| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Rail Vehicle Accessibility
Mrs. Anne Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions if the fleet of new trains to be introduced into service by Central Trains Ltd. and Anglia Railways Train Services Ltd. complies with the provisions of the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations 1998; and if he will make a statement. [90800]
Ms Glenda Jackson: As I explained in my answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow, East (Mr. McNulty) on 9 March 1999, Official Report, column 167, we are expecting to receive a number of exemption applications from train operating companies whose designs for new rail vehicles were well advanced prior to the 1998 Regulations coming into force.
We have received applications from both Central Trains Ltd. for their Class 170/5 rail vehicles and Anglia Railways Train Services Ltd. for their Class 170/2 rail vehicles. The exemptions have been assessed by our statutory advisers, the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee. They are mostly of a minor nature and have been requested for a relatively short time only.
The exemptions will not prevent disabled people from using the new trains. Indeed we believe that their introduction will make a significant contribution to improving mobility opportunities for disabled people. Exemption Orders have been laid in Parliament today.
Mr. Burgon:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions when he expects to announce new designations under the European Commission's Shellfish Waters Directive. [90923]
Mr. Meacher:
A list of 93 areas in England to be designated under the Shellfish Waters Directive has been placed in the House. New designations will be made in 76 locations and the existing 17 designations will be included within revised boundaries for those areas.
These new designations take account of views expressed in a wide ranging public consultation exercise. I believe that they will more than meet the expectations
8 Jul 1999 : Column: 594
of the shellfish industry. This extensive package of new designations will improve our environmental credentials in Europe. It represents very good news for the shellfish industry, the quality of whose harvests will be improved. But, more importantly from a water quality viewpoint, it should be good news for environmentalists, who should see yet further improvements in water quality around our coasts and in estuaries. Pollution control measures for designated waters will help improve nearby bathing waters.
I believe that all shellfish waters currently in need of protection are now covered by the pollution prevention measures which apply following designation. But I will keep the situation under review so that other shellfish areas can be protected where necessary.
For public health reasons, we need to minimise the levels of bacteria in shellfish. The Government's aim is that bacteriological standards should be achieved in designated waters which allow harvesting areas to achieve at least category B standard under the system applied by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to classify shellfish harvesting areas for food safety purposes.
We expect the total cost of improvements to continuous and intermittent discharges affecting shellfish waters in England to be around £81 million between 2000 and 2005. Much of this expenditure is necessary to achieve other water quality and environmental objectives, including those for bathing waters. The current Periodic Review of water company price limits will include allowance for the necessary investment by water companies.
Mr. Burgon:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions when he expects to bring forward new regulations on tree preservation orders; and if he will make a statement. [90924]
Mr. Meacher:
The Town and Country Planning (Trees) Regulations have been laid in both Houses today, and are due to come into force on 2 August. The Regulations will replace all existing secondary legislation in England and Wales on the subject of tree preservation orders.
A consultation paper setting out our proposals for these Regulations was issued in July last year. A summary of responses to the consultation paper, 204 in all, has been placed in the House Library.
A large majority of respondents broadly supported our proposals, so we have modelled the new Regulations closely on the provisions in the consultation paper.
We have made some revisions, however, in response to detailed points made in consultation. Local authorities were concerned that our proposals on compensation would lead to an unwelcome increase in petty claims for minor loss or damage caused by protected trees, so we have taken steps to rule out such claims by setting a lower limit of £500. In response to a general call for tree preservation orders to be circulated more widely, local authorities will be required to copy each new order to the people whose property adjoins the land on which the protected trees stand. In response to concerns that our proposal to exempt the pruning of fruit trees was open-ended, we have included new provisions making
8 Jul 1999 : Column: 595
clear that such pruning must be carried out in accordance with good horticultural practice. Our proposals for speeding up appeals to the Secretary of State, which are made against a local authority's refusal of consent to do work on protected trees and handled without an inquiry or hearing, have also been revised to bring them into line with forthcoming reforms of planning appeals.
Mr. Fabian Hamilton:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if the Government will provide assistance to innocent people who have had lives and property damaged on either side of the Kashmir line of control by Indian forces. [89890]
Clare Short:
I have been asked to reply.
