| Previous Section | Home Page |
Column 340
reliability criteria--sample of at least 50 and a standard error no higher than 5 per cent.
All employees<1> April 1993
|Ave hours per week |Ave hours overtime
|Average earnings (£)|Median earnings (£) |including overtime |per week
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Divisions 0-9 (all employees)
male |296.2 |265.5 |41.3 |3.5
female |165.9 |142.6 |30.9 |0.8
all |233.8 |203.6 |36.5 |2.2
Division 5 (Construction)
male |255.8 |236.9 |45.6 |6.9
all |245.6 |233.7 |44.4 |6.5
Division 6 (Distribution, hotels and catering; repairs)
male |228.1 |207.4 |41.3 |2.2
all |161.9 |138.7 |34.5 |1.3
Division 9 (Other services)
female |189.5 |181.9 |29.3 |0.6
all |225.5 |199.1 |21.2 |1.0
<1> All employees on adult rates, whose pay was unaffected by absence.
Column 339
Barlinnie Special Unit
Sir Nicholas Fairbairn: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when the special unit at Barlinnie was set up; what is its cost to date; and how many convicts have been referred to date.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: The subject of the question relates to matters undertaken by the Scottish Prison Service. I have asked its chief executive, Mr. E.W. Frizzell, to arrange for a reply to be given.
Letter from E.W. Frizzell to Sir Nicholas Fairbairn, dated 20 October 1994:
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton has asked me to reply to your Question about the Barlinnie Special Unit. You asked when the Unit was set up; what is its cost to date; and how many convicts have been referred to date.
The Barlinnie Special Unit was opened on 5 February 1973 and, to date, 36 prisoners have been located there.
Until recently all the Unit's costs were incorporated with those of Barlinnie Prison and cannot be identified separately, and even now, some cost, for example on repairs, food and medical services, are not differentiated from the main prison. However,you may be interested to know that the Unit's staffing costs, which represent the largest part of the costs of any penal establishment in the last 3 years were £303,000 in 1991 92, £331,000 in 1992 93 and £383,000 in 1993 94.
Public Information
Mrs. Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how much has been spent by his Department in each of the last three years to (a) produce public information in alternative formats for visually impaired people and (b) publicise the availability of accessible information amongst visually impaired people.
Mr. Lang: My Department has spent a total of £26,000 in the last three years in the production of public information material in Braille and on audio tape. Details of the availability of this material are publicised through the Scottish Braille Press at no cost to my Department.
Mrs. Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will indicate which departmental publications are
Column 340
currently available (a) in Braille, (b) in large print and (c) on tape; and if he will indicate what efforts have been made by his Department to inform visually impaired people about the availability of publications in alternative formats to normal print.Mr. Lang: The following Scottish Office publications are currently available both in Braille and tape:
The Patient's Charter in Scotland
The Parent's Charter in Scotland
The Justice Charter for Scotland
The Tenant's Charter in Scotland
Council Tax -- A Guide to the New Tax for Local Government in Scotland
"A Parents' Guide to Special Educational Needs" is also available in Braille.
Details of this material are publicised by the Scottish Braille Press, in liaison with the Scottish Office, through information releases to individual users and related organisations.
Sheep
Mrs. Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will set out the numbers and causes of death of sheep in Scotland (a) at the latest available date, (b) 10 years ago and (c) 20 years ago; and if he will make a statement.
Sir Hector Monro: Information in the form requested is not held centrally.
Waste Management
Mr. Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received on the appropriateness of the Waste Management Licensing (Fees and Charges) Regulations in respect of small local disposal regimes in remoter rural areas; and if he will make a statement.
Sir Hector Monro: Since the consultation paper on fees and charges for waste management licensing was published in August 1992 representations have been received from 11 individuals and organisations about fees
Column 341
and charges for small rural landfill sites. I also met the hon. Member for Roxburgh and Berwickshire (Mr. Kirkwood) in July last year in connection with such sites in Berwickshire.In setting fees and charges for licences the Government fixed a concessionary subsistence charge level of £650 per annum for the smallest sites which take inert waste.
