent of these were made through the London¹ airports and 4 per cent through Manchester airport.

asked Her Majesty's Government:When they intend to introduce legislation to implement the proposals set out in Cm 5237

The Government will introduce legislation as soon as parliamentary time allows. In the mean time we are continuing to work closely with local government and other interested bodies in preparing for legislation.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Falconer of Thoroton on 30 January [HL2408], when the Joint Aviation Authorities are expected to complete their consideration of the finding of the recent Civil Aviation Authority study, aimed principally at harmonising European standards on airline seat spacing, that "in view of the increased height and weight of the population, there should be an increase in seat spacing" above the current minimum distance of 26 inches; and when new minimum standards can be expected. [HL2659]

It is likely that further investigation will be necessary to validate this research before any new minimum seat space standards can he proposed. Further research would be expected to include physical trials on cabin simulators with participants of different sizes and heights.The Civil Aviation Authority, representing the IJK in the JAA, will participate in the resultant discussions together with representatives from many of the 31 other member states. It is not possible at this stage to predict a time-scale for any particular outcome.