Home Page |
Column 155
(By Order) Order read for consideration of Lords amendments.
To be considered on Thursday 2 November.
(By Order) Order for consideration, as amended, read.
To be considered on Wednesday 1 November.
[Lords] (By Order)
Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Wednesday 1 November.
[Lords]
Motion made ,
That the Promoters of the Nottingham Park Estate Bill [Lords] shall have leave to suspend proceedings thereon in order to proceed with the Bill, if they think fit, in the next Session of Parliament, provided that the Agents for the Bill give notice to the Clerks in the Private Bill Office no later than the day before the close of the present Session of their intention to suspend further proceedings and that all Fees due on the Bill up to that date be paid ;
That, if the Bill is brought from the Lords in the next Session, the Agent for the Bill shall deposit in the Private Bill Office a declaration signed by him, stating that the Bill is the same, in every respect, as the Bill which was brought from the Lords in the present Session ;
That, as soon as a certificate by one of the Clerks in the Private Bill Office, that such a declaration has been so deposited, has been laid upon the Table of the House, the Bill shall be read the first and second time and committed (and shall be recorded in the Journal of this House as having been so read and committed) ;
That the Petitions relating to the Bill presented in the present Session which stand referred to the Committee on the Bill shall stand referred to the Committee on the Bill in the next Session ; That no Petitioners shall be heard before the Committee on the Bill, unless their Petition has been presented within the time limited within the present Session or deposited pursuant to paragraph (b) of Standing Order 126 relating to Private Business ;
That, in relation to the Bill, Standing Order 127 relating to Private Business shall have effect as if the words "under Standing Order 126 (Reference to committee of petitions against Bill)" were omitted ;
That no further Fees shall be charged in respect of any proceedings on the Bill in respect of which Fees have already been incurred during the present Session ;
That these Orders be Standing Orders of the House.-- [Miss Betty Boothroyd.]
To be considered on Thursday 2 November .
[Lords] Motion made,
Column 156
That the Promoters of the Vale of Glamorgan (Barry Harbour) Bill [Lords] shall have leave to suspend proceedings thereon in order to proceed with the Bill, if they think fit, in the next Session of Parliament, provided that the Agents for the Bill give notice to the Clerks in the Private Bill Office of their intention to suspend further proceedings not later than the day before the close of the present Session and that all Fees due on the Bill up to that date be paid ;That if the Bill is brought from the Lords in the next Session, the Agents for the Bill shall deposit in the Private Bill Office a declaration signed by them, stating that the Bill is the same, in every respect, as the Bill which was brought from the Lords in the present Session ;
That as soon as a certificate by one of the Clerks in the Private Bill Office, that such a declaration has been so deposited, has been laid upon the Table of the House, the Bill shall be deemed to have been read the first and shall be ordered to be read a second time ; That the Petitions against the Bill presented in the present Session which stand referred to the Committee on the Bill shall stand referred to the Committee on the Bill in the next Session ; That no Petitioners shall be heard before the Committee on the Bill, unless their Petition has been presented within the time limited within the present Session or deposited pursuant to paragraph (b) of Standing Order 126 relating to Private Business ;
That, in relation to the Bill, Standing Order 127 relating to Private Business shall have effect as if the words "under Standing Order 126 (Reference to committee of petitions against Bill)" were omitted ;
That no further Fees shall be charged in respect of any proceedings on the Bill in respect of which Fees have already been incurred during the present Session ;
That these Orders be Standing Orders of the House.-- [Miss Betty Boothroyd.]
To be considered on Thursday 2 November.
Motion made,
That the Promoters of the Birmingham City Council (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill [Lords] shall have leave, except as provided by these Orders, to suspend further proceedings thereon in order to proceed with the Bill, if they think fit, in the next Session of Parliament, provided that the Agents for the Bill give notice to the Clerks in the Private Bill Office of their intention to suspend further proceedings not later than the day before the close of the present Session and that all Fees due on the Bill up to that date be paid ;
That, if the Bill is brought from the Lords in the next Session the Agent for the Bill shall deposit in the Private Bill Office a declaration, signed by him, stating that the Bill is the same, in every respect, as the Bill which was brought from the Lords in the present Session ;
That, as soon as a certificate by one of the Clerks in the Private Bill Office, that such a declaration has been so deposited, has been laid upon the Table of the House, the Bill shall be read the first time and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills ; That, notwithstanding the suspension of other proceedings on the Bill, Standing Order 171A(1) shall apply to the presenting of Petitions against the Bill brought from the Lords in the present Session and only Petitions presented under this Order shall be received as Petitions presented under Standing Order 171A(1) ; That any Petitions presented under the foregoing Order shall stand referred to the Committee on the Bill in the next Session ; That no further Fees shall be charged in respect of any proceedings on the Bill in respect of which Fees have already been incurred during the present Session ;
That these Orders be Standing Orders of the House.-- [Miss Betty Boothroyd.]
To be considered on Thursday 2 November.
Column 157
Motion made,
That the Promoters of the British Railways Bill shall have leave to suspend proceedings thereon in order to proceed with the Bill, if they think fit, in the next Session of Parliament, provided that the Agents for the Bill give notice to the Clerks in the Private Bill Office not later than the day before the close of the present Session of their intention to suspend further proceedings and that all Fees due on the Bill up to that date be paid ;
That on the fifth day on which the House sits in the next Session the Bill shall be presented to the House ;
That there shall be deposited with the Bill a declaration signed by the Agents for the Bill, stating that the Bill is the same, in every respect, as the Bill at the last stage of its proceedings in this House in the present Session ;
That the Bill shall be laid upon the Table of the House by one of the Clerks in the Private Bill Office on the next meeting of the House after the day on which the Bill has been presented and, when so laid, shall be read the first and second time (and shall be recorded in the Journal of this House as having been so read) and, having been amended by the Committee in the present Session, shall be ordered to lie upon the Table ;
That no further Fees shall be charged in respect of any proceedings on the Bill in respect of which Fees have already been incurred during the present Session ;
That these Orders be Standing Orders of the House.-- [Miss Betty Boothroyd.]
To be considered on Thursday 2 November.
Motion made,
That the Promoters of the Bromley London Borough Council (Crystal Place) Bill shall have leave to suspend proceedings thereon in order to proceed with the Bill, if they think fit, in the next Session of Parliament, provided that the Agents for the Bill give notice to the Clerks in the Private Bill Office not later than the day before the close of the present Session of their intention to suspend further proceedings and that all Fees due on the Bill up to that date be paid ;
That on the fifth day on which the House sits in the next Session the Bill shall be presented to the House ;
That there shall be deposited with the Bill a declaration signed by the Agents for the Bill, stating that the Bill is the same, in every respect, as the Bill at the last stage of its proceedings in this House in the present Session ;
That the Bill shall be laid upon the Table of the House by one of the Clerks in the Private Bill Office on the next meeting
Column 158
of the House after the day on which the Bill has been presented and, when so laid, shall be read the first and second time (and shall be recorded in the Journal of this House as having been so read) and, having been amended by the Committee in the present Session, shall be ordered to lie upon the Table ;That no further Fees shall be charged in respect of any proceedings on the Bill in respect of which Fees have already been incurred during the present Session ;
That these Orders be Standing Orders of the House.-- [Miss Betty Boothroyd.]
To be considered on Thursday 2 November.
(No. 3) Bill-- [Lords]
Motion made,
That the Promoters of the Greater Manchester (Light Rapid Transit System) (No. 3) Bill [Lords] shall have leave to suspend proceedings thereon in order to proceed with the Bill, if they think fit, in the next Session of Parliament, provided that the Agents for the Bill give notice to the Clerks in the Private Bill Office of their intention to suspend further proceedings not later than the day before the close of the present Session and that all Fees due on the Bill up to that date be paid ;
That if the Bill is brought from the Lords in the next Session, the Agents for the Bill shall deposit in the Private Bill Office a declaration, signed by them, stating that the Bill is the same, in every respect, as the Bill which was brought from the Lords in the present Session ;
That as soon as a certificate by one of the Clerks in the Private Bill Office that such a declaration had been so deposited has been laid upon the Table of the House, the Bill shall be deemed to have been read the first time and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills ;
That, no petitions against the Bill having been presented within the time limited within the present Session, no Petitioners shall be heard before any committee on the Bill save those who complain of any amendment as proposed in the filled up Bill or of any matter which arises during the progress of the Bill before the committee ; That no further Fees shall be charged in respect of any proceedings on the Bill in respect of which Fees have already been incurred during the present Session ;
That these Orders be Standing Orders of the House.-- [Miss Betty Boothroyd.]
To be considered on Thursday 2 November.
Column 159
1. Mr. Andrew F. Bennett : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if, pursuant to his answer of 28 July, Official Report, column 1043, he will publish in the Official Report the figures on factory inspections contained in the letter.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. Patrick Nicholls) : Yes, Sir
Mr. Bennett : I congratulate the Minister on trying to hide the figures. Does he accept that the figures show that 20 per cent. of factories and other industrial premises have not been inspected for more than five years? Is that not a disgrace, especially when two people are killed every working day? Under the present Government, the Health and Safety Executive has been cut by about 20 per cent. Is it not high time that the Government gave safety in industry a higher priority, informed management of the existence of the Health and Safety Executive and made the executive really effective?
Mr. Nicholls : Far from being disgraceful, the hon. Gentleman has shown that he does not know the facts which lie behind his supplementary question. He makes the assumption that all premises should be inspected the same number of times. That seems to assume that the dangers inherent in a chemical engineering factory will be same as those in a dressmaking concern. There is a rating system which ensures that inspectors look for trouble to the greatest extent where they are most likely to find it. Far from trying to hide the figures, I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman did not draw attention to the fact that a letter that I sent to him, containing the information which is to be placed in the Library, showed that the number of preventive inspections had risen by about 20 per cent. since 1985 -86.
Mr. Ian Bruce : Does my hon. Friend agree that the best inspectors of any factory are the employees, and that the inspectorate always responds to a complaint by employees at a work place so as to ensure that safety is paramount? Surely the responsibility should be on employees to alert inspectors.
Mr. Nicholls : My hon. Friend is right. The primary responsibility for ensuring proper health and safety in the work force lies with employers and employees. Just as we could not solve crime by putting a policeman on every corner, there is no evidence that we could eliminate accidents by putting an inspector in every work place.
Mr. Strang : Now that I have received a letter from the Secretary of State which it took him three months to write, in which he admits that he has failed to keep his promise to the House to increase the factory and agriculture inspectorates by 40 inspectors by 31 March, will the Minister take the opportunity on behalf of the Government to apologise to the House for failing to keep
Column 160
that promise? When will the Government increase the strength of the factory and agriculture inspectorates by the 40 inspectors promised by 31 March?Mr. Nicholls : The only apology due to the House arising from the question would be from the hon. Gentleman for the distorted way in which he has presented the figures. The target was 590 factory inspectors in post by April 1990. That has already been achieved, which is hardly surprising as in the past two years the HSE has received all the money for which it bid from central Government. The only point at issue is why the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friend the hon. Member for Denton and Reddish (Mr. Bennett) have persisted in choosing not to understand the figures.
Mr. Strang : Does the Minister deny what he said?
Following is the information :--
The number of preventive inspection visits paid by the Health and Safety Executive's (HSE) Factory Inspectorate (FI) to fixed premises in each of the last four planning years is as follows :
Year |Numbers of Preventive |Inspection Visits ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1985-86 |50,434 1986-87 |54,876 1987-88 |59,437 1988-89 |60,708 In addition, a substantial number of inspections of transient activities were carried out and visits were also paid to all types of workplaces for other purposes such as accident and complaint investigations, to give advice and to check on shortcomings previously identified.
The HSE records show that of the fixed premises registered with FI in April 1989, 36,234 last had a preventive inspection visit five years ago, 47,974 seven years ago, 17,230 nine years ago and 23,606 11 or more years ago.
3. Mr. Evennett : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment how many people are currently participating in YTS in Greater London.
The Minister of State, Department of Employment (Mr. Tim Eggar) : The latest available figures show that there were 21,500 young people participating in YTS in Greater London.
Mr. Evennett : I thank my hon. Friend for his reply. What proportion of YTS completers in London go on to full-time employment? Does my hon. Friend agree that YTS provides valuable training for young people?
Mr. Eggar : I certainly agree with my hon. Friend. YTS provides extremely valuable training. Some 90 per cent. of all YTS completers in London go on to full-time employment and no fewer than 98 per cent. of all trainees entering the Bexley youth training group in my hon. Friend's constituency have found full-time employment.
Mr. Clelland : How many youngsters suffer from accidents during their training? Will the Minister confirm that the number of accidents among YTS trainees has risen in the past few years and that as many as seven are killed and 500 injured every year under that scheme?
Column 161
Mr. Eggar : It is true that the number of accidents among YTS employees has risen, but that is because the number of youngsters on YTS has risen significantly. It is clear that young people on YTS are at least as safe, if not more so, as young people in employment generally.
4. Mr. Cousins : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what has been the trend of pay increases for (a) chairs of major companies and (b) work forces in major manufacturing companies since 1980.
Mr. Nicholls : The Government do not produce information about pay increases for individual chairmen or work forces of companies. Average earnings of all employees in manufacturing increased by 120 per cent. between August 1980 and August 1989. No reliable information on directors' earnings is readily available. Pay is a matter for businesses to determine in the light of all the relevant circumstances.
Mr. Cousins : In that case, does the Minister accept that it was unfortunate to publish an article in October's Department of Employment Gazette which appeared to criticise the justification for some of the large salary increases for individual company chairmen, in particular singling out Lord King of British Airways and FKI Babcock who receives more than £550,000 from his two part-time jobs with those companies? Is not that an entirely unwarranted attack on an honest worker doing his best in the marketplace?
Mr. Nicholls : I am sure that Lord King will take great comfort from what the hon. Gentleman says. The Government, including my right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, have constantly made it clear that we are against unjustified pay increases. If, in the circumstances, a pay rise can be justified, so be it.
Mr. Cran : Does my hon. Friend agree that far too many in the British work force from top to bottom, are besotted with the desire to receive unearned pay increases? Would they not be better employed trying to close the productivity gap which still exists between Britain and some of our major competitors?
Mr. Nicholls : My hon. Friend has it exactly. It is remarkable that even after 10 years of a Conservative Government it is still possible for Opposition Members to indulge in a sterile class war every time high salaries are mentioned. If a pay rise can be justified in all the circumstances, that pay rise is a proper one.
Mr. Fatchett : But is it not true that many company directors have this year given themselves increases often running into three figures in percentage points? How can that be justified at a time when the Government insist that ambulance staff, who contribute so much to our society, should have forced upon them an increase below the level of inflation? Why should they take a cut in real wages while the top people are getting such large increases?
Mr. Nicholls : Any company making a decision about what its directors will be paid has to take into account a number of factors. It will have to consider whether a pay rise is necessary to attract staff of the correct calibre and whether the person will make a contribution which will
Column 162
justify his salary. The hon. Gentleman cannot get to grips with the fact that many of the lowly or lower paid employees, whose interests he claims to represent, are better served by having companies run efficiently, and that that costs money at the highest level.5. Mr. Amess : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what are the latest unemployment figures for the constituency of Basildon and for the same period in each of the last six years.
Mr. Eggar : In September 1983 there were 6,532 unemployed claimants in the parliamentary constituency of Basildon compared with 2,439 in September this year. With permission, I will publish the detailed figures in the Official Report .
Mr. Amess : Is my hon. Friend aware that the sign displaying the number of people without work in Basildon has been taken down, although the local Labour party claimed that it fell down as a result of rusty screws? Does he agree that the downward trend of unemployment in Basildon reflects the successes of local businesses, the availability of a willing work force and the underlying strength of the British economy?
Mr. Eggar : I am pleased to congratulate employers and employees in Basildon on the considerable increase in economic activity that has led to many new jobs. If I may dare to make a recommendation to my hon. Friend, I suggest that he offers the council some new screws so that it can publicise the fact that unemployment in Basildon has fallen by more than 30 per cent. in the past year alone.
Mr. Tony Lloyd : Is the Minister aware that the Secretary of State recently advised young people in Basildon and other areas who are presently in receipt of income support or unemployment benefit to refuse offers of jobs if they did not contain a significant training element leading to a qualification? The Secretary of State seems to agree that that is accurate. Is the Minister further aware that under the present regulations if young people refuse jobs they will have their benefit suspended? Did the Secretary of State not think through his comments or was he announcing that the regulations would be changed to allow people to refuse jobs on that basis?
Mr. Eggar : My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State made it clear that in the 1990s we expect that youngsters will have the choice of moving into full-time education or jobs with training. That is the desire of the Government and of employers.
Following is the information :
In September 1989 there were 2,439 unemployed claimants in the parliamentary constituency of Basildon. The table shows the number of unemployed claimants in the constituency of Basildon for each September from 1983 to 1988. The figures are affected by the change in the compilation of the count in March 1986 to reduce over-recording and by the change in the coverage of the count from September 1988 due to the introduction of new benefit regulations for young people aged under 18.
Column 163
? Unemployment in Parliamentary Constituency of Basildon September |Number of unemployed |claimants --------------------------------------------------------------- 1983 |6,532 1984 |7,050 1985 |6,634 1986 |6,157 1987 |5,032 1988 |3,495
6. Mr. Robert B. Jones : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment if he will make a statement on the progress of school-industry compacts.
The Secretary of State for Employment (Mr. Norman Fowler) : Forty compacts are being supported by the Training Agency. To date, some 230 schools and more than 30,000 young people are participating in compact arrangements, actively supported by more than 1,000 employers and training providers. By any standards, the initiative has made a very impressive start.
Mr. Jones : I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for those encouraging figures. Will he confirm that they apply to urban programme authorities, not to authorities in general, and that there is also merit in compact-like arrangements in other local education authorities, from which employers, schools and businesses may profit?
Next Section
| Home Page |