| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Patent Office
Mr. Harvey: To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on staff and union consultation during the process of re-engineering within the Patent Office. [35899]
8 Jul 1996 : Column: 8
Mr. Ian Taylor: Patent Office management regard consultation of the staff concerned as an essential step in winning commitment to specific proposals for re-engineering. Staff are therefore consulted before any proposals are implemented. The Patent Office management is always ready to meet the trade union side to discuss matters of interest or concern under the Whitley procedures.
Mr. Harvey: To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list the areas within the Patent Office that are under consideration for re-engineering indicating the number of staff, time scale and names of the departments involved; and if he will make a statement. [35897]
Mr. Ian Taylor: The Patent Office keeps its structure and organisation under continuing scrutiny for possible improvements to operational efficiency. In particular, it has under review certain "front end" administrative processes which are similar in nature but separately handled in the trade marks directorate and the patents and designs directorate. This exercise is still in its early stages and no detailed time scale or staffing proposals have yet been adopted. About 75 posts are covered. No compulsory redundancies are foreseen.
Public Interest Disclosure Bill
Mr. Touhig: To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many representations his Department has received since 10 April, on the Public Interest Disclosure Bill; how many of these were in favour of the Bill; and how many indicated that the Bill would pose an undue burden on business. [36139]
Mr. John M. Taylor: In the period 10 April to 4 July, my Department received 11 letters on the Public Interest Disclosure Bill. Three of these were general inquiries about the Bill, seven were in support and one expressed concern about the Bill.
Post Office
Mr. Couchman: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what financial and efficiency targets he has set for the Post Office in 1996. [36446]
Mr. Oppenheim: My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, in agreement with the Treasury and in consultation with the Post Office, has set Royal Mail a target to achieve a 20 per cent. return on capital and employed in each of the three years 1996-97 to 1998-99, and has set Parcelforce a target to achieve a return on capital employed of 1.5 per cent. in 1996-97, 3.5 per cent. in 1997-98 and 5.5 per cent. in 1998-99. The profit used when calculating the returns will be struck after interest, excluding interest on past surpluses, but before tax. The capital employed on which returns will be calculated will be the greater of either opening fixed assets or the previous year's closing capital employed. In addition, Post Office Counters Ltd. has been set a target to achieve a 2.5 per cent. return on turnover in each of the three years 1996-97 to 1998-99. The profit used when calculating the return will also be struck after interest, excluding interest on past surpluses, but before tax.
8 Jul 1996 : Column: 9
My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, in agreement with the Treasury and in consultation with the Post Office, has set a real unit cost target for Royal Mail of a cumulative reduction of 6.2 per cent. by 1998-99 over 1995-96.
Insurance
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what representations he has received from people who, having taken out payment protection cover, find their certificate of insurance differs from their letter of acceptance. [35625]
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has to prevent insurance companies from changing conditions of payment protection cover once a letter of acceptance has been signed by both the insurer and the insured. [35626]
Mr. Nelson: None. If an insurer wishes to change the terms of a policy it is incumbent on the insurer to notify the proposed changes to the policyholder. The policyholder can then decide whether to accept the new terms or to seek alternative cover elsewhere.
Factoring Companies
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the President of the Board of Trade (1) what representations he has received about factoring companies capping the limit of the amount of money they collected on behalf of their clients; [35627]
- (2) what representations he has received about factoring companies refusing to collect debts on behalf of their clients. [35628]
Mr. Page: I am not aware of any representations being made about factoring companies capping the limit of the amount of money they collect, or refusing to collect debts, on behalf of their clients.
If, however, the hon. Gentleman is aware of any specific problems being experienced by small businesses, I will be happy to receive full details from him.
Animal Welfare
Mr. Morley: To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will list (a) United Kingdom legislation, (b) EU legislation and (c) international treaties, conventions or other obligations concerning animal welfare for which his Department has responsibility. [34291]
Mr. Lang [holding answer 25 June 1996]: None.
Statutory Instruments
Mr. Steen: To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many statutory instruments his Department introduced in (a) 1994, (b) 1995 and (c) between 1 January 1996 and 1 May 1996 which had the effect of repealing one or more previous statutory instruments without replacing them with a new regulation. [35039]
8 Jul 1996 : Column: 10
Mr. Lang [holing answer 3 July 1996]: This information is not available in the form requested. However, a list of regulations that have been repealed or amended was placed in the Library of the House by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster on 8 May 1996.
Orimulsion
Mr. Ainger: To ask the President of the Board of Trade when he last met Mr. O. J. Williams to discuss the application to burn orimulsion at Pembroke power station; and if he will make a statement. [35525]
Mr. Page [holding answer 4 July 1996]: Neither I nor my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has met Mr. Williams.
Nuclear Energy
Mrs. Beckett: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what is the shortfall between the cost of the liabilities which remain the responsibility of the public sector and the amount of moneys available to Magnox, excluding the proceeds from the sale of the advanced gas-coded reaction and pressurised water reactor nuclear power generation stations; and if he will make a statement on how that shortfall was to be met (a) in May 1995 and (b) at present. [35617]
Mr. Ian Lang [holding answer 4 July 1996]: I refer the right hon. Member to the answer I gave on 22 May 1996, Official Report, column 269. The estimated cost of meeting Magnox Electric's liabilities are given in the company's report and accounts for the year ended 31 March 1996, published on 10 June 1996, as £8.9 billion discounted at 3 per cent. real and £18.2 billion undiscounted. Magnox Electric's liabilities have always been in the public sector and will remain so after the privatisation of British Energy.
EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT
Bereaved Families
Mr. Cann: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what guidance she has issued to employers on ways of helping their staff to make contact with bereaved families. [34659]
Mr. Robin Squire: The Department has not issued guidance to employers on this subject. A sensitive approach to contacts with bereaved families is an aspect of good employment practice. The Health and Safety Executive provides information and advice to bereaved families following fatal accidents at work.
Key Stage 2 Tests
Mr. Blunkett: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment if she will make a statement on changes in the marking methodology for key stage 2 tests in English between 1995 and 1996. [35895]
8 Jul 1996 : Column: 11
Mr. Paice: The School Curriculum and Assessment Authority made a number of improvements this year to the external marking of the national curriculum tests at key stage 2. These included: increased training for markers; at least two checks of each markers' work at least twice; improved mark schemes; confirming the final level boundaries after a sample of actual scripts had been marked; and re-checking papers close to the level boundaries.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |