| Previous Section | Home Page |
Mr. Archie Hamilton : I am not aware of any closed Ministry of Defence records which identify any such incident.
Column 413
Low Flying
Mr. Tyler: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps he is taking to reduce the impact of low-flying military aircraft on livestock and poultry ; what consultation he has had with farming organisations and other interested bodies ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : My Department's policy is to spread low flying as widely as possible throughout the country so as to minimise disturbance. A number of consultations have taken place with farming organisations about low flying.
Phased Array Radar
Mr. Redmond : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when the test phase of the Fylingdales phased array radar is due to be completed ; when the PAR is due to become fully operational ; and what role it will play in the nation's defence.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The phased array radar at RAF Fylingdales will reach initial operational capability on 1 July this year and will be fully operational on 1 October. The role of the station will continue to be that of a ballistic missile early warning system.
Fuel Jettisoning
Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many cases of Phantom jets jettisoning more than 1,000 litres of fuel while airborne have been reported in each year since 1980.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The number of reported incidents of RAF Phantom jets jettisoning fuel while airborne is as follows :
|Number
---------------------
1980 |12
1981 |30
1982 |46
1983 |52
1984 |35
1985 |14
1986 |5
1987 |16
1988 |22
1989 |15
1990 |11
1991 |4
No records are kept of the amount of fuel jettisoned.
Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what guidance is given to Royal Air Force and Royal Navy pilots about jettisoning large quantities of fuel while airborne over (a) the sea, (b) rural areas and (c) built-up areas.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : It is normal practice for aircrew to jettison fuel only if, in an emergency, it is essential to reduce the aircraft weight before landing and the option of remaining airborne in order to burn fuel is not possible.
In the United Kingdom, RAF and RN pilots are directed that, where possible, fuel is not to be jettisoned at a height lower than 1,500 ft. The aircraft must also be under air traffic control and, where possible, over the sea. Otherwise a sparsely populated area should be chosen.
Column 414
Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the environmental consequences of aviation fuel being jettisoned by airborne military aircraft.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : RN and RAF pilots are instructed to jettison fuel under carefully controlled conditions which ensure that the great majority of fuel evaporates before it reaches the ground. There is, therefore, minimal environmental impact at ground or sea level. The evaporated fuel is widely dispersed. Most of it is biodegradable and that which remains has no known effects on the atmosphere. There are no products in military aviation jet fuel known to cause greenhouse effects, damage to the ozone layer or air pollution in the lower atmosphere.
Extremely Low Frequency Communications
Mr. Cryer : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many installations for extremely low frequency communications are in operational use in the United Kingdom ; whether they are effective ; and if he will make a statement.
Nuclear Missiles
Mr. Cryer : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how targets for nuclear missiles are determined ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : It has been the practice of successive Governments not to discuss our nuclear targeting plans.
Trident
Mr. Cryer : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will now make it his policy to provide information on the proportion of Trident nuclear warheads to be constructed in the United States of America.
Mr. Aitken : All Trident warheads will be constructed in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Cryer : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the number of successful tests of the Trident missiles and the total number of tests conducted.
Mr. Aitken : The United States Navy has to date conducted a total of 35 test firings of the Trident II D5 ballistic missile, of which 30 were successful--one partially--one was destroyed in error by the test range authorities, and four were unsuccessful. All test flights since December 1989 have been successful, and have validated fully the reliability of the Trident II system.
Nuclear Tests
Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how records were compiled for persons serving in the British nuclear tests, who were not issued with film badges, and what the present day monitoring procedures are.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : Records of test participants were complied by the National Radiological Protection Board
Column 415
from personnel records, Atomic Weapons Research Establishment reports, planning documents, Her Majesty's ships' ledgers, RAF operations record books and the "blue books". As the United Kingdom no longer conducts atmospheric nuclear weapons testing, no present day monitoring procedures for this situation exist. Otherwise, monitoring procedures implement MOD policy which is to justify all exposures, comply with MOD and statutory limits and to keep all exposures as low as reasonably practicable.Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what records he has of contamination levels in copra, drinking water and sea water, recorded during British nuclear testing in the south Atlantic during the 1950s and 1960s ; if he will make them available to the NRPB--National Radiological Protection Board--study ; and if he will place the information in the Library.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : Ministry of Defence records show no significant radioactive material from the tests in the south Pacific ocean was detected in drinking water, copra or sea water in any of the samples collected from areas that were occupied by participants. The monitoring records from Christmas Island are currently being compiled into a report for the National Radiological Protection Board study, and this report will be placed in the Library of the House when it is ready.
Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many British nuclear test participants have died as a result of multiple myeloma and non-lymphatic leukaemia.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : Mortality figures for multiple myeloma and non -lymphatic leukaemia among test participants will be provided in the National Radiological Protection Board report, which will be published, subject to peer review, later this year.
Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what information he has on the purpose of the "blue book" at the time information was, initially, collated for entry ; and if he has made this information available to the NRPB study.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The "blue books" are a compilation of information by the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment whose purpose was to provide timely advice to test participants on their radiation exposure, if any, from the tests. The "blue books" have been made available to the National Radiological Protection Board.
Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what information he has about the exclusion zone declared between 1 March and 1 August 1957 and the action that was taken to safeguard personnel within that zone ; and if he has made this information available to the NRPB study.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The purpose of the exclusion zone was to prevent aircraft and ships from straying into a possible danger area. Personnel within the zone were at a safe distance from the detonations. The original archive documents relating to the exclusion zone can be made available for the National Radiological Protection Board's inspection should it so wish.
Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many deaths per million have occurred
Column 416
annually, since 1962, resulting from multiple myeloma and non-lymphatic leukaemia in (a) the population of the United Kingdom and (b) British nuclear test participants.Mr. Archie Hamilton : I will write to the hon. Member.
Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what information he has on differences between British and American nuclear test programmes in connection with safety procedures and protective measures ; and if he has made this information available to the NRPB study.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The United States nuclear weapon test programme was wholly different from that of the United Kingdom. It would not be appropriate for me to comment on United States safety procedures and protective measures which are entirely a matter for the United States.
Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what information he has concerning persons who were provided with protective clothing at the time of the Grapple Y test who were further away from the test site than other, unprotected, test participants ; and if he has made this information available to the NRPB study.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : All participants in the Grapple Y test were issued, where necessary, with suitable protective clothing to protect against the heat generated by the detonation.
Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what tests are being undertaken to identify levels of Americium contamination in British nuclear test participants and to establish whether this differs from the control group of non-nuclear test veterans.
Mr. Hinchliffe : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will compensate Mr. Andrew Dickson for exposure to radiation during nuclear tests in the Pacific.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : There is no evidence that Mr. Dickson was exposed to radiation whilst serving on Christmas Island. Compensation would be considered if a participant in the United Kingdom test programme could show--even on the balance of probabilities--that participation had caused any subsequent illness.
Support Services
Mr. Robert Banks : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will quantify the savings in co-locating the support management groups and logistic support services ; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The recurring savings which would accrue from the collaboration of all the support management group and logistic support services are estimated to be in the order of £6 million per annum.
Mr. Robert Banks : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will provide details of the valuations placed on buildings which would be available for disposal under option II of his consultation document "The Wyton Option".
Mr. Archie Hamilton : No. Provision of the valuations would disclose information which is commercially sensitive.
Column 417
Mr. Robert Banks : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the costs for new buildings necessitated by the proposed move of the support management group to RAF Wyton ; and what are the costs of refurbishing existing buildings for the same purpose at RAF Wyton.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : This information is commercial in confidence.
Mr. Robert Banks : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what are the numbers of posts for RAF service men and civilian employees provided for in his proposal to co-locate the support management group and the associated units of logistic support services.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : The number of service and civilian posts proposed at RAF Wyton is estimated to be about 3,000.
Mr. Robert Banks : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the estimated cost in redundancy payments arising from his review of the support management groups and logistic support services and reduction in staff levels.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : It is not possible to be precise about anticipated redundancy costs at this stage. The same basis for assessing potential redundancy costs was, however, used for every option which involved non-mobile staff. Every effort will be made to minimise redundancy.
Mr. Robert Banks : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he will make available a copy of the RAF's relocation implementation working group study report.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : No. This is an internal document which contains information confidential to management. Summary details of the report have, however, been made public in a consultative document.
