---

North Sea Conference

Mr. Faber: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to publish the guidance note on implementation of the declaration of the fourth North sea conference in Ebjerg, Denmark, on 8 and 9 June 1995. [35630]

Mr. Robert B. Jones: I am pleased to be publishing the UK guidance note on the ministerial declaration made at the fourth North sea conference today. The guidance note sets out the commitments made at the fourth North sea conference and the actions necessary to implement them. It clearly demonstrates the progress that has already been made in realising those commitments and highlights our determination to continue to work for the protection of the marine environment, both in the North sea and in all the seas and coastal waters surrounding the United Kingdom. Copies of the guidance note will be placed in the Library of the House.

TRANSPORT

Search and Rescue Services

Mr. Allen: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what is the declared maximum transmission range of the S61N; and if he will make a statement; [33611]

(2) what is the declared maximum operation range, without refuelling, of search and rescue helicopters; and if he will make a statement. [33610]

Mr. Norris: I have asked the chief executive of the Coastguard agency to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from C. J. Harris to Mr. Graham Allen, dated 2 July 1996:

The Secretary of State for Transport has asked me to reply to your recent Questions about search and rescue helicopters.
Pending the formal adoption of the criteria proposed by the SAR Helicopter Review Group there is no "declared maximum operating range" of search and rescue helicopters. The range at which helicopters can operate depends on the weather and the nature of the task, as well as on aircraft characteristics. As an example the range at which existing UK SAR helicopters could complete a stretcher recovery of a person from a vessel and return with them to base, in still air would be (in nautical miles):
RAF Sea King: 265
RN Sea King: 240
Coastguard S61: 200
"Maximum transmission range" is an unfamiliar term in the flying world, both civilian and military. It has therefore been assumed that the term means the maximum distance an aircraft can cover between two points, assuming no fuel used on SAR tasks. For the Coastguard SAR S61 the distance is 420 nautical miles.

2 Jul 1996 : Column: 401

Motorway Lane Markings

Mr. Spearing: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what study he has made of the system of motorway lane marking as used in France, designed to secure adequate distance between vehicles at given speeds. [34672]

Mr. Norris: The Transport Research Laboratory has conducted research and has published the results in project report 118 "M1 Chevron Trial--Accident Study" in August 1995, a copy of which has been placed in the Library.

Trains (Luggage Racks)

Mr. Redmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list by region for the last 12 months the cost of the replacing stolen luggage racks from passenger trains; and if he will make a statement. [34986]

Mr. Watts: This information is not held centrally, and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Seat Belts

Ms Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what transport standards apply to the fitting of retrofitted seat belts on school transport; and if he will make a statement. [35443]

Mr. Norris: Retrofitted seat belts can be approved to either European or British standards. Each belt approved to these standards will display an approval mark.

Ms Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has to license seat belt fitters. [35444]

Mr. Norris: There are currently no plans to license seat belt fitters.

2 Jul 1996 : Column: 402

Ms Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what research he has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated on the safety of retrofitted seat belts. [35445]

Mr. Norris: There is a large body of research on seat belts generally but the Department has not commissioned research specifically into the safety of retrofitted seat belts.

Selkent Buses

Mr. Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the progress being made by the operator of the Selkent route franchise of London Transport Buses. [35459]

Mr. Norris: This is a matter for London Transport Buses.

Passenger Rail Subsidies

Mr. Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what approaches for increased subsidy have been made to the Office of Passenger Rail Franchising by each of the private operators providing passenger rail services since the commencement of their franchise agreements; and if he will make a statement. [35449]

Mr. Watts: None.

EU Bus and Coach Directive

Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will place a copy of the fiche d'impact for the EU bus and coach directive in the Library. [34988]

Mr. Norris: The Commission has not yet tabled a proposal for a European bus and coach directive, and consequently no fiche d'impact has yet been issued.

2 Jul 1996 : Column: 401

2 Jul 1996 : Column: 403

SOCIAL SECURITY

Compensation Recovery Unit

Mr. Worthington: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security when he expects to announce his policy response to the fourth report of the Social Security Committee, HC196 of Session 1994-95, on the work of the compensation recovery unit. [33356]

Mr. Roger Evans: The reply by the Government to the fourth report of the Select Committee on compensation recovery was published on 2 October 1995, Cm 2997. A compliance cost assessment of the Select Committee's proposals was also published on 14 February. Consultation exercises on the future of the compensation recovery scheme and on the implications of the compliance cost assessment ended on 13 November 1995 and 29 April 1996 respectively.

The Government will announce their decision in due course.

Benefit Fraud

Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security (1) if he will make a statement on the organisation of the work of the Benefits Agency's internal fraud investigators; [33788]

(2) how many Benefits Agency staff have been (a) disciplined, (b) suspended or (c) dismissed for matters relating to benefit fraud in the period 1 April 1995 to 31 March 1996; [33782]

(3) how many Benefits Agency staff have been prosecuted for matters relating to benefit fraud in the period 1 April 1995 to 31 March 1996; what were the charges laid and their outcome; how much benefit was defrauded in each case; what was the grade and office location of the Benefits Agency of each employee involved; and how many such employees were employed in offices at (a) local, (b) headquarters and (c) other levels. [33783]

Mr. Heald: Internal fraud investigations in the Benefits Agency are the responsibility of area directors and their equivalents, and the personnel services manager for Beenefits Agency central services.