Mountain Rescue
Mr. Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if his Department has received a report from the Mountain Rescue Committee of Scotland in respect of the project funded by his Department earlier this year; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Hector Monro: Yes. The report was released on 6 May at the mountain safety seminar in Dunblane, which I addressed. Its findings are being studied carefully by all parties involved with mountain safety, including the Scottish Mountain Safety Group. The proceedings of the Dunblane seminar will be published within the next month or so.
In light of the issues raised in the report and discussed at the seminar, a number of initiatives have been undertaken, including the installation of information and warning signs at the start of routes and the development of a new training course on navigational skills. Consideration is also being given to the introduction of warning posts at particularly dangerous areas on certain routes, to the potential benefits of electronic aids and to possible areas for further research.
Health Care
Mr. Morgan: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list those areas which have developed joint commissioning operations for the planning and purchasing of primary and secondary health care in their area; and what are the principal organisational models used.
Lord James Douglas-Hamilton: In Scotland, health boards are, and always have been, responsible for both primary -- family health services -- and secondary -- hospital and community health services. In their new, enhanced role as purchasers of health services they have retained responsibility for commissioning both types of service. There has therefore been no need to develop joint commissioning operations as in England.
Gourock Ropeworks
Dr. Godman: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what recent discussions he had held with Historic Scotland and the Renfrewshire Enterprise Company concerning the Gourock ropeworks of Port Glasgow; and if he will make a statement.
Sir Hector Monro [holding answer 18 October 1994]: Historic Scotland is an executive agency with the Scottish Office and reports to my right hon. Friend on built heritage matters. Historic Scotland has remained in close touch with Inverclyde district council, the relevant planning authority, since the company which owned the Gourock ropeworks building went into receivership earlier this year. Historic Scotland has therefore been aware of the interest by a housing company in converting the listed building to residential use.
Column 342
Mr right hon. Friend has not had any recent discussions with Renfrewshire Enterprise on the future of the ropeworks building. However, Renfrewshire Enterprise has an interest in the future of the building because of its prominent location within the enterprise zone. Renfrewshire Enterprise is providing funds to the housing company for a feasibility study.I understand that the study has been completed and the conclusions are that, while the building is suited for conversion and redevelopment for residential accommodation, and such a scheme would be practical and a worthwhile re-use of this important category A listed building, a substantial funding gap remains. It will be for each of the agencies involved to consider whether it would be appropriate for them to make a contribution.
I understand that Inverclyde district council officials are to arrange a meeting of all concerned.
Historic Buildings
Dr. Godman: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) how many buildings listed as of historical importance were cleared of such listing and demolished in each of the past 10 years in (a) Inverclyde, (b) Strathclyde and (c) Scotland as a whole; and if he will make a statement;
(2) how many buildings of historical importance were renovated and at what cost in each of the past five years in (a) Inverclyde, (b) Strathclyde and (c) Scotland as a whole; how many of these were industrial buildings; and if he will make a statement;
(3) how many buildings listed as being of special architectural or historical importance are located in (a) Inverclyde, (b) Strathclyde and (c) Scotland as a whole; how many of these have been or are the subject of grant aid from Historic Scotland; and if he will make a statement.
Sir Hector Monro [holding answer 18 October 1994]: The subjects of the questions relate to matters undertaken by Historic Scotland. I have asked its director and chief executive, Mr Graeme Munro, to write to the hon. Member.
The reply will appear in the Official Report and a copy will be deposited in the Library of the House.
Letter from Graeme N. Munro to Dr. Norman Godman, dated 20 October 1994
You have tabled four Parliamentary Questions to the Secretary of State for Scotland for written answer on 18 October. Three of your Questions relate to operational matters undertaken by Historic Scotland and I have been asked to provide the information you are seeking. The terms of this letter will be reproduced in the Official Report and a copy of it will also be deposited in the Library of the House.
I shall answer each Question in the order in which it appears on the Order paper.
Question: How many buildings listed as of historical importance were cleared of such listing and demolished in each of the past 10 years in (a) Inverclyde, (b) Strathclyde and (c) Scotland as a whole?