Ministry Police
Mr. Mackinlay : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Ministry of Defence police officers are based in Northern Ireland.
Mr. Archie Hamilton : For security reasons, it is not our practice to disclose such details.
Market Testing
Mr. Terry Davis : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence who has been appointed as a consultant to his Department for market testing.
Mr. Aitken : Mr. Christopher Littmoden, finance director of Marks and Spencer, has been appointed as a part-time adviser on the Department's market-testing programme.
Nuclear Contamination, Australia
Mr. Foulkes : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the current position regarding discussions between the Governments of the United Kingdom and Australia
Column 418
regarding the clean-up of nuclear contamination on the Maralinga lands in South Australia and compensation to the Aboriginal people affected ; and when he expects to announce Her Majesty's Government's intentions.Mr. Archie Hamilton : The Australian Government have asked that the United Kingdom make a contribution towards the cost of further rehabilitation of the former nuclear weapon test sites at Maralinga and Emu Field in South Australia, and meet the cost of providing compensation for the local Aboriginal population. Our view is that the agreement reached in 1968 with the then Australian Government releases the United Kingdom from any further responsibility for rehabilitation of these sites and that the question of compensation for the Aboriginal population is not one for Her Majesty's Government. Nevertheless, we are carefully studying the Australian request, which raises a number of complex legal and technical issues, and hope to give a considered response soon.
EMPLOYMENT
Training
Mr. Milburn : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) if she will list for each training and enterprise council the budget made available from her Department for 1991-92 and 1992-93 (a) at current prices and (b) at 1992-93 prices, indicating in both cases the percentage difference ;
(2) if she will list for each training and enterprise council the budget made available from her Department for the provision of youth training places for 1991-92 and 1992-93 (a) at current prices and (b) at 1992-93 prices, indicating in both cases the percentage difference ;
(3) if she will list for each training and enterprise council the budget made available from her Department for the provision of employment training places for 1991-92 and 1992-93 (a) at current prices and (b) at 1992-93 prices, indicating in both cases the percentage difference ;
(4) if she will list for each training and enterprise council the number of training weeks contracted for under employment training (a) in 1991-92, (b) in 1992-93 and (c) the percentage difference ;
(5) if she will list for each training and enterprise council the number of training weeks contracted for under youth training (a) in 1991-92, (b) in 1992-93 and (c) the percentage difference.
Mr. McLoughlin : The information requested for 1991-92 is given in the following tables for England only. Information relating to Wales and Scotland is a matter for the respective Secretaries of State to answer. I am not at present in a position to give the coresponding information for 1992-93.
Column 419
|c|TEC budget allocations 1991-92 and at 1992-93 prices|c|
|c|London|c|
£ million budgets Training weeks multiplied by 10,
TEC |Total |Employment|Youth |Employment|Youth
|training |training |training |training
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AZTEC
Current |10.7 |2.4 |3.4 |3.6 |6.4
1992-93 prices |11.2 |2.5 |3.6
CENTEC (16 September 1991)
Current |12.0 |3.2 |3.2 |6.4 |7.9
1992-93 prices |12.5 |3.3 |3.3
CILNTEC (14 October 1991)
Current |8.1 |2.2 |3.1 |4.6 |6.4
1992-93 prices |8.5 |2.3 |3.2
LETEC
Current |27.6 |9.0 |10.5 |17.4 |27.0
1992-93 prices |28.8 |9.4 |11.0
North London (16 September 1991)
Current |9.7 |3.2 |2.4 |6.1 |5.7
1992-93 prices |10.1 |3.3 |2.5
North West London (16 September 1991)
Current |5.6 |1.8 |1.5 |3.3 |3.3
1992-93 prices |5.9 |1.9 |1.6
SOLOTEC
Current |18.6 |3.8 |4.7 |6.7 |12.6
1992-93 prices |19.4 |4.0 |4.9
South Thames (27 May 1991)
Current |20.5 |7.0 |5.3 |12.9 |10.1
1992-93 prices |21.4 |7.3 |5.5
West London (16 September 1991)
Current |8.9 |2.0 |3.4 |3.3 |8.0
1992-93 prices |9.3 |2.1 |3.6
Notes:
1.The percentage difference between current and 1992-93 prices is 4.5 per cent.
2.Where TECs became operational after 1 April 1991, the dates are shown in brackets.
|c|TEC budget allocations 1991-92 and at 1992-93 prices|c|
|c|South East|c|
£ million budgets Training weeks multiplied by 10,
TEC |Total |Employment|Youth |Employment|Youth
|training |training |training |training
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Essex
Current |29.2 |5.8 |12.3 |9.1 |22.8
1992-93 prices |31.0 |6.1 |12.9
Hampshire
Current |32.o |5.0 |16.8 |9.4 |36.5
1992-93 prices |33.4 |5.2 |17.6
Heart of England
Current |10.7 |1.6 |4.9 |2.6 |9.2
1992-93 prices |11.2 |1.7 |5.1
Hertfordshire
Current |19.5 |2.8 |5.4 |5.2 |9.9
1992-93 prices |20.4 |2.9 |5.6
Isle of Wight
Current |4.1 |0.6 |1.6 |1.0 |3.6
1992-93 prices |4.3 |0.6 |1.7
Kent
Current |32.2 |5.5 |14.3 |8.9 |28.7
1992-93 prices |33.6 |5.7 |14.9
Milton Keynes and North Buckinghamshire
Current |6.5 |1.2 |3.5 |1.9 |5.8
1992-93 |6.8 |1.3 |3.7
Surrey
Current |14.1 |1.8 |4.5 |3.2 |11.7
1992-93 prices |14.7 |1.9 |4.7
Sussex
Current |26.0 |4.5 |11.2 |8.3 |23.1
1992-93 |27.2 |4.7 |11.7
Thames Valley Enterprise
Current |24.9 |2.4 |13.6 |4.1 |30.4
1992-93 prices |26.0 |2.5 |14.2
Note:
The percentage difference between current and 1992-93 prices is 4.5 per cent.
|c|TEC budget allocations 1991-92 and 1992-93 prices|c|
|c|South West|c|
£ million budgets Training weeks multiplied by 10,
TEC |Total |Employment|Youth |Employment|Youth
|training |training |training |training
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avon
Current |29.3 |6.0 |13.0 |11.4 |27.5
1992-93 prices |30.6 |6.3 |13.6
Devon and Cornwall
Current |52.5 |10.5 |22.1 |19.9 |27.5
1992-93 prices |52.9 |11.0 |23.1
Dorset
Current |15.5 |2.5 |7.1 |4.0 |14.7
1992-93 prices |16.2 |2.6 |7.4
Gloucester
Current |13.0 |1.9 |6.4 |3.5 |13.4
1992-93 prices |13.6 |2.0 |6.7
Somerset
Current |13.3 |1.7 |6.4 |3.1 |13.8
1992-93 prices |13.9 |1.8 |6.7
Wiltshire
Current |12.8 |1.7 |6.3 |3.0 |13.6
1992-93 prices |13.4 |1.8 |6.6
Note:
The percentage difference between current and 1992-93 prices is 4.5 per. cent.
|c|West Midlands|c|
£ million budgets Training weeks multiplied by 10,
TEC |Total |Employment|Youth |Employment|Youth
|training |training |training |training
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Birmingham
Current |46.5 |16.6 |15.1 |22.9 |25.9
1992-93 prices |48.6 |17.3 |15.8
Central England
Current |11.0 |2.2 |4.8 |5.1 |10.0
1992-93 prices |11.5 |2.3 |5.0
Coventry
Current |25.8 |4.9 |12.9 |9.7 |24.7
1992-93 prices |27.0 |5.1 |13.5
Dudley
Current |11.2 |2.9 |5.1 |5.7 |11.2
1992-93 prices |11.7 |3.0 |5.3
Hereford and Worcester
Current |10.1 |2.0 |4.7 |3.7 |9.9
1992-93 prices |10.6 |2.1 |4.9
Sandwell
Current |11.4 |2.8 |5.2 |5.7 |10.3
1992-93 prices |11.9 |2.9 |5.4
Shropshire
Current |13.5 |2.9 |6.6 |5.8 |14.4
1992-93 prices |14.1 |3.0 |6.9
Staffordshire
Current |34.6 |6.0 |19.6 |11.6 |39.9
1992-93 prices |36.2 |6.3 |20.5
Walsall
Current |10.5 |3.2 |4.5 |6.0 |8.2
1992-93 prices |11.0 |3.3 |4.7
Wolverhampton
Current |11.6 |3.1 |5.0 |6.5 |10.9
1992-93 prices |12.1 |3.2 |5.2
Note:
1.The percentage difference between current and 1992-93 prices is 4.5 per cent.
Column 423
|c|West Midlands|c|
£ million budgets Training weeks multiplied by 10,
TEC |Total |Employment|Youth |Employment|Youth
|training |training |training |training
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leicester
Current |26.3 |4.7 |14.2 |7.3 |30.9
1992-93 prices |27.5 |4.9 |14.8
Northamptonshire
Current |12.9 |2.5 |6.2 |3.8 |13.1
1992-93 prices |13.5 |2.6 |6.5
Lincolnshire
Current |18.8 |3.7 |11.1 |6.0 |21.4
1992-93 prices |19.6 |3.9 |11.6
Greater Nottingham
Current |21.4 |4.7 |11.2 |8.4 |22.3
1992-93 prices |22.4 |4.9 |1.7
North Nottingham
Current |17.0 |5.0 |8.2 |5.0 |15.6
1992-93 prices |17.8 |5.2 |8.6
South Derbyshire
Current |17.6 |4.1 |9.2 |6.4 |18.2
1992-93 prices |18.4 |4.3 |9.6
North Derbyshire
Current |11.5 |2.2 |6.2 |4.3 |12.6
1992-93 prices |12.0 |2.3 |6.5
Norfolk and Waveney
Current |22.9 |4.7 |12.4 |8.7 |24.2
1992-93 prices |23.9 |4.9 |13.0
Suffolk
Current |14.2 |1.8 |4.5 |3.2 |8.6
1992-93 prices |14.8 |1.9 |4.7
Bedfordshire
Current |12.1 |1.7 |7.0 |2.7 |14.3
1992-93 prices |12.6 |1.8 |7.3
Greater Peterborough
Current |8.2 |1.6 |4.3 |3.0 |10.3
1992-93 prices |8.6 |1.7 |4.5
CAMBSTEC
Current |6.4 |0.7 |3.2 |1.2 |7.1
1992-93 prices |6.7 |0.7 |3.3
Note:1.The percentage difference between current and 1992-93 prices is 4.5 per cent.
|c|Yorkshire and Humberside|c|
TEC £ million budgets Training weeks multiplied by 10,
|Total |Employment|Youth |Employment|Youth
|training |training |training |training
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leeds
Current |22.5 |5.5 |10.6 |12.1 |17.5
1992-93 prices |23.5 |5.7 |11.1
North Yorkshire
Current |17.0 |3.5 |5.1 |7.1 |13.8
1992-93 prices |17.8 |3.7 |5.3
Bradford
Current |18.7 |4.7 |6.9 |8.4 |10.9
1992-93 prices |19.5 |4.9 |7.2
Calderdale/Kirklees
Current |20.6 |5.5 |9.8 |9.3 |18.0
1992-93 prices |21.5 |5.7 |10.2
Wakefield
Current |12.2 |3.2 |6.0 |5.6 |9.6
1992-93 prices |12.7 |3.3 |6.3
Barnsley and Doncaster
Current |25.7 |7.5 |14.1 |13.0 |23.8
1992-93 prices |26.9 |7.8 |14.7
Sheffield
Current |24.2 |6.8 |12.6 |11.4 |18.2
1992-93 prices |25.3 |7.1 |13.2
Rotherham
Current |12.1 |3.3 |6.0 |5.8 |9.9
1992-93 prices |12.6 |3.4 |6.3
Humberside
Current |37.5 |10.6 |18.5 |18.3 |37.0
1992-93 prices |39.2 |11.1 |19.3
Note: The percentage difference between current and 1992-93 prices is 4.5 per cent.
