---

Intellectual Property

Mr. David Stewart: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what is the purpose and scope of the reservation of intellectual property in the Scotland Bill. [60441]

Mr. McLeish: The purpose of the reservation is to ensure the continuation of uniform intellectual property laws across the UK. This will avoid difficulties for owners of intellectual property rights arising from, for example, difference in what can be protected, the extent of the protection and remedies for breach of rights. Indeed, the benefits of harmonisation in this area are becoming increasingly recognised with the ever wider harmonisation of intellectual property rights and related matters across Europe and the rest of the world.

Patents, designs, registered trade marks and copyright are well known examples of intellectual property rights and are reserved. The reservation also embraces all other existing and future analogous rights and matters, such as rights in performances and semi-conductor topographies, moral rights, the law of passing off and trade secrets, and the new database right. Moreover, rights such as those in utility models and matters such as technical measures for the protection of copyright works and information relating to the management of rights, all of which are included in recent draft EC Directives on intellectual property, fall within the scope of the reservation. Furthermore, all matters relating to the Patent Office are reserved, as are current and future ancillary matters.

The existing major legislation on intellectual property, namely the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, the Patents Act 1977, the Trade Marks Act 1994 and the Registered Designs Act 1949, exemplifies but does not limit the range of provisions relating to 'intellectual property' which falls or may in the future fall within the reservation.

There is just one exception from the reservation, that is UK plant breeders' rights within the meaning of the Plant Varieties Act 1997. Agricultural Ministers, that is the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and the Secretaries of State for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, are jointly responsible for UK plant breeders' rights. Devolution in this one area of intellectual property is therefore consistent with the joint responsibility which already exists for plant breeders' rights.

Millennium Compliance

Mr. Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) what assessment he has made of the extent to which the computer systems in (a) his Department, (b) its agencies and (c) other public bodies to which his Department is responsible will be modified and tested in relation to the millennium computer problem by January 1999; and if he will make a statement; [60136]

(2) what is his latest estimate of the total cost of tackling the millennium computer problem including the embedded chip problem in (a) his Department, (b) its agencies and (c) other public bodies for which his Department is responsible, separately identifying expenditure to date and future expenditure; and if he will make a statement. [60134]

17 Nov 1998 : Column: 467

Mr. Dewar: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the President of the Council to the hon. Member for Liverpool, Garston (Maria Eagle) on 21 October 1998, Official Report, column 1109, announcing the results of the most recent quarterly review of Government Departments' and agencies' progress in tackling the Year 2000 date change issue and providing information on progress and costs. Information on progress in the wider public sector in Scotland, including the National Health Service, water authorities, nationalised industries and some non-departmental public bodies, is available on The Scottish Office's Web site. The results of the next quarterly review of progress will be announced shortly to the House and updates to quarterly plans will be placed in the Library of the House and on the Web.

Mr. Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the contingency plans drawn up by (a) his Department, (b) its agencies and (c) other public bodies in relation to problems arising from millennium compliance including the embedded chip problem after 31 December 1999. [60137]

Mr. Dewar: My Department and Agencies recognise the need to review and keep up to date their plans to deal with threats to business community, including the millennium date change. I expect them to have completed a review of key aspects of their operations, and to ensure that appropriate plans are in place, by the end of January 1999.

Planning to ensure the continued delivery of key public services is primarily the responsibility of those who manage these services. The Scottish Office will continue to encourage organisations in the wider public sector in Scotland to ensure that their contingency plans are adequate in the light of the millennium date change issue.

Mr. Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will list the problems which have arisen in (a) his Department, (b) its agencies and (c) other public bodies for which his Department is responsible from millennium compliance; if he will make a statement on progress to date in tackling such problems; and what are the priority areas for remedial work. [60135]

Mr. Dewar: The Scottish Office has been working since 1996 to ensure that the service it provides to the public will not be materially affected by the Year 2000 computer problem. The Department expects that all of its important systems will be tested and proved to be Year 2000 compliant by March 1999. Agencies and other public sector bodies in Scotland including the water authorities, the NHS in Scotland, local authorities, the nationalised industries and certain non-departmental public bodies are responsible for ensuring that their services will not be materially affected by the problem. Their progress is monitored by The Scottish Office. A range of progress reports is published on the Web, including the Web sites maintained by The Scottish Office, the NHS in Scotland and the Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency.

Financial Management

Mr. Gorrie: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) what plans he has to ensure adequate training in

17 Nov 1998 : Column: 468

financial management of those in charge of the financial management of projects receiving Government funding as a condition of grant; [59630]

(2) what plans he has to insist on adequate external auditing and monitoring of projects receiving Government funding as a condition of grant. [59631]

Mr. McLeish: Grant conditions, and monitoring arrangements for different grant schemes operated by The Scottish Office are set taking into account all the circumstances surrounding the individual scheme. The conditions and monitoring arrangements are kept under review.

Where the grant is towards a particular project the conditions normally include a requirement for external validation that the grant has been used for the purpose for which it was provided. Alternatively, in the case of grants to local authorities, the Scottish Office may make arrangements directly with the Accounts Commission for Scotland for the external auditing of councils' grant claims.

In the particular case of grants under the Urban Programme to local authorities, the standard terms and conditions require local authorities to establish effective appraisal, monitoring and financial systems.

These conditions also require the local authority to ensure that the expenditure by third parties receiving funding from the Council is accounted for properly; and that the accounts of third parties are either audited statutorily, or in the case of unincorporated bodies, reported on by a qualified accountant.

The reporting accountants have to report if they are not satisfied: that proper records have been kept; that the accounts are consistent with the records; that they have received all necessary information; and that other information in the annual report is consistent with the financial statements.

Training in financial management is a matter for the bodies concerned.

Mr. Gorrie: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what plans he has to ensure that councils arrange for adequate auditing arrangements and training in financial management when giving grants to projects receiving public funds. [59629]

Mr. McLeish: Local authorities are fully responsible for ensuring that there is clear public accountability where they provide public funds to external bodies. I expect councils to follow the guidance laid out by the Accounts Commission and COSLA in the Code of Guidance on Funding External Bodies and Following the Public Pound. This sets out the procedures for specifying minimum standards of accountancy and audit arrangements in appropriate cases. Where these are found wanting in individual cases, I would expect councils to take firm corrective action.

Mr. Gorrie: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the Government's response to the recent report by Edinburgh City Council into the financial management of publicly funded projects in the city. [59632]

17 Nov 1998 : Column: 469

Mr. McLeish: The City of Edinburgh Council has identified weaknesses in the management of some projects. This is primarily a matter for the Council but the Government place the highest importance on the proper conduct and management of projects and organisations which are publicly funded and discussions are taking place with the Council on the issues raised in its report and the action it should take.

---