The decision by the Secretary of State to list a building is a recognition by him that the building satisfies the criteria for listing as being of special architectural or historic interest. A building does not lose the architectural or historic qualities which justified listing in the first place because someone wishes to alter or demolish it. Once a building is listed, formal consideration of works affecting its character, including demolition, is subject to listed building control
Column 343
requirements established by the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1972. Government policy on the demolition of listed buildings makes plain the practical considerations involved for a planning authority (and the Secretary of State) in assessing the case made by an applicant for the demolition of a listed building. Planning authorities are required to notify to Historic Scotland, prior to the issue of consent, all non-delegated listed building and conservation area consent applications which they have resolved to approve, including all demolitions of listed buildings and of unlisted buildings within conservation areas. However, information is not readily available in the form in which you have requested it. AnnexColumn 344
A shows--for Scotland, for Strathclyde and for Inverclyde--the annual totals of all categories of notified applications.What the annual figures do not reveal is what happened to the notified applications. Historic Scotland aims to clear 95 per cent. of all notified applications within the statutory initial 28 day period for consideration. Of the remaining 5 per cent. extended for further consideration, most are cleared through negotiation and agreement. Only a small number of cases each year are called in for the Secretary of State's own decision, and of these a number over the 10 year period have been in respect of demolition. The number of cases called in for decision over the period was:
1984 |1985|1986|1987|1988|1989|1990|1991|1992|1993 ------------------------------------------------------- 3 |3 |5 |1 |4 |10 |6 |8 |8 |5
Column 343
of which the number of demolition applications granted consent were:Column 344
1984 |1985|1986|1987|1988|1989|1990|1991|1992|1993 ------------------------------------------------------- 2 |- |- |- |- |3 |1 |1 |1 |1
Column 343
In that period no demolition applications in Inverclyde District were called in for the Secretary of State's decision. However, it is more than likely that of the 140 notified cases in Inverclyde some were for demolition.Deletions from statutory lists do occur as part of the maintenance of the lists. Deletions are required for a number of reasons, for example, fire, loss of original character for whatever reason, and demolition for public safety reasons.
Over the last 5 years, 3 deletions were required from the Inverclyde District list, 53 from the Strathclyde lists and 172 across Scotland.
Question: How many buildings of historical importance were renovated and at what cost in each of the past five years in (a) Inverclyde, (b) Strathclyde and (c) Scotland as a whole; how many of these were industrial buildings?
Question: How many buildings listed as being of special architectural or historical importance are located in (a) Inverclyde,
Column 344
(b) Strathclyde and (c) as a whole; how many of these have been or are the subject of grant aid from Historic Scotland? Again, we cannot answer these Questions precisely as asked but there are currently a total of 236 buildings in Inverclyde listed as being of special architectural or historic interest, 7,610 in Strathclyde and 40,654 in Scotland as a whole. We do not record particular types of listed buildings.Annex B shows for each of the last five financial years the number of buildings of outstanding architectural or historic interest (or buildings in outstanding conservation areas) which have received grant for repairs under the historic buildings repair grant scheme administered by Historic Scotland. The Annex provides this information for Inverclyde, Strathclyde and Scotland; it shows the value of the grants awarded and the number of buildings which can be categorised as industrial.
I hope this information is helpful.
Listed Building Consent Statistics 1984-1993-Annex A
|1984 |1985 |1986 |1987 |1988 |1989 |1990 |1991 |1992 |1993 |Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inverclyde |10 |12 |20 |15 |21 |11 |17 |11 |8 |15 |140
Strathclyde |560 |621 |433 |456 |494 |586 |636 |627 |640 |572 |5,625
Scotland |1,724 |1,925 |1,800 |2,022 |1,782 |1,943 |1,989 |1,995 |2,092 |2,189 |19,461
Annex B
|Inverclyde |Strathclyde|Scotland
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1989-90
Number of buildings which have been the subject of grant |2 |37 |165
Value of grants awarded |£10,000 |£2,719,550 |£8,800,482
Number of the buildings that were industrial buildings |NIL |1 |2
1990-91
Number of buildings which have been the subject of grant |NIL |55 |165
Value of grants awarded |NIL |£4,451,900 |£11,349,704
Number of the buildings that were industrial buildings |NIL |1 |4
1991-92
Number of buildings which have been the subject of grant |NIL |38 |149
Value of grants awarded |NIL |£4,440,734 |£12,308,216
Number of the buildings that were industrial buildings |NIL |NIL |6
1992-93
Number of buildings which have been the subject of grant |1 |46 |158
Value of grants awarded |£39,100 |£3,142,127 |£9,825,848
Number of the buildings that were industrial buildings |NIL |NIL |2
1993-94
Number of buildings which have been the subject of grant |4 |61 |202
Value of grants awarded |£399,100 |£6,587,564 |£14,613,653
Number of the buildings that were industrial buildings |NIL |2 |5
Column 345
DEFENCE
Equal Treatment Directive
Mr. Martlew: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps (a) he has taken and (b) he intends to take to ensure that the armed forces comply with the equal treatment directive; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Soames: The armed forces are aware of the provisions of the equal treatment directive and are continuing to develop policies accordingly. It is the Government's intention to amend the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 in relation to its application to the armed forces as soon as a legislative opportunity arises.
Public Information
Mrs. Ewing: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how much has been spent by his Department in each of the last three years to (a) produce public information in alternative formats for visually impaired people and (b) publicise the availability of accessible information among visually impaired people;
(2) if he will indicate which departmental publications are currently available (a) in Braille, (b) in large print and (c) on tape; and if he will indicate what efforts have been made by his department to inform visually impaired people about the availability of publications in alternative formats to normal print.
Mr. Soames: While my Department's publications are not normally provided in alternative formats for visually impaired people, we would be happy to arrange for this on individual request. The overall cost to my Department is therefore low and could not be identified separately.
Queen Victoria School
Dr. Marek: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many pupils attended the Queen Victoria school, Dunblane, in the summer term; and if he will give details of the ranks held by the parents serving in HM forces.
Mr. Soames: These matters are for the Queen Victoria school under its framework document. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Brian Raine to Dr John Marek, dated 20 October 1994: I have been asked to reply to your Question about the number of pupils attending Queen Victoria School in the Summer Term 1994 and Ranks held by parents serving in HM Forces.
Column 346
The number of pupils who attended Queen Victoria School in the Summer Term 1994 was 250.The parents of pupils are drawn from all three Services and the ranks held by them range from Private soldier to Major (or other Service equivalents). The majority of parents who are still serving, fall in the rank of Sergeant to Warrant Officer which are the ranks that regular servicemen or women would expect to achieve with children of an age eligible to attend the School. Children of Officers have only this year become eligible to attend the School in line with the practice at the Duke of York's Royal Military School, Dover.
I hope this answers your question satisfactorily but if there is anything on which you wish me to elaborate please do not hesitate to contact me.
Party Conferences
Mr. Tony Banks: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what were the costs to his Department arising from the annual conference of (a) the Liberal Democrats, (b) the Labour party and (c) the Conservative party.
Mr. Soames: In response to requests from the respective regional police authorities for each conference a small number of specialist military personnel were deployed to assist the police in searching the conference areas for explosive devices and on standby for potential bomb disposal tasks. No readily identifiable additional costs to the defence budget arose from these operations.
In addition, staff from private offices visited Bournemouth in order to deal with departmental work. Travel, subsistence and communication costs were incurred on defence votes.
Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woolwich
Mr. Austin-Walker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) whether the Queen Elizabeth military hospital, Woolwich will be transferred or sold to Greenwich Healthcare Trust for national health service use;
(2) what offers he has received for the purchase of the Queen Elizabeth military hospital, Woolwich.
Mr. Soames: To date, my Department has received one offer for the purchase of Queen Elizabeth military hospital, from the Greenwich Healthcare Trust. As I said in my answer to the hon. Member for Greenwich (Mr. Raynsford) on 19 October, Official Report, column 252, negotiations with the Greenwich Healthcare trust have been progressing well although a number of stages remain to be completed before any contract could be signed. In the meantime, however, we have received an expression of interest from a private consortium. Should this result in a formal offer, we would consider it.
Column 345
|
| Home Page |