As we state in the Conflict Reduction and Humanitarian Assistance Policy Statement, we will provide humanitarian assistance to people affected by armed conflict, wherever this may be (a copy of the Statement is in the Library of the House). We will consider proposals to relieve the humanitarian needs of people on either side of the Line of Control in accordance with our policy statement.
Mr. Maples:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is his Department's policy on the currency in Kosovo; and when a final decision on the currency to be used in Kosovo will be taken. [90127]
Mr. Tony Lloyd:
Such decisions are for the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK).
Mrs. Gillan:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what discussions have taken place between Ministers and officials in his Department and those in the Department of Trade and Industry, concerning delegations of hon. Members intending to visit Libya; [90097]
Mr. Hoon
[holding answer 7 July 1999]: I refer the hon. Member to the statement given by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary in the House on 7 July 1999, Official Report, columns 1033-34.
Lorna Fitzsimons:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the procedure for drawing up the agenda for the Commonwealth Heads of Government meetings; and when the agenda for the next meeting will be (a) determined and (b) published. [90109]
Mr. Tony Lloyd:
The agenda for a Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) is initially drawn up by the host Government in consultation with the Commonwealth Secretariat. This provisional agenda is
8 Jul 1999 : Column: 596
then circulated to all Heads of Government for comment. We understand that a provisional agenda for the forthcoming CHOGM, in November in South Africa, will be circulated in September. However, the South African Government have already proposed that the agenda be centred around the special theme of "People-Centred Development: The Challenge of Globalisation".
Lorna Fitzsimons:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the Foreign Policy Centre's recent report on Reinventing the Commonwealth. [90112]
Mr. Tony Lloyd:
We share the view of the Foreign Policy Centre and other organisations that the role of the Commonwealth in the 21st century needs careful re-examination, particularly in order to ensure that its values, objectives and principles are more widely understood and shared. We consider the Centre's report a useful contribution to the debate.
Mr. McNamara:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the substantive resolutions and decisions made at the 55th session of the UN Commission on Human Rights meeting in Geneva on 22 March to 30 April. [89900]
Mr. Tony Lloyd:
Eighty two resolutions and 13 decisions were adopted at the 55th session. A full list is available in the Library of the House and on the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights' internet website.
Mr. McNamara:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will name the members of the United Kingdom delegation to the 55th session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. [89901]
Mr. Tony Lloyd:
The 55th session of the UN Commission on Human Rights was attended by the late Derek Fatchett, who made a national statement in plenary on behalf of the United Kingdom.
The United Kingdom delegation was headed by Audrey Glover CMG. She was supported by a team of officials from the United Kingdom Permanent Missions in Geneva and New York, and received additional support from London.
Mr. McNamara:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what were the issues of substance concerning the death penalty discussed under Item 17 at the 55th session of the UN Commission on Human Rights; what position was argued by the United Kingdom; what issues were put to the vote; what were the voting figures; and which way the United Kingdom voted on each occasion. [89902]
Mr. Tony Lloyd:
The UK co-sponsored an EU resolution calling on all States to abolish the death penalty and, where it is retained, to observe minimum international safeguards. The resolution, the text of which is available on the website of the office of the UN Commission on Human Rights, was adopted by 30 votes in favour, with 11 against and 12 abstentions. A paragraph vote tabled with the aim of weakening the text was defeated.
8 Jul 1999 : Column: 597
The UK also co-financed with Germany a panel discussion on the death penalty, with expert participants from the Council of Europe, International Commission of Jurists, Russia, Egypt, Pakistan, UK, USA and Trinidad and Tobago.
Mr. McNamara:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what issues were raised by the United Kingdom on the concept and practice of affirmative action under Item 16 at the 55th session of the UN Commission on Human Rights; what resolutions were moved by the United Kingdom; and what was the result. [89903]
Mr. Tony Lloyd:
The United Kingdom sponsored a decision entitled "The concept and practice of affirmative action", under agenda item 16 at the 55th session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. The decision endorses the appointment of a Special Rapporteur to undertake a study on the subject of affirmative action. It was adopted by consensus by the Commission. There were no resolutions on this topic under this agenda item.
(2) what advice has been provided by his Department to hon. Members intending to join delegations visiting Libya. [90098]
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |