asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they will describe the essence of the defence of necessity in cases involving the Official Secrets Act indicating the origins of this defence and the main cases in recent years in which it has been used. [HL1597]

Necessity is a common law defence which applies to all crimes. The origin of the defence of necessity in Official Secrets Act cases arises from the case of David Shayler, who was prosecuted for an offence under Section 1 of the Official Secrets Act 1989. In that case the Court of Appeal decided that in addition to the defences specifically provided by the Act the defence of duress or necessity of circumstance was available to defendants charged with an offence contrary to Section 1 of the 1989 Act.The essence of the defence is that it is available when a defendant commits an otherwise criminal act to avoid an imminent peril of danger to life or serious injury to himself or towards somebody for whom he regards himself as responsible. That person need not be named and may not be identifiable. If it is not possible to name the person it must be possible to identify them by reason of the threat to them which may be avoided by the defendant taking action. The defendant has a responsibility for them because he is placed in a position where he has a choice whether to take or not to take the action which will avoid them being injured. The act done should be no more than is reasonably necessary to avoid the harm feared and the harm resulting from the act should not be disproportionate to the harm avoided.The defence of necessity has been used in the case of David Shayler and was raised by the defence in the case of Katharine Gun.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What assurances were given to the last two meetings of Bangladesh donors by Ministers of the Bangladesh Government regarding the implementation of the Chittagong Hill tracts accord; whether they consider that those assurances have been implemented, and how they intend to pursue this matter at the next donors' meeting. [HL1558]

During the 2002 and 2003 meetings of the Bangladesh Development Forum, donors expressed concerns over the Government of Bangladesh's handling of the Chittagong Hill tracts. They expressed particular concern at the slow pace of implementation of the Chittagong Hill tracts peace accord. Given this, we are disappointed with the continued lack of progress on implementation of the peace accord, and are concerned at the increasing unrest in the region including violent clashes between rival tribal groups, settlers and the military. In advance of the 2004 Bangladesh Development Forum in May we will be discussing with donor colleagues the most appropriate way to raise these concerns during that meeting.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they provide assistance or redress for foreign nationals in the event that their passports have been lost or mislaid by the Home Office; and, if so, of what sort. [HL1768]

Where the Immigration and Nationality Directorate accepts liability for the loss of a foreign national's or British citizen's passport, the person concerned is provided with a letter confirming the loss. This can be presented to the relevant Embassy or High Commission in the United Kingdom or the United Kingdom Passport Agency, to assist in obtaining a replacement document. Advice is also given about making a claim for compensation.The directorate offers ex-gratia payments for the cost of a replacement passport and any other reasonable expenses associated with obtaining the replacement document, including any expenses or losses occasioned by the individual being unable to travel as planned. A claim for redress must be supported by appropriate documentary evidence, eg. receipts, to show that the costs were reasonable and had been necessarily incurred.

asked Her Majesty's Government:On how many occasions in how many counties since 2000 the Boundary Committee of the Electoral Commission has proposed two or three-member electoral divisions when recommending new boundaries; and whether they will give details of all such proposals together with the electorate of each such proposed division; and which proposals have not been approved. [HL1776]

Prior to 2002 no recommendations were made for multi-member electoral divisions. Since April 2002 Government have no responsibility for the electoral arrangements of local authorities, which are now a matter for the Electoral Commission. It is the commission's responsibility to consider, and if it thinks fit implement, proposals for electoral arrangements put forward by the Boundary Committee. The noble Lord may therefore wish to write directly to the chairman for information regarding this issue.

asked Her Majesty's Government:When the national 1985 standards of fire cover will be withdrawn and replaced by fire cover arrangements based on the individual integrated risk management plans drawn up by fire authorities in England and Wales: and who will be responsible from that date for ensuring that the new fire cover arrangements are as efficient and effective as the 1985 standards. [HL1805]

The recommended standards of fire cover will be superseded from 1 April 2004 when fire and rescue authorities implement their first agreed integrated risk management plans. These plans will detail locally determined response standards on the basis of authorities' assessment of risks to the community.Fire and rescue authorities have responsibility for making provision for firefighting purposes to efficiently meet all normal requirements.The Audit Commission will be responsible for assessing performance and will introduce a new inspection regime for the Fire and Rescue Service in co-operation with the Fire Service Inspectorate.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What percentage of new recruits to the Army, Navy and Royal Air Force passed the initial fitness tests in the most recent year for which figures are available; and what were the equivalent figures over the past 10 years. [HL1644]

The information is not held centrally in the manner requested. Nevertheless, I am able to provide the following details.NAVAL SERVICEAll RN recruits are required to undertake a pre-joining fitness test which must be passed before entering the Service. Pass rates in the potential Royal Marines course average out at 50 to 55 per cent.ARMYAll Army recruits must pass the initial fitness test in order to complete recruit training. Failure to complete a fitness test results in the recruit being retrained and retested.RAFAll RAF recruits undertake the fitness test in week one of phase 1 training and again at the end of phase 1. During the period April to December 2003, the pass rates were 80 per cent and 88 per cent respectively. All recruits are expected to attain the standards of the RAF fitness test before the end of phase 2 training.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What percentage of new recruits to the Army, Navy and Royal Air Force passed the initial swimming tests in the most recent year for which figures are available; and what were the equivalent figures over the past 10 years. [HL1645]

The information is not held centrally in the format requested. The following information is available.NAVAL SERVICEAll naval recruits have passed their initial swimming tests. RN recruits have to pass this element of their training before moving into the fleet. It is mandatory for a Marine to have completed the battle swimming test before he can be operationally deployed.ARMYArmy recruits are not required to pass the military swimming test (MST). The MST may be completed at any time during a soldier's service and is recorded on each soldier's record of service.RAFThe RAF has tested the swimming ability of new entrants only since June 2003. Between June 2003 and March 2004, some 1,775 recruits undertook their initial RAF swimming test, and 357 (20 per cent) could not achieve the required swimming standard.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they plan to privatise the fire fighting section of the Ministry of Defence; if so, on what basis and when; and what benefits they expect as a result. [HL1769]

The airfield support services project is seeking the most cost-effective and viable solution for the provision of airfield support services, including wider fire services, without compromising operational capability and/or safety. No decision has yet been made about the outcome of this project and we will do so only following full and careful consideration of all the options. Although we are moving towards this point, I am not yet in a position to say exactly when this will be.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What is their timetable for the publication of guidance by the Department for Constitutional Affairs on the exemptions from the right of access and on procedural matters under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. [HL1492]

On 1 March 2004, my department issued eight draft exemption guidance chapters to the freedom of information practitioners' group. The representatives on the group are from Whitehall bodies.As soon as chapters of guidance have been cleared by the practitioners' group, they will be made available on the department's website,

asked Her Majesty's Government:How many people (full-time equivalent) were employed in 2000 for purposes relating to elections (a) by the Home Office, (b) by boundary commissions for England and Wales, and (c) by any other relevant organisations; and how many were employed at most recent date for which figures are available (a) by the Home Office, (b) in boundary commissions for England and Wales, (c) by the Local Government Boundary Committee, (d) by the Electoral Commission other than the Local Government Boundary Committee, and (e) by any other relevant organisations. [HL1564]

I attach two tables on the number of full-time staff employed for purposes related to election issues. Table A covers those organisations named in the Question except the Electoral Commission, which is an independent body accountable directly to Parliament. It also assumed responsibility for the Local Government Boundary Committee for England in April 2002. As the Government have no responsibility for either the commission or the committee, the noble Lord may wish to write to the chairman of the Electoral Commission on the matters he raises. Table B covers other relevant government organisations.

asked Her Majesty's Government:How many civil servants currently work in the dental section of the Department of Health; and how many have worked in a similar capacity during the tenure of the last four Chief Dental Officers. [HL1460]

Ten Civil Service whole-time equivalent posts are currently assigned within the Office of the Chief Dental Officer, Professor Raman Bedi. As part of the Change Programme within the Department of Health, 14 whole-time equivalent Civil Service posts moved on 1 August 2003, with the associated functions, into a special health authority set up in shadow form to support dentists and the National Health Service in the run-up to the reform of NHS dentistry provided for in the Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003. This special health authority will replace the Dental Practice Board in due course.Both the Office of the Chief Dental Officer and the special health authority (shadow arrangements) are supported by a number of contractors and staff seconded from other organisations such as the NHS to work on specific projects.At 31 July 2003 just prior to the establishment of the special health authority (shadow arrangements) a total of 21 whole-time equivalent posts (excluding the post of Chief Dental Officer) were assigned to work on dentistry supported by a number of contractors and seconded staff. Additional support was provided as necessary by staff from the support divisions such as finance and human resources and from senior managers in the department. Arrangements for this additional support remain unchanged under the departmental change programme.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Which primary care trusts the Ministers with responsibility for dentistry have met in the past nine months regarding access to National Health Service dentistry in their areas. [HL1462]