|c|North west|c| -------------------------------------------------------- Bolton and Bury Current |12.9|2.5 |6.6 |4.3 |13.6 1992-93 prices |13.5|2.6 |6.9 CEWTEC Current |21.0|7.4 |10.4|13.7|18.5 1992-93 prices |21.9|7.7 |10.9 Cumbria Current |17.3|3.4 |10.3|6.8 |21.8 1992-93 prices |18.1|3.6 |10.8 ELTEC Current |17.3|3.5 |8.6 |6.4 |17.6 1992-93 prices |18.1|3.7 |9.0 LAWTEC Current |26.3|6.1 |12.9|10.8|26.4 1992-93 prices |27.5|6.4 |13.5 Manchester Current |38.5|9.9 |16.9|15.9|35.6 1992-93 prices |40.2|10.3|17.7 METROTEC Current |10.5|2.4 |5.1 |4.3 |10.1 1992-93 prices |11.0|2.5 |5.3 Oldham Current |8.6 |1.6 |4.7 |2.9 |9.8 1992-93 prices |9.0 |1.7 |4.9 QUALITEC Current |9.3 |2.3 |5.5 |3.9 |9.8 1992-93 prices |9.7 |2.4 |5.7 Rochdale Current |6.5 |2.1 |2.9 |4.1 |6.1 1992-93 prices |6.8 |2.2 |3.0 South and East Cheshire Current |10.9|1.8 |4.2 |2.5 |7.5 1992-93 prices |11.4|1.9 |4.4 Stockport and High Peak Current |9.7 |1.7 |4.9 |3.1 |10.3 1992-93 prices |10.1|1.8 |5.1 Merseyside (24 June 1991) Current |41.6|12.6|20.8|22.9|36.5 1992-93 prices |43.5|13.2|21.7 NORMID (24 June 1991) Current |11.9|2.3 |7.1 |4.2 |13.6 1992-93 prices |12.4|2.4 |7.4 Notes: 1.The percentage difference between current and 1992-93 prices is 4.5 per cent. 2.Where TECs become operational after 1 April 1991, the dates are shown in brackets.
|c|Northern|c|
£ million budgets Training weeks multiplied by 10,
TEC |Total |Employment|Youth |Employment|Youth
|training |training |training |training
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Teeside
Current |34.6 |11.8 |14.8 |18.3 |16.8
1992-93 prices |36.2 |12.3 |15.5
Tyneside
Current |45.9 |13.5 |20.1 |21.0 |25.9
1992-93 prices |48.0 |14.1 |21.0
Wearside
Current |21.5 |6.6 |9.4 |10.8 |35.8
1992-93 prices |22.5 |6.9 |9.8
County Durham
Current |34.4 |10.6 |15.7 |17.5 |29.4
1992-93 prices |35.9 |11.1 |16.4
Northumberland
Current |15.6 |3.5 |5.1 |5.6 |8.2
1992-93 prices |16.3 |3.7 |5.3
Note:
The percentage difference between current and 1992-93 prices is 4.5 per cent.
Ankylosing Spondylitis
Mr. David Porter : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what study her Department has done into the effects of ankylosing spondylitis on the body of sufferers to both work and availability for work as far as unemployment benefits are concerned ; and if he will make a statement.
Column 426
Mr. McLoughlin : The Department has not carried out a study into the effects of ankylosing spondylitis or any other specific illness. The Employment Service can offer specialist advice to any unemployed person with a disability or long-term health problem who needs guidance in obtaining work. In providing advice, the Employment Service's general
Column 427
approach is to treat each person as an individual and not to be unnecessarily restrictive. We believe that people with disabilities should be considered fit for work across the full range of occupations unless there are very clear reasons otherwise. If the needs of the individual make it necessary, the ES can provide practical help and has access to other specialists who can assist with particular problems which might arise from specific disabilities.Physical or mental disability may force some unemployed people to impose restrictions on the work they can accept. If these restrictions are reasonable in the circumstances, and provided the person is available to do some work on each day that benefit is paid, the rules state that benefit is allowed.
New Jobs
Mr. David Porter : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what estimates her Department makes of the numbers of people in work in Suffolk and Norfolk in jobs which had not been created 10 years ago ; and if she will make a statement.
Mr. McLoughlin : No records are kept of jobs created ; only estimates of the net changes in the numbers of employees in employment are made. The earliest and most recent figures for employees in employment by county are from the censuses of employment for September 1981 and September 1989. Between the two census dates the numbers of employees increased by 41,400 in Suffolk and by 30,500 in Norfolk.
Labour Statistics
Mr. Milburn : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment (1) if she will indicate for each training and enterprise council--TEC--area the number of people unemployed in (a) April 1991 and (b) April 1992, indicating the percentage difference ;
(2) if she will indicate for each TEC area the number of people classified as long-term unemployed in April 1991 and April 1992 (a) as a total and (b) as a percentage of the total number unemployed, indicating the percentage difference in both cases ;
(3) if she will indicate for each TEC area the number of young people unemployed in April 1991 and April 1992 (a) as a total and (b) as a percentage of the total number unemployed, indicating the percentage difference in both cases.
Mr. Michael Forsyth : The information requested can be obtained from the NOMIS database in the Library.
Careers Service
Mr. Byers : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment what plans she has to change the legal basis of the careers service.
Mr. McLoughlin : Legislation to open up a range of options for management of careers services is to be included in the Employment Bill announced in the Queen's Speech on 6 May 1992. The legislation will implement changes proposed in chapter 7 of volume 1 of the Government's White Paper "Education and Training for the 21st Century", Cm 1536, published in May 1991.
Column 428
Market Testing
Mr. Terry Davis : To ask the Secretary of State for Employment who has been appointed as a consultant to her Department for market testing.
Mr. Michael Forsyth : The Department has not appointed any one individual or company as a consultant for market testing. However, several companies have provided consultancy advice on market testing. They are Coopers and Lybrand Deloitte, Ernst and Young, KPMG, Symmonds and PA Consultants.
SOCIAL SECURITY
Disability Living Allowance
Mr. Sproat : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) pursuant to his answer of 17 June, Official Report, column 591, about hearing appeals on disability living allowances, what is the maximum time he regards as acceptable to hear an appeal ; (2) how many people have been waiting to have their appeals on disability living allowance heard for (a) less than one month, (b) between one and three months, (c) between three and six months and (d) over six months.
Mr. Scott : Clearance times for appeals is a matter for the chief executive of the Benefits Agency, under its framework document, and the president of the Independent Tribunal Service.
Provisional target clearance times set by the Benefits Agency allow for 80 per cent. of appeals against a disability living allowance to be cleared within 30 working days, and 95 per cent. within 45 working days. This time relates to the preparation of the appeal and its submission to the Independent Tribunal Service. Information about clerance times within the Independent Tribunal Service may be obtained from the office of the president, His Honour Judge Holden. No appeals against disability living allowance decisions have been received by the Independent Tribunal Service.
Pension Law
Mr. Pawsey : To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security whether he is now in a position to announce the members of the Pension Law Review Committee.
Mr. Lilley : On 8 June, Official Report, columns, 19-21, I announced the establishment of a committee to review the framework of law and regulation within which occupational pension schemes operate, which is to be chaired by Professor Roy Goode QC.
I am very pleased that the individuals listed have agreed to serve as members of the Pension Law Review Committee. Between them they possess an enormous range and depth of knowledge about occupational pensions and the wider social and economic context, and each of them will help to ensure that the committee's final report is complete and authoritative.
The members are :
Tony Atkinson--Professor of Economics, London School of Economics David Berridge--Chief Executive, Scottish Equitable Life Assurance Harvie Brown-- Actuary and Principal, William M. Mercer Fraser Ltd.
Column 429
Bryan Hines--formerly General Manager, Insurance and Investments, ICI plcStewart James--Partner, Rowe and Maw
Terence Libby--Chairman and Chief Executive, Morrisflex Ltd. Alastair Ross- Goobey--Chief Investment Strategist, James Capel Patricia Triggs--Partner, KPMG Peat Marwick McLintock
Sue Ward--Freelance journalist and researcher on pensions issues. I understand from Professor Goode that the committee will invite evidence to be submitted on the basis of a consultation paper which it will produce as soon as possible. I will ask Professor Goode to ensure that the availability of the consultation paper is made widely known when it is published.
| Next Section
| Home Page |