|Previous Section||Home Page|
Column 433The Potato Marketing Scheme (Amendment) Order 1994 (SI 1994/2404)
The Dairy Produce Quotas (Amendment) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2448)
The Milk Marketing Board Scheme of Reorganisation (Third Party Rights) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2460)
The Bovine Offal (Prohibition) (Amendment) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2628)
The Spongiform Encephalopathy (Miscellaneous Amendments) Order 1994 (SI 1994/2627)
The Apple Orchard Grubbing Up (Amendment) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2731)
The Sheep Annual Premium Scheme (Amendment) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2741)
The Hill Livestock (Compensatory Allowances) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2740)
The Bucellosis (England and Wales) (Amendment) (No.2) Order 1994 (SI 1994/2762)
The Milk Marketing Board (Residuary Functions) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2759)
The Beef Carcase (Classification)(Amendment) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2853)
The Medicines (Standard Provisions for Manufacturer's Licences for Veterinary Medicinal Products) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2852) The Sheep Annual Premium and Suckler Cow Premium Quotas (Amendment) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2894)
The Importation of Animal Products and Poultry Products (Amendment) Order 1994 (SI 1994/2920)
The Agricultural Marketing Act 1958 Part I (Certification of Cessation of Effect in Relation to Milk) Order 1994 (SI 1994/2922) The Milk Marketing Scheme (Certification of Revocation) Order 1994 (SI 1994/2921)
The Diseases of Animals (Approved Disinfectants)(Amendment) Order 1994 (SI 1994/2965)
The Dairy Produce Quotas (Amendment)(No.2) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2919)
The Farm and Conservation Grant (Amendment) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/3003)
The Farm and Conservation Grant (Variation)(No.2) Scheme 1994 (SI 1994/3002
The Draft Milk Development Council Order 1994
The Medicines (Veterinary Medicinal Products) Veterinary Surgeons from other EEA States) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2986) The Medicines (Restrictions on the Administration of Veterinary Medicinal Products) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/2987)
The Diseases of Poultry Order 1994 (SI 1994/3141)
The Meat Products (Hygiene) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/3082) The Agricultural Processing and Marketing Grant Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/3137)
The Marketing Authorisations for Veterinary Medicinal Products Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/3142)
The Medicines (Veterinary Drugs) (Renewal Applications for Licences and Animal Test Certificates) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/3143)
The Beef Special Premium (Amendment) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/3131)
The Medicines (Veterinary Drugs) (Pharmacy and Merchants' List) (Amendment No. 2) Order 1994 (SI 1994/3169)
The Welfare of Animals During Transport Order 1994 (SI 1994/3249)
The Sole and Nephrops (Prohibition of Fishing) Order 1994 (SI 1994/3273)
The Enzootic Bovine Leukosis (Amendment) Order 1995 (SI 1995/13)
The Fertilisers (Amendment) Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/16) The Beef Special Premium (Amendment) Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/14)
Column 434The Suckler Cow Premium (Amendment) Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/15)
The Bovine Animals (Records, Identification and Movement) Order 1995 (SI 1995/12)
The Pigs (Records, Identification and Movement) Order 1995 (SI 1995/11)
The Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/77)
The Food Protection (Emergency Prohibitions) (Radioactivity in Sheep) (England) (Partial Revocation) Order 1995 (SI 1995/39) The Apple Orchard Grubbing Up (Amendment) Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/40)
The Hill Livestock (Compensatory Allowances) Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/100)
The Surplus Food Regulations 1995 (SI 1995/184)
The Welfare of Animals During Transport (Amendment) Order 1995 (SI 1995/131)
continue to press in Brussels for effective journey limits to be included in the proposed Community measures on the welfare of animals during transport;
maintain our pressure to improve existing Community measures on farm animal welfare, pressing home in particular the case for phasing out the veal crate now that we have got the review of the relevant Community measure brought forward from 1997 to 1995;
continue to work with interested parties to encourage the establishment of welfare-friendly outlets for surplus dairy calves; maintain our extensive programme of research and development and our provision of advice to farmers on welfare matters.
Mr. Alfred Morris: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of whether the chemical weapons convention will enhance international security; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Soames: The chemical weapons convention provides for a comprehensive, global and verifiable ban of a complete class of weapons of mass destruction and also for the destruction of very large quantities of existing chemical warfare agents. Once fully implemented, it will make a significant contribution to international security.
Mr. Denham: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the total wage and salary bill of (a) defence personnel and (b) civilian personnel at his Department's establishments, in each district council area in Hampshire, in 1989 and in the most recent year, expressed in constant prices.
Mr. Denham: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list, for each district council area in Hampshire, the number and percentage of the population represented by (a) defence personnel and (b) civilian
Column 436personnel at his Department's establishments, in (i) 1989 and (ii) the most recent year.
Mr. Soames: Service and civilian personnel numbers are available at local authority area level and the available figures are as set out. Comparable population estimates are not yet available for 1994.
1 July 1989 1 July 1994 |Service |Civilian |Service |Civilian |personnel<1> |personnel<2> |personnel<1> |personnel<2> |Percentage of |Percentage of |Number |population |Number |population |Number |Number ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hampshire |36,715 |2.34 |20,397.5 |1.30 |29,092 |18,473.0 Basingstoke and Deane |0 |0.00 |69.5 |0.05 |0 |39.5 East Hampshire |2,398 |2.32 |799.5 |0.77 |1,316 |666.5 Eastleigh |0 |0.00 |20.0 |0.02 |0 |7.0 Fareham |1,785 |1,80 |279.5 |0.28 |1,511 |328.0 Gosport |6,520 |8.40 |3,978.5 |5.13 |4,141 |3,790.0 Hart |2,491 |3.09 |785.0 |0.98 |2,019 |840.5 Havant |0 |0.00 |17.0 |0.01 |0 |14.0 New Forest |570 |0.35 |142.0 |0.09 |699 |164.5 Portsmouth |9,080 |4,84 |5,851.0 |3.12 |9,016 |4,710.5 Rushmoor |7,142 |8.32 |5,072.5 |5.91 |4,621 |4,236.0 Southampton |53 |0.03 |237.5 |0.12 |13 |161.0 Test Valley |4,291 |4.21 |1,234.0 |1.21 |3,798 |1,578.5 Winchester |2,385 |2.46 |1,911.5 |1.97 |2,095 |1,937.0 <1> UK regular service personnel. The figures for 1 July 1994 provisional. <2> UK based permanent civilian staff counted as full-time equivalents.
Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will ensure that the enforcement provisions contained in the Deregulation and Contracting Out Bill apply to all regulations for which his Department is responsible, past, present and future; and if he will make a statement.
The Injuries in War (Shore Employments) Compensation (Amendment) Scheme 1994.
The International Headquarters and Defence Organisation (Designation and Privileges) (Amendment) Order 1994
The Visiting Forces and International Headquarters (Application of Law) (Amendment) Order 1994.
The Army, Air Force and Naval Discipline Acts Continuation Order.
Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (Application to the Armed Forces etc.) Regulations 1994.
The Defence Evaluation and Research Agency Trading Fund Order 1995.
Mr. Fatchett: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will set out the procedures adopted for the sale of surplus small arms prior to the establishment of the Disposal Sales Agency and list British companies
Column 436involved over the previous five years; and if he will make a statement.
Mr. Freeman: The rules for the sale of small arms, prior to the establishment of the Disposal Sales Agency and continued since, are to restrict surplus sales to the export market. United Kingdom companies seeking to purchase surplus small arms are required to hold a section 5 firearms licence; to provide proof of a secured contract to an acceptable customer with end user certification and to obtain an export licence. Contracts have been let which ensure that other surplus weapons are reduced to scrap.
It is not MOD policy to reveal details of purchasers without their written consent. A list of British companies involved over the previous five years would require disproportionate efforts to produce should all consents be forthcoming.
Mr. Fatchett: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will set out the position adopted for the sale of surplus armoured vehicles and tanks prior to the establishment of the Disposal Sales Agency, and the companies purchasing surplus armoured vehicles and tanks over the last five years; and what items were involved.
Mr. Freeman: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Pembroke on 1 December 1994, Official Report , columns 899 - 900 . The positions adopted prior to and subsequent to the establishment of the Disposal Sales Agency are unchanged.
Dr. David Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what review is being conducted into the strength of the Royal Marines; what is the target level for the future strength of the Royal Marines; and how many redundancies will be required from current levels.
Mr. Soames: A redundancy programme for the Royal Navy, of which the Royal Marines are an integral part, was announced following the "Front Line First" study and other efficiency measures already in train. Included in this are about 100 regular Royal Marines personnel. The strength of the Royal Marines regulars is not otherwise under review, and--apart from those already mentioned--no RM redundancies are planned. There is no target or ceiling for future strength and manpower will continue to be maintained to meet commitments.
My Department is at present reviewing the future requirement for the Royal Marines Reserve, but no decision on its future size and shape have yet been taken. Any proposals which are accepted in principal by Ministers would then be subject to a period of consultation, during which all interested parties would be offered the opportunity to comment.
Mrs. Clwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to his answer of 10 February, Official Report , column 465 , how much it would cost to fit self-destructing and self-neutralising mechanisms retroactively on those anti-personnel mines held by the United Kingdom armed forces for their use in any future conflict.
Mr. Freeman [holding answer 23 February 1995]: Some theoretical work undertaken by the Defence Research Agency has indicated that it may be feasible to fit self-destructing mechanisms to existing Ranger anti-personnel mine stocks, but no detailed engineering study or cost analysis has been undertaken. This will be one of the options which will be assessed when Ranger comes to be replaced.
Mr. Freeman [holding answer 23 February 1995]: Any acquisition of anti-personnel landmines, which would have a self- destructing or self-neutralising mechanism, would be purchased by my Department's procurement executive.
14. Mr. Tyler: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what steps he is taking to ensure comparable investment per capita in the promotion of tourism in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
Mr. Dorrell: Allocations to the national tourist boards reflect the differing circumstances and priorities in each country and are not made on a per capita basis. Direct comparisons are therefore misleading.
Mr. Dorrell: Government support for tourism is channelled through the statutory British Tourist Authority and English tourist board. Through the English tourist board, support is made available to the 11 non- statutory
Column 438regional tourist boards, including the heart of England tourist board and east midlands tourist board.
Mr. Dorrell: The British Tourist Authority promotes Britain as a tourist destination in overseas markets. The Department of National Heritage will be providing £34.5 million in grant in aid to the BTA in the coming financial year.
I shall be making public my agenda for action by Government and the tourist boards to help the tourist industry improve its competitive performance on 1 March.
Mr. Dorrell: The United Kingdom's earnings from domestic and inbound tourism are estimated to have been £33 billion in 1993. This represents 5.2 per cent. of gross domestic product. Figures for England alone are not available.
Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what is the estimated contribution from (a) the single regeneration budget, (b) the total public sector and (c) the private sector to London's tourism over each of the next five years.
Mr. Dorrell: London will benefit from the single regeneration budget by £316 million over the next seven years and an investment of this size will have a substantial effect in attracting visitors to the capital. In November, I announced £4 million of public funds that would be made available for BTA to run a marketing campaign in conjunction with the London tourist board; this will be matched from the private sector. The LTB will also receive £439,000 of public funds from the English tourist board this year. Forecasts of SRB, public and private funding for the next five years are not available.
Mr. Sproat: I have not yet had the pleasure of visiting the Yorkshire sculpture park. I hope to have the opportunity to do so. The Yorkshire sculpture park is, I know, one of our national assets and is of international significance, and I look forward to experiencing its delights.
27. Lady Olga Maitland: To ask the Secretary of State for National Heritage what assessment he has made of the effect of the national lottery on the sums available for good causes from football pools operators.
Mr. Dorrell: No funds from the national lottery have yet been distributed to good causes. The distributing bodies expect to begin making announcements about successful applications shortly with grants being made shortly thereafter.
Mr. Dorrell: The national lottery distributors are able to provide limited revenue support for a lottery funded capital project where that funding cannot be found from any other source. It is necessary to limit the use of revenue funding from lottery proceeds to maintain the principle of additionality and to prevent the silting up of available funds with on- going commitments. The National Lottery Charities Board will not be subject to the presumption in favour of capital expenditure.
Mr. Dorrell: Responsibility for this issue rests with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education. I know that she is aware of particular concerns currently about discretionary grants from local authorities for dance and drama students.