| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Millennium Compliance
Mr. Laurence Robertson:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what steps he has taken to ensure that companies are able to ensure the millennium
14 Dec 1998 : Column: 364
compliance of their computers; how much money he has spent on this; what percentage of the money has been given to Taskforce 2000; and if he will make a statement. [62412]
Mrs. Roche
[holding answer 8 December 1998]: The Department has set up Action 2000 to lead the work on behalf of Government in ensuring that businesses take effective measures to make their computer systems compliant with millennium date requirements. DTI has provided Action 2000 with £19.3 million of funding to support the work, of which some £9.0 million has been spent so far. Taskforce 2000 is a separate organisation which has received £0.35 million from the Department.
Mr. Llew Smith:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry for what reasons it is not normal departmental policy to disclose the names of firms participating in competitive tendering for departmental projects. [63493]
Dr. Howells:
The Code of Practice on Access to Government Information is the benchmark by which we make public details of competitive tendering. The Department would not normally make known the names of individual bidders participating in such an exercise. It would be generally considered to prejudice the legitimate commercial interests of such persons. However if we were asked to reveal the names we would consult each of the companies involved and ask whether they were content for their identity to be revealed. If the companies wished their names to remain confidential we could not release this information unless there were an overriding public interest.
Ms Jenny Jones:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what measures are being taken to incorporate arms brokerage within arms trade regulations covering United Kingdom companies. [63434]
Mrs. Roche:
The Government do already impose controls on trafficking and brokering under the United Nations Act 1946 where this is necessary to implement a binding United Nations decision.
Section 3.3 of the White Paper on Strategic Export Controls, which was published on 1 July 1998, contains proposals to extend controls on trafficking and brokering to:
The proposals in Section 3.1 of the White Paper, to extend current controls on weapons of mass destruction, also include trafficking and brokering activity.
Now that the formal consultation process following publication of the White Paper has ended, we are reviewing all the proposals contained in the White Paper in the light of the responses received.
14 Dec 1998 : Column: 365
Mr. Charles Kennedy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the official trading status of Miller Civil Engineering Ltd. [63317]
Dr. Howells
[holding answer 10 December 1998]: The latest accounts delivered by Miller Civil Engineering Limited and made up to 31 December 1997 include the following statement in the Directors' report.
Mr. Gray:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if it his policy that Ireland should retain its Objective I status when the zones for EU aid are re-drawn. [63178]
Mrs. Roche
[holding answer 10 December 1998]: Decisions on EU Objective 1 funding for other member states are not a matter for the UK Government.
Mr. Chope:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many nine digit telephone numbers in the 0800 range have (a) been issued, (b) remain available to be issued and (c) are currently in use; and when the full range is expected to be in use. [63467]
Mrs. Roche:
The 0800 nine-digit range was allocated by BT to itself in the time of its monopoly before 1984. When Oftel took over the administration of the Numbering Scheme from BT in 1994 unused portions ("blocks") of the 0800 nine digit range were recovered from BT and issued as ten digit numbers to other operators. BT has currently allocated over 80 per cent. of the 0800 nine digit capacity. No other operator has 0800 nine digit capacity.
Because of BT's dominance in its holding of 0800 numbers BT was required to stop allocating new nine digit numbers to their customers from July 1997. Since that date BT has been issuing 0800 ten digit numbers out of allocations made to them by Oftel. The remaining unused 0800 nine digit numbers cannot be made available to other operators under current arrangements as they are in BT blocks. They therefore remain frozen pending the outcome of the current Oftel consultation on freephone numbers.
The up to date figure for the quantity of 0800 nine digit numbers in use is not information held by Oftel as it relates to BT and its customers. However, it is generally recognised that between 80,000 and 100,000 such numbers are in use.
It is the intention of the current consultation on freephone numbers to decide on an arrangement that will make available the full range of 0800.
Mr. Chope:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many responses have been received to OFTEL's consultation document, Freephone Numbers: Options for the Future, from (a) businesses, (b) network
14 Dec 1998 : Column: 366
operators, (c) telecom advisory committees and (d) others; and how many responses from each group (i) supported and (ii) opposed options 1 and/or 2. [63522]
Mrs. Roche:
Oftel has received submissions to its consultation document Freephone Numbers: Options for the Future from 168 respondees. Responses are divided into the following categories:
countries subject to other types of embargo, whether as a result of non-binding decisions of the UN or decisions of the EU, Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe or the UK Government;
certain types of equipment, the export from the UK of which, has been banned because of evidence that goods of the same type have been used in torture;
missiles capable of a range of at least 300 km.
"The company did not trade on its own account during the year but acted as agent on behalf of The Miller Group Limited whose principal activities included civil engineering".
a) Businesses--128 responses
Consisting of 66 supporting the Freephone User Group (FUG) responses, 26 supporting the Direct Marketing Association responses and 36 other business responses.
b) Network operators--8 responses
c) Telecommunications Advisory Groups--21 responses
d) Others--11 responses
Consisting of 2 Consultants, 2 Consumer Groups, 5 Trade Bodies and 3 residential users. The numbers of responses that (i) supported and (ii) opposed options 1 and/or 2 are shown in the table below.
| Support | Oppose | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Option 1 | Option 2 | Option 1 | Option 2 | |
| (a) Businesses | 2 | 3 | 93 | 97 |
| FUG | 0 | 0 | 66 | 66 |
| DMA | 0 | 0 | 26 | 26 |
| Others | 0 | 3 | 0 | 5 |
| (b) Operators | 1 | 6 | 3 | 0 |
| (c) TACs | 0 | 19 | 1 | 0 |
| (d) Others | 2 | 4 | 2 | 2 |
| Total | 5 | 32 | 98 | 99 |
Hallmarking
Ms Rosie Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on forthcoming changes to the Hallmarking Act 1973. [64080]
Mr. Mandelson: The Hallmarking (Hallmarking Act Amendment) Regulations and the Hallmarking (Hallmarking Act Amendment) Order 1998 were laid in Parliament on Friday 4 December 1998.
These will align UK law with EU single market rules whilst ensuring that UK manufacturers can remain competitive at home and in Europe. The specific changes are as follows:
Section 2 of the Act is amended so as to recognise certain hallmarks from other European countries as "approved hallmarks". This follows a 1994 European Court of Justice Judgment in the case of Houtwipper (Case C-293/93) which ruled that Member States which prohibited the sale of articles of precious metal not hallmarked in accordance with national laws would not be in breach of single market rules provided that such articles did not already bear hallmarks struck by an independent body in accordance with the legislation of the exporting Member State, containing information which was equivalent to that provided by the hallmarks of the importing Member State and which was intelligible to consumers in that Member State. As a result, articles of precious metal bearing hallmarks which meet these criteria will be able to be offered for sale in the UK without, as previously, having to be re-hallmarked.
14 Dec 1998 : Column: 367
The distinction between UK manufactured articles and imports is to be ended so that the same marks will be struck on both UK and imported articles. This, also, is designed to align UK law with single market rules.
The range of finenesses to which articles can be hallmarked in the UK is increased to include new standards (both higher and lower) in addition to those traditionally recognised in the UK. This will ensure that UK manufacturers can compete on an equal basis with European counterparts. Consumers also stand to benefit from being able to purchase a wider range of items of jewellery and other precious articles of a standard of purity which could not previously be sold as precious articles in the UK.
The fineness of UK hallmarked articles will from now on be expressed millesimally. This means that the striking of traditional marks such as the crown for gold and the orb for platinum will become voluntary. This change will make hallmarks more readily understandable to consumers. This is especially important in view of the new increased range of finenesses.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |