---

29 Jan 1997 : Column: 209

Written Answers to Questions

Wednesday 29 January 1997

DEFENCE

Weather Centres

Mr. Hardy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the quality of the measuring equipment at (a) the Leeds, (b) the Nottingham and (c) the Waddington weather centres. [12962]

Mr. Arbuthnot: This is a matter for the chief executive of the Meteorological Office. I have asked the chief executive to write to the hon. Member.

Letter from J. C. R. Hunt to Mr. Peter Hardy, dated 29 January 1997:

I am replying to your Question to the Secretary of State for Defence about the quality of measuring equipment at Meteorological Office weather centres, as this falls within my area of responsibility as Chief Executive of the Meteorological Office.
The observing equipment used at all three sites is SAMOS (Semi Automatic Meteorological Observing System), a system developed within the Meteorological Office.
Prior to acceptance for general operational use this system underwent detailed trials and evaluation to prove its viability as an accurate observing system suitable for replacing manual observations.
The sensors are calibrated in the Meteorological Office Quality Assurance laboratory before installation and as necessary in subsequent use. Leeds and Waddington are manned stations and staff there perform check climate measurements every morning against separate, calibrated sensors.
Nottingham (or more correctly Watnall) is co-located with a Meteorological Office maintenance centre. The duty technician on site checks the wet bulb reservoir and general condition/operation of the equipment, but routine caretaker observations are not carried out. Watnall and Waddington are well exposed sites giving a good representation of the local meteorological conditions. Leeds Weather Centre SAMOS is located on a roof top site within the city and may be subject to local effects particularly in respect of wind and temperature.
All data on receipt at HQ Bracknell go through automatic quality evaluation procedures.
I am confident that the equipment we use gives excellent results whilst making significant savings on the cost of a fully manned operation.
I hope this gives you the information you need.

Guardsmen Fisher and Wright

Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received from Lieutenant General Sir David Scott-Barrett on the subject of guardsmen Fisher and Wright; and when he plans to reply to those representations. [12185]

Mr. Soames: My right hon. Friend has received one representation direct from Lieutenant General Sir David Scott-Barrett. A representation from the hon. Member for Linlithgow is one of a number which have been received on behalf of a group of former Scots Guards, including Lieutenant General Sir David Scott-Barrett. Replies to

29 Jan 1997 : Column: 210

these letters will be sent shortly, but will not address their substance, since that is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

Cadet Force

Mr. Jon Owen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the cost of his proposals to extend the cadet force in schools. [13181]

Mr. Soames: The Government are considering ways of increasing the scope of the cadet forces to allow even more young people the opportunity to enjoy the benefits of membership. Options and the costs associated with them are still under consideration.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Dentists (Prison Sentences)

Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many former dentists (a) have served and (b) are currently serving a prison sentence following conviction for assault arising from extensive and wholly unnecessary treatment. [12473]

Miss Widdecombe: Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

Letter from A. J. Pearson to Mr. Gordon Prentice, dated 29 January 1997:

The Home Secretary has asked me, in the absence of the Director General from the office, to reply to your recent Question asking, how many former dentists (a) have served or (b) are currently serving a prison sentence following conviction for assault arising from extensive and wholly unnecessary treatment.
The information requested is not available centrally.

Prisons (Drugs Testing)

Mr. George Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will list the total number of extra days which will be served in prison due to positive drug tests which have been taken since September 1996; [12383]

(2) if he will list the total number of extra days which will be served in prison due to positive drug tests which were taken before March 1996. [12382]

Miss Widdecombe: Responsibility for these matters has been delegated to the Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

Letter from Richard Tilt to Mr. George Howarth, dated 29 January 1997:

The Home Secretary has asked me to reply to your recent Questions concerning the total number of extra days to be served due to positive drug tests.

29 Jan 1997 : Column: 211

This information is given in the table.
Unsuspended additional days awarded for all drug test offences for the periods requested

Period of adjudication	Number of days	Number of punishments
Before March 1996	37,614	2,977
September-December 1996 (provisional)	56,205	3,738




(1) This table includes the offences of 'unauthorised use of a controlled drug', 'refusing to provide a drug test sample' and 'falsifying a drug test sample'.

(2) The 'unauthorised use of a controlled drug' offence is not exclusively provable by testing, as discovery of the physical act of drug use might also lead to the offence being proven. We are unable to distinguish between those offences discovered by testing and by other means.

(3) The offence of unauthorised use of a controlled drug was introduced in February 1995. Mandatory drug testing began in eight establishments at that time, and was extended to the rest of the estate between September 1995 and March 1996.

(4) Offences are grouped by the date of adjudication rather than the date of testing/discovery.

(5) A survey in 1994 indicated that about 17 per cent. of punishments of additional days are later remitted.

Mr. Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to commission independent research relating to the introduction of mandatory drugs testing in all prisons. [12210]

Miss Widdecombe: Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

Letter from A. J. Pearson to Mr. George Howarth, dated 29 January 1997:

The Home Secretary has asked me, in the absence of the Director General from the office, to reply to your recent Question about plans to commission independent research relating to the introduction of mandatory drug testing in all prisons.

Two separate research projects have already been commissioned. The first project commenced in July 1996 and is being carried out by the University of Oxford Centre for Criminological Research. The study is qualitative in nature and focuses on five establishments and its purpose is to assess the impact of mandatory drug testing on the level and nature of drug misuse in prisons. The final report of this research is expected to be provided to the Prison Service before the end of April
The second project was commissioned in December 1996 and is being carried out by the National Addiction Centre. The study will use data available for all prisons and its purpose is to provide an evaluation of the impact of the mandatory drug testing programme on substance misuse in prison. The time frame for a report has yet to be finally determined.
The final report of this research is expected to be provided to the Prison Service before the end of April 1998.

Mr. Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if she will list (a) the number of prisoners (i) randomly tested for drugs, (ii) tested for drugs on suspicion, (iii) tested for drugs while on risk assessment, (iv) tested for drugs while on frequent testing, (v) tested for drugs on reception and (vi) voluntarily tested for drugs in each month prior to March 1996 and (b) the number of these prisoners who have tested positive for each type of drug for each of the above categories; [12420]

29 Jan 1997 : Column: 212

(2) if he will list the number of multiple drug positives from a single sample for the categories (a) randomly tested for drugs, (b) tested for drugs on suspicion, (c) tested for drugs while on risk assessment, (d) tested for drugs while on frequent testing, (e) tested for drugs on reception and (f) voluntarily tested for drugs since mandatory drug testing began; [12381]

(3) if she will list (a) the number of prisoners (i) randomly tested for drugs, (ii) tested for drugs on suspicion, (iii) tested for drugs while on risk assessment, (iv) tested for drugs while on frequent testing, (v) tested for drugs on reception and (vi) voluntarily tested for drugs in each month since September 1996 in each prison and (b) the number of these prisoners who have tested positive for each type of drug for each of the above categories. [12421]

Miss Widdecombe: I will write to the hon. Member.

---