Each director has specially trained investigators who conduct investigations into staff working in the directorate. In addition to full-time permanent investigators, directors have panels of trained investigators, normally employed on other duties, who can be called on to assist in investigations when necessary. Often the panel members will have expertise in a particular area.

The Benefits Agency security branch provides a central support and co-ordinating function for investigators throughout the agency.

Disciplinary and prosecution action is also the responsibility of area directors and their equivalents within the agency. Disciplinary action taken specifically as a result of benefit fraud is not distinguished from that taken for other reasons in central records.

2 Jul 1996 : Column: 404

Details of staff suspended are not recorded as suspension is an interim measure taken by managers pending the conclusion of investigative action.

Information is, however, collated centrally relating to the prosecution and disciplinary action taken as a result of area directors' investigations.

Involvement of staff in benefit fraud is viewed very seriously by the Benefits Agency, and will result in dismissal and prosecution when proven.

The figures in the table relate to disciplinary action taken between 1 April 1995 and 31 March 1996 as a result of area directors' investigations, where the investigation identified benefit-related fraud. This includes cases where members of staff were found to be "living together as husband and wife" with benefit customers, where such action resulted in a fraudulent benefit claim. The figures do not include cases where officers resigned.

	Number
Benefits Agency staff dismissed for involvement in benefit related fraud	10
Staff receiving other penalties for involvement in benefit related fraud	0

Figures are not kept centrally relating specifically to prosecutions arising from benefit fraud.

The cases listed in the list are those prosecutions resulting from area directors' investigations in the Benefits Agency, and which were completed between 1 April 1995 and 31 March 1996, which involved any benefit. This includes misappropriation of instruments of payment, and frauds which involved misuse of the benefits administration system rather than false benefit claims.

Case 1
Charge: Not recorded
Amount defrauded: £2,655.22
Outcome: 10 months-imprisonment
Office location: London Central District
Grade: Local Officer II
Level of employment: Local
Case 2
Charge: False accounting, deception
Amount defrauded: £2,261.61
Outcome: 240 hours community service
Office location: Hackney and Islington District
Grade: Local Officer II
Level of employment: Local
Case 3
Charge: Conspiracy to defraud
Amount defrauded: £153,467.70
Outcome: 18 months imprisonment
Office location: South Downs District
Grade: Local Officer II
Level of employment: Local

2 Jul 1996 : Column: 405

Case 4
Charge: Theft and deception
Amount defrauded: £7,855.75
Outcome: Six months imprisonment
Office location: West Hertfordshire District
Grade: Local Officer II
Level of employment: Local
Case 5
Charge: Conspiracy to defraud
Amount defrauded: £79,803.28
Outcome: Two officers were charged--both were acquitted
Office Location: Newham District
Grade: Local Officer II
Level of employment: Local
Case 6
Charge: Theft
Amount defrauded: £20,495.53
Outcome: BA employee sentenced to three years imprisonment. Seven external accomplices were also charged: three were cautioned, three were sentenced to community service, and one received six months probation.
Office location: Sefton District
Grade: Local Officer II
Level of employment: Local
Case 7
Charge: conspiracy to defraud
Amount defrauded: £9,953.51
Outcome: Charges against officer dropped by CPS. Co-conspirator sentenced to 18 months imprisonment.
Office location: Birmingham Chamberlain District
Grade: Local Officer II
Level of employment: Local
Case 8
Charge: Not recorded
Amount defrauded: £36,348.67
Outcome: Two years imprisonment
Office location: Oxfordshire District
Grade: Local Officer II
Level of employment: Local
Case 9
Charge: Conspiracy to defraud
Amount defrauded: £59,000.00
Outcome: Officer sentenced to two and a half years imprisonment. External accomplice sentenced to one years imprisonment.
Office location: Hackney and Islington District
Grade: Local Officer II
Level of employment: Local
Case 10
Charge: Conspiracy to defraud
Amount defrauded £34,094.50
Outcome: Four months imprisonment
Office location: Palace District
Grade: Local Officer II
Level of employment: Local

2 Jul 1996 : Column: 406

Case 11
Charge: Not recorded
Amount defrauded: £15,901.14
Outcome: Two and a half years imprisonment
Office location: Birkenhead District
Grade: Local Officer II
Level of employment: Local

Mr. Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what amounts were spent by the Government on the detection of benefit fraud in (a) 1993-94 and (b) 1994-95. [34031]

Mr. Heald: In 1993-94, over £70 million was allocated for the detection of benefit fraud. In 1994-95, the allocation increased to over £77 million.

---