---

Deregulation

Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list the rules and regulations he proposes to repeal or amend by means of a reference to the Deregulation Committee before the end of 1996; and if he will make a statement. [3779]

Mr. Ancram [holding answer 12 November 1996]: My right hon. and learned Friend will not be submitting any rules or regulations to the Deregulation Committee.

In its deliberation of the 1994 Deregulation and Contracting Out Bill, Parliament decided that the general order-making power which enables Ministers to amend primary legislation by subordinate order for deregulatory purposes would not extend to Northern Ireland.

Any deregulatory measures introduced in Great Britain by means of reference to the Deregulation Committee will, where appropriate, be replicated in Northern Ireland by the Order in Council procedure.

AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FOOD

Feline Spongiform Encephalopathy

Mr. Martyn Jones: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action he is taking to (a) encourage the reporting and (b) collate statistics on the incidence of feline spongiform encephalopathy, indicating the dates for each action taken; and if he will make a statement. [435]

Mrs. Browning: Since November 1994, the diagnosis of any transmissible spongiform encephalopathy in the laboratory, other than those produced by experimental means in the course of research, has been officially notifiable. A free post mortem examination for FSE to encourage the reporting of FSE cases by veterinary practitioners has been available through the veterinary investigation service of MAFF since May 1990.

Statistics have been collated by the Government since 1990, when the first case of FSE was confirmed. FSE statistics were provided for the hon. Member on 11 November 1996, Official Report, columns 73-74.

Peanut Warnings

Mr. Martyn Jones: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) what obligations (a) companies, (b) organisations and (c) individuals providing catering facilities have to warn customers who may be allergic to

13 Nov 1996 : Column: 260

peanuts of their presence in food that they provide; and if he will make a statement; [3234]

(2) what obligations manufacturers of food products containing peanuts have, in addition to listing the products' ingredients, with regard to warning sufferers from peanut-related allergic reactions of the presence of peanuts; and if he will make a statement. [3233]

Mrs. Browning: All food offered for sale must meet the food safety requirements of the Food Safety Act 1990. There is no specific rule requiring caterers to indicate the presence of peanuts in their foodstuffs. However, many establishments are now aware that some consumers suffer reactions to peanuts and indicate their presence, or absence, in the food that they sell. This is either by a motif or by using the word peanut in the name of the food. Manufacturers of prepacked food have taken similar steps on product labels. There is a legal obligation that such information should not mislead the purchaser.

Smallholdings

Mr. Martyn Jones: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what assistance his Department gives to encourage smallholdings. [3452]

Mr. Boswell: The Ministry's policies and support for agricultural businesses apply both to smallholdings and to larger businesses. In carrying out our various programmes to improve the economic performance of the agriculture industry, full account is taken of the needs of small businesses. Small businesses also benefit from the Ministry's implementation of the Government's deregulation policies.

Fisheries Agreements (West Africa)

Mr. Steen: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, pursuant to his answer of 28 October, Official Report, column 52, what has been the United Kingdom's contribution to the fisheries agreements with the west African countries. [3822]

Mr. Baldry: The annual cost to the Community budget of the EC fisheries agreements with west African countries is estimated to be 212 million ecu or £166 million. The UK's contribution will be around 15 per cent.

Argentine Beef Imports

Mr. Steen: To ask the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on trends in the levels of imports into the United Kingdom of Argentine beef since 1993; what checks are made at ports of entry for the presence of steroids in such beef; and if he will make a statement. [3787]

Mr. Baldry: Overseas trade statistics for imports of beef from Argentina into the United Kingdom are as follows:

1993: 14,285
1994: ¹ 14,917
1995: ¹ 28,289
1996 to July: ¹ 14,634.
All data are in tonnes.
¹ Provisional data.

13 Nov 1996 : Column: 261

All third countries intending to export animal products to the EU are required to submit plans for residue surveillance for approval by the EU standing veterinary committee. They are also required to submit their results to the Commission as evidence that the surveillance plans are being carried out. Such imports are checked upon entry to verify compliance with animal and public health conditions of import, including conditions relating to steroids. All imports undergo a documentary check. In addition, a percentage are subject to additional identity and physical checks, including checks for prohibited hormones.

SOCIAL SECURITY

Benefits

Sir Ralph Howell: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security what would be the estimated reduction in expenditure on (a) social security benefits, (b) welfare benefits and (c) free school meals for social security benefits recipients if all those aged 18 to 65 years, who were able to work, earned (A) £120, (B) £140 and (C) £160 per week gross of tax and national insurance contributions and 16 and 17-year-olds earned (i) £60, (ii) £70 and (iii) £80 per week gross. [2002]

Mr. Roger Evans: The information is set out in the tables.

Table 1 shows the net benefit savings if all the claimant unemployed earned the levels stated.

Table 2 shows the additional net benefit savings if those currently in work with earnings below the levels stated were to earn the stated value, and work 30 hours or more a week. All figures must be regarded as broad estimates of the potential benefit savings.

Table 1: Net benefit savings if the unemployed claimant earned £120, £140 or £160 per week

		Earnings
	£120	£140	£160
Net benefit savings	£6,900 million	£7,300 million	£7,600 million

1 Estimates are based on 2.1 million unemployed, at 1996-97 prices.

2. Estimates are rounded to the nearest £100 million.

3. All claimants unemployed are assumed to work 30 hours or more a week.

4. All partners of claimants unemployed who are identified as in work and earning below the level stated are assumed to work for 30 hours a week at the new level of earnings.

5. Net benefit savings include the value of free school meals.

6. Estimates exclude expenditure implications for welfare benefits.

7. Sixteen and 17-year-olds are deemed to earn £60, £70 or £80 per week in place of £120, £140 and £160 respectively.

8. Estimates are based on figures from the 1996 departmental report, the 1995 Quarterly Statistical Enquiry and the 1994 Family Resources Survey uprated to 1996-97 prices.

13 Nov 1996 : Column: 262

Table 2: Net benefit savings if those currently in work earning less than the value earned £120, £140 or £160 per week

		Earnings
	£120	£140	£160
Net benefit savings	£1,000 million	£1,300 million	£1,600 million

1. Estimates are set at 1996-97 prices.

2. Estimates are rounded to the nearest £100 million.

3. All those affected are assumed to work at least 30 hours a week.

4. Net benefit savings include the value of free school meals.

5. Estimates exclude expenditure implications for welfare benefits.

6. Sixteen and 17-year-olds are deemed to earn £60, £70 or £80 per week in place of £120, £140 and £160 respectively.

7. Estimates are based on the 1995 Quarterly Statistical Enquiry and the 1994-95 Family Resources Survey uprated to 1996-97 prices.

Child Support Agency

Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will list the date on which the Child Support Agency received an application from the parent with care in case 1017680981 for a compensatory award and the date on which he expects that case to be referred to the special payments branch; and if he will make a statement. [2972]

Mr. Andrew Mitchell: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Miss Ann Chant. She will write to the hon. Member.

Letter from Miss Ann Chant to Mr. David Lidington, dated 12 November 1996:

I am replying to your Parliamentary Question to the Secretary of State for Social Security about the Child Support Agency case reference 1017680981.
An application for compensation was received on 5 January 1996. In this case, the Agency could not consider the application until a full maintenance assessment had been calculated. A full assessment was calculated on 29 May 1996, and since then every effort has been made by the Agency to secure regular maintenance for the parent with care, culminating in the imposition of a deduction from earnings order on 1 October 1996.
The claim for compensation was passed to the Agency's Special Payments Branch on 1 November 1996. Based on the information then available, it was decided that a compensation payment was not appropriate. However, further information has since come to light and it has now been accepted that compensation can be paid. A revised decision has been issued and a compensation payment of £1,651.73 paid.
I hope this is helpful.

---