The Minister of State with responsibility for dentistry, as well as meetings with Strategic Health Authorities' chief executives and others, has met with four primary care trusts regarding access to NHS dentistry over the past nine months:

• 10 July 2003—Greater Peterborough Primary Care Partnership
• 12 August 2003—Lambeth PCT
• 26 February 2004—North East Lincolnshire PCT
• 3 March 2004—Isle of Wight PCT

asked Her Majesty's Government:What has been the ratio of National Health Service dentists per head of population in each year since 1997. [HL1509]

The available information is for the number of National Health Service dentists (headcount) per 10,000 population and is given in the table for September in each of the years 1997 to 2002.NHS dentists cover dentists working in the general dental service (GDS), hospital dental service. community dental service, personal dental service (PDS) and salaried service of the GDS.Dentists working in more than one dental service are included in each service apart from dentists working in both PDS and GDS who are counted in the GDS only. Information for 2003 is not yet available.The information is based on dentist numbers and is not on a whole-time equivalent basis, which is not available. Dentists in the GDS are able to vary the amount of their dental work and to vary their NHS commitment.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they will list the current pilot sites which are testing the new National Health Service dentistry-based contract. [HL1510]

The NHS Modernisation Agency is currently working with a number of field sites who volunteered to test out the ideas and principles outlined in Options for Change (August 2002). The learning from these sites will inform the new contract that primary care trusts will be negotiating with dentists for 2005. However, Options for Change field sites are not directly testing the new contract that will replace current arrangements as this is still being consulted on.The

asked Her Majesty's Government:What the current salary is for a community dental service dentist with:

Salary scales for the community dental service (CDS) are published by the Department of Health each April via an advance letter. The level of remuneration is determined by the annual review and recommendations of the Doctors and Dentists Review Body.Based on the community dental officer salary scale published on 1 April 2003, a CDS dentist would earn: £29,365 after one year's experience and £31,815 to £39,165 after two to five years' experience.The community dental officer salary scale has eight spine points, so a dentist with eight years' experience on the 1 April 2003, would earn £46,515 subject to satisfactory performance.Additionally, a CDS dentist who had progressed through the remaining three paybands to the top of the clinical director of CDS scale on 1 April 2003 could expect to earn £64,610, subject to satisfactory performance.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What discussions the Department of Health has had with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's Homelessness Unit regarding the provision of dental services to homeless people. [HL1565]

The Government are committed to rebuilding and restoring National Health Service dentistry to improve the oral health of the whole nation, including its most vulnerable members. One function of the community dental service is to provide dental care and treatment for people with special needs, including homeless people, from fixed-site and mobile outreach clinics. Forty-six NHS dental access centres located in areas of poor oral health provide dental services for patients who may not otherwise access dentistry.Under the Health and Social Care (Community Health and Standards) Act 2003, every primary care trust will have a new duty to provide primary dental

asked Her Majesty's Government:What was the total amount of grants made by the child support fund in each of the past five years. [HL1196]

The Children's Fund programme was launched in November 2000. The programme paid out £15.9 million in 2001–02 and £99 million in 2002–03. Final outturn figures for 2003–04 are not yet available although to date the programme has spent £163 million out of commitments totalling £198 million.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What was UK Sport's budget for encouraging and maintaining United Kingdom influence within international sports federations; and how much was spent on the international representatives' grant aid programme for each year since 1997–98; and [HL1744]How many United Kingdom individuals are in senior positions on international sports federations; what are their names, positions and organisations; and what funding they have received from UK Sport for each year since 1997–98. [HL1745]

UK Sport's budget for encouraging and maintaining United Kingdom influence in international sports federations is as follows:

asked Her Majesty's Government:How many private tenancies in the Borough of Allerdale are in receipt of housing benefits; and [HL1731]How many private tenants in the Borough of Allerdale are in receipt of housing benefit. [HL1732]

The number of private tenants in Allerdale local authority in receipt of housing benefit at August 2003 is 6,400.The number of private tenants (excluding registered social landlord tenants) in Allerdale local authority in receipt of housing benefit at August 2003 is 1,000.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they intend to introduce legislation to enable the public to have a right of direct access to the Parliamentary Ombudsman for complaints of maladministration. [HL1620]

As my honourable friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office made clear in the other place on 9 March (Offical Report, cols. 1379–80) discussions with the Parliamentary Ombudsman on this issue are continuing.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What conclusion the Joint Aviation Authorities reached on the need for common European standards for airline seat spacing; and whether their findings took account of the impact of the ageing and increasing longevity of Europe's population. [HL1816]

I refer the noble Baroness to the Answer on 16 September 2003 (Official Report col. WA 172). The Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) did not reach a conclusion on the need for common European standards for airline seat spacing.The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) assumed responsibility for the design standards of most aircraft manufactured and operated in the European Union on 28 September 2003; this includes standards for airline seat spacing. The agency's draft rulemaking programme for 2005–07 recognises that the issue of seat spacing needs to be investigated, including the potential relationship to deep venous thrombosis (DVT).

asked Her Majesty's Government:How many vessels there are in the United Kingdom flag fleet; and how many have been issued with a security certificate under the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code; and [HL1863]What resources they have allocated to ensure that all vessels in the United Kingdom are issued with security certificates under the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code by 1 July 2004. [HL1865]

There are over 600 UK flagged ships that are affected by the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code.The Department for Transport's Security Directorate (TRANSEC), in conjunction with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA), has the policy lead and is responsible for introducing the ISPS code requirements. TRANSEC is responsible for UK ports and passenger shipping, and the MCA is responsible for non-passenger shipping, under a policy framework set by TRANSEC.Both TRANSEC and the MCA have recruited and trained new staff to ensure that they have adequate resources to fulfil the task of assessing and approving ship security plans, and are already issuing international ship security certificates to passenger and non-passenger ships.For security reasons it is not appropriate to disclose the number of ships that have already been issued with a certificate, however the vast majority now have approved plans.The Government expect that all UK flagged ships will comply with the required ISPS standards by the deadline date of 1 July 2004.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they will compensate the owner of a United Kingdom flag vessel who suffers financially if upon inspection that vessel is found to have a flawed security certificate issued under the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code. [HL1864]

As the designated authority under the ISPS code the Department for Transport has developed a rigorous ship security plan approval regime for the UK flagged fleet.Clear guidelines and deadlines have been issued to industry to submit their ship security plans to the Department for Transport's Security Directorate (TRANSEC) for passenger ships and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) for non-passenger ships for examination and approval. Once a plan has been approved, it must be verified on board the ship prior to issuing an international ship security certificate (ISSC).Any ship that does not comply with the UK's standards for implementing the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) code will not be issued with a certificate. Once an ISSC has been issued, the responsibility for ensuring continued adherence to the ship security plan will fall on the ship. UK flagged ships will be subject to compliance inspections, but the Government will not be in a position to compensate any operator that fails to maintain an adequate level of security.

asked Her Majesty's Government:How many ports in the United Kingdom need to be assessed to meet the requirements of the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code; how many have already been assessed; and how many have been certified as complying with the code; and [HL1866]What guidance and timescale they have issued to ports and port operators with regard to the implementation of the requirements of the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code; and [HL1867]What resources they have allocated to ensure that all ports and port operations meet the requirements of the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code by 1 July 2004. [HL1868]

The Department for Transport's Security Directorate (TRANSEC) has the policy lead and is responsible for introducing the International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code requirements to approximately 600 UK port facilities by the deadline date of 1 July 2004.TRANSEC has recruited and trained new inspectors to ensure they have adequate resources to fulfil the task of assessing port facilities and approving port facility security plans.For security reasons it is not appropriate to set out in detail the number of port facilities that have already been assessed or the number of port facility security plans approved.However, all of the major UK ports including the passenger operations have been assessed and port facility security assessment (PFSA) reports have been prepared. UK ports have two months from the date of receiving the PFSA reports in which to prepare and submit their plans.Along with the individual PFSA reports, industry has been provided with port facility security instructions and security standards for passenger, container ro-ro, other bulk cargo, and chemical oil and gas port facilities. These will form the basis of their port facility security plans.A port facility security plan template has also been made available to assist companies to prepare their plans.