| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Departmental Policies
Mr. Maclean: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what systems he has in place to ensure that policies being developed by his Department are subject to a crime impact (a) assessment and (b) audit and are not likely to lead to enhanced criminal opportunities. [72680]
Mr. Byers [holding answer 24 February 1999]: Government Departments are co-operating on policy developments, and I liaise closely with Ministerial colleagues at the Home Office on any likely implications for crime of new policies.
Minister for Science
Mr. Redwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will place an agenda and minutes for the meeting on 15 December 1998, which the Minister for Science chaired, in the Library. [73020]
Mr. Byers [holding answer 25 February 1999]: The meeting referred to was part of the Public Consultation on the Biosciences, which my noble Friend chairs. The meeting was attended by representatives of many different interested parties. This exercise looks at public attitudes to regulation of the biosciences. Minutes for the meeting have been circulated to all attendees of the meeting and a copy has been placed in the Library of the House.
Internet Web Caching
Mr. Fabricant: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment he has made of the effects on information technology in the United Kingdom of the implementation of the resolution by the European Parliament to outlaw Internet web caching. [73383]
Mr. Wills: Unauthorised reproduction of copyright material in electronic form is generally prohibited under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. The European Parliament's proposed amendment to the draft Directive on copyright in the information society, which would mean that temporary copies such as occur in caching could infringe copyright if right owners have not agreed to use of their material in the relevant service, would not therefore change the situation in the UK. Current UK copyright law does not seem to have inhibited the development of information technology services, or placed undue burdens on those providing such services. However, we support moves to clarify the liability of service providers under copyright and other laws, along the lines proposed in the draft Directive on electronic commerce.
Electronic Red Boxes
Mr. Maclean: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will name the Ministers in his Department who are regular users of the new electronic red boxes. [73693]
Mr. Byers
[holding answer 26 February 1999]: The Minister of State for Energy and Industry has been using the electronic red box developed for the DTI for some time. This facility enables him to work on electronic copies of documents at home and to access many of the Department's information systems. Following evaluation of his experience later this year, consideration will be given to extending its use to other Ministers.
2 Mar 1999 : Column: 698
Mr. Bercow:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment he has made of the operation of the Regulatory Flexibility Act 1980 in the United States. [73231]
Mr. Kilfoyle:
I have been asked to reply.
Whilst it is not for us to assess the effectiveness of the United States' internal legislative arrangements, we are aware of this Act and officials in the Cabinet Office Better Regulation Unit are in contact with their US counterparts with the aim of increasing our mutual understanding and promoting the exchange of best practice. Many of the main provisions of this Act cover the same ground as certain requirements in our own system of regulatory impact assessment.
Mr. Bercow:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment he has made of the operation of sunset regulation in the United States. [73224]
Mr. Kilfoyle:
I have been asked to reply.
We are aware of the discussions in the United States and other countries about the use of sunset clauses in regulation. Officials in the Cabinet Office Better Regulation Unit actively participate in such discussions both bilaterally and at the OECD with the aim of increasing mutual understanding and promoting exchanges of best practice. We are not aware of any federal United States legislative requirement for sunset clauses.
Mr. Bercow:
To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment he has made of the operation of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 1996 in the United States. [73223]
Mr. Kilfoyle:
I have been asked to reply.
Whilst it is not for us to assess the effectiveness of the United States' internal legislative arrangements, we are aware of this Act and officials in the Cabinet Office Better Regulation Unit are in contact with their US counterparts with the aim of increasing mutual understanding and promoting the exchange of best practice. Many of the main provisions of this Act, aimed at small business, cover the same ground as the UK's Access Business initiative.
Mr. Mullin:
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) what steps have been taken to interview new witnesses or witnesses who have changed their evidence in the case of Stuart Gair; and if he will make a statement; [68173]
Mr. McLeish
[holding answer 4 February 1999]: A petition claiming a miscarriage of justice in Stuart Gair's conviction was submitted by Mr. Gair's solicitor to my right hon. Friend on 10 September 1998.
2 Mar 1999 : Column: 699
An initial review of the new evidence in Mr. Gair's case has been carried out by the Scottish Office and clarifications and further information sought from the solicitor. However, no interviews or inquiries have yet been commissioned. Mr. Gair's solicitor has indicated that he does not want the Crown Office to be involved in the examination of this case and has requested that my right hon. Friend appoint an impartial body to carry out any investigations.
In the light of this continuing objection by Mr. Gair's solicitor, the most appropriate way forward would seem to be for the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission to instruct or carry out any necessary investigations once it comes into operation on 1 April this year. The new Commission will have powers to undertake its own inquiries and to obtain statements and reports. One of the main intentions behind our setting up this Commission is to make the review of alleged miscarriages of justice in Scotland clearly independent and to ensure public confidence in the process.
In these circumstances we are not in a position to estimate how long it might be before a decision is reached in this case.
Mr. Berry:
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what assessment he has made of the impact on his Department's policies of the goods and services provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to be implemented in October 1999. [71268]
Mr. Galbraith
[holding answer 22 February 1999]: We are acting to ensure that the Department's policies meet the needs of disabled people and comply with legal requirements. The Department already takes positive steps to make it easier for disabled people to make use of its services. We shall continue to do so, not only by complying fully with new duties in the Disability Discrimination Act but by aiming to do more where appropriate.
Existing guidance on policy appraisal is currently being reviewed in the light of the guidance "Policy Appraisal for Equal Treatment" which the Cabinet Office issued to all Government Departments in November 1998. This was signed jointly by the Minister for Women, the Secretary of State for Education and Employment and the Home Secretary. The new guidance will ensure that all new and existing policies and programmes are assessed for any differential impact, not only on disabled people but on women and people from ethnic minorities. That includes the need to ensure that policies and their outcomes comply with the law. Where necessary, we shall act to remove any differential impact.
From 1 July 1999, this will be a matter for the Scottish Parliament. The report of the Consultative Steering Group on the Scottish Parliament strongly recommended that the Parliament should have an Equal Opportunities Committee. Monitoring and reporting of progress on the Disability Discrimination Act will be for the Scottish Executive.
Mr. Llew Smith:
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland when his Department received the research
2 Mar 1999 : Column: 700
dossier on GMO research into potatoes from Dr. Pusztai of the Rowett Research Institute; when the Minister for the Cabinet Office requested copies of the work submitted to his Department under contract by Dr. Pusztai; which other Government departments or research units have received copies; and on what dates. [72528]
Mr. Macdonald:
A copy of the report produced by Dr. Putszai for the Rowett Research Institute in response to the Institute's Audit Committee was copied to the Scottish Office on 26 October 1998. The report was published by the Rowett Research Institute on 16 February 1999. Dr. Pusztai was contracted by the Rowett Research Institute to undertake the research on GMO potatoes and it was for the Institute to consider and publish the report.
The Government welcome the decision by the Rowett Research Institute to publish Dr. Pusztai's report, together with the audit committee's response to this report. The Government also welcome the request by the Rowett Research Institute to the Royal Societies of London and Edinburgh to conduct an independent analysis of Dr. Pusztai's and Dr. Ewen's research. For this to take place, it is clearly essential that all those involved should respond to the requests within the scientific community to make available the data and papers on which their conclusions are based.
From 1 July 1999, this will be a matter for the Scottish Parliament.
(2) what date he received a submission on behalf of Stuart Gair; what action he has taken; and when he expects to complete his consideration. [68188]
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |