House of Commons
Wednesday 14 June 2000
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
PRIVATE BUSINESS
City of London (Ward Elections) Bill (By Order)
Order for further consideration, as amended, read.
To be further considered on Wednesday 21 June.
Oral Answers to Questions
CABINET OFFICE
The Minister was asked--
Drug Addiction
1. Mr. David Chaytor (Bury, North): What estimate she has made of the economic costs of addiction to hard drugs in respect of (a) the national health service and (b) police forces in England and Wales. [124262]
The Minister for the Cabinet Office (Marjorie Mowlam): Drug misuse costs Britain more than £4 billion each year in crime, sickness and absenteeism. The Government are fully committed to tackling this problem. That is why we pledged an additional £217 million as part of the 1998 comprehensive spending review for anti-drugs activities. We are currently finalising the spending for the next three years and will announce details of future funding in support of the Government's drugs strategy very shortly.
Mr. Chaytor: I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. First, in view of those remarkable figures, does she agree that the importance of treatment for addiction is becoming even more important? What steps are being taken to improve facilities for treatment?
Secondly, does my right hon. Friend agree that the control of drugs is not something which can be dealt with purely within national borders? What steps are being taken internationally to stop the flow of drugs? Are there any lessons that we can learn from other countries' drugs policies?
Marjorie Mowlam: On the first part of my hon. Friend's question, more than £70 million of the sum that I mentioned was allocated to health and local authorities to fund new treatment services. We fundamentally believe that treatment works; we have the research and the figures to show it. A further £133 million was allocated to the criminal justice system to help to break the links between
drug misuse and crime. We have also advertised for an extra 300 counsellors, and we hope shortly to start training them. Treatment is one of our areas of focus.The second part of my hon. Friend's question was about the international front. He is right to suggest that drugs do not recognise national boundaries. We are working effectively across the services within the United Kingdom to stop drugs entering the country, and we are working in co-operation with Europe and OECD countries to maximise the effectiveness of international groups. Last night, I returned from Colombia, from which 80 per cent. of the cocaine consumed in this country comes. I went there to see what we could do to work with the Colombians to help to decrease the flow of drugs.
Mr. Ian Bruce (South Dorset): Will the Minister tell us whether the strategy is yet scoring any successes in reducing the amount of drug use? As police resources become ever more stretched, police forces often do not pursue drug offences. They follow up other offences that are more likely to be reported to them. Drug offences tend not to be reported to the police, so they have to take a proactive approach to such offences.
Marjorie Mowlam: There are signs that we are making progress slowly. We have a 10-year strategy because, as we have frequently said, we shall not be able to deal with the problem overnight. Referrals in the prison system for offences and some of the figures--the figures in different reports often contradict each other--show that, overall, the trend is that we are making progress in dealing with the problems of young people and reoffending in prisons. Police forces are doing a good job in focusing on the killer drugs--heroin and cocaine--so I assure the hon. Gentleman that all the evidence that I have suggests that we are making progress. However, we have a 10-year strategy because dealing with the problem will take time.
Drugs (Confiscation of Profits)
2. Mr. Tam Dalyell (Linlithgow): If she will make a statement about her plans to improve the system of confiscation of the profits accruing from drug-related crime. [124263]
The Minister of State, Cabinet Office (Mr. Ian McCartney): As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said this morning in response to a question for written answer from my hon. Friend the Member for West Lancashire (Mr. Pickthall), we have today published the performance and innovation unit report on "Recovering the Proceeds of Crime". Copies of the report have been placed in the Vote Office and Libraries of the House.
The report sets out the Government's rigorous new approach to attacking crime through its finances. The measures that we are announcing will improve the confiscation process for all crimes, including those related to drugs. We will draw up the first ever cross-cutting strategy with annual reporting on progress; we will set up a new national confiscation agency containing a centre of excellence in financial investigation to drive through the new strategy and deliver increased levels of training;
and we will work with our international partners to drive up standards of financial regulation and to bring pressure to bear on the non-co-operative jurisdictions.
Mr. Dalyell: Can that strategy deal with the problem of drug traffickers who have managed somehow to dissociate themselves directly from drug trafficking itself?
Mr. McCartney: Yes, absolutely. First, in criminal law, those on indictment for serious crimes will, for the first time ever, be obliged to put details of their assets before the court, which will then determine the process for seizing or freezing those assets before any trial.
Secondly, the use of means other than the criminal law, such as taxation and other forms of confiscation, will improve the situation dramatically, as people will have to prove that their assets have been gained legally, and not through illegal activity. When illegal activity has occurred and has been proven by the courts, those assets will be liable to confiscation.
Mrs. Ann Winterton (Congleton): We welcome moves to improve the confiscation of the proceeds of crime. Surely, however, we are not talking just about the profits of crime. Is the Minister aware that substantial powers already exist under the Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986, the Criminal Justice Act 1988 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 1995? As courts already have those powers, is the reason why more confiscations are not being made that there is insufficient funding for the extensive financial investigations required?
Mr. McCartney: It is typical of the party of Michael Ashcroft that Conservative Members cannot give an absolute commitment to deal with the return of resources. Those powers are available to the courts at present. However, the problem is that the law is complex and is located in three separate legislative processes. We are bringing those processes together in a single process. In addition, we are giving the courts new powers and there will be a new organisation to seek out and to seize those assets, which is a major improvement. We are resolutely committed to disrupting, undermining and closing down criminal enterprises, unlike the previous Government.
Mr. David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire): Is it not the case that the Inland Revenue has powers to enforce the removal of assets? As long ago as 1996, the Office for National Statistics estimated that the income generated from drugs, prostitution, the sale of stolen goods and illegal gambling was in excess of £11 billion. Could we not do more to rationalise the tax legislation, to make those powers more effective and to encourage the Inland Revenue to work more closely with the law enforcement agencies?
Mr. McCartney: The report makes recommendations, along the precise lines mentioned by my hon. Friend, which deal with money laundering and the role of the Inland Revenue in working with our criminal intelligence organisations and our law enforcement agencies. Nobody--but nobody--who has an income should fail to pay tax on it. The reality is that the Mr. Bigs of crime normally have assets involving huge sums of money and other resources gained from criminal activity, but they do not pay tax on them. The system will change radically.
Action in civil and criminal law will feature, as will action in the tax system. We should remember that Al Capone eventually came to his end through non-payment of tax.Rural Affairs
3. Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York): If she will make a statement on her role in co-ordinating Government policies on rural affairs. [124264]
The Minister for the Cabinet Office (Marjorie Mowlam): I chair the ministerial rural affairs group, which co-ordinates Government policy on rural issues. I have no direct responsibility for any specific area of rural policy, but my Committee co-ordinates the work of other Departments to ensure that the policy is fully implemented.
Miss McIntosh: Following the Prime Minister's famous speech to the Women's Institute, in which he did not once refer to farming or the countryside, will the Minister instigate a review of Government policies on the countryside, those who live there and rural affairs in general? What future can the Government offer to those who live in the country? What will happen about the high cost of petrol and the crisis in farming? What future is possible for village shops and rural post offices?
Marjorie Mowlam: Many of the topics covered in the Prime Minister's speech inevitably affect rural areas. There are no separate policies for rural and urban areas: all our policies, including the minimum wage and the working families tax credit, are for urban and rural areas. I therefore deny the hon. Lady's point. She asked for more work to be done on rural areas. A rural White Paper is being drawn up and is being consulted on. It will shortly be published, along with the urban White Paper.
I find it difficult to take lessons from Opposition Members on dealing with rural areas, considering what we inherited. When we came to government, 30 small schools in rural areas closed every year and only one in four parishes had any transport at all. Since then, we have put in £40 million so that small schools can stay open. We have put more than £100 million into improving rural transport, and 1,800 new rural routes have been created since we came into government. We are also ensuring that the new deal offers alternative training and employment. I can therefore guarantee that what the hon. Lady has asked for is already happening and is much more than what we inherited from the previous Government.
Mr. Peter Bradley (The Wrekin): Is my right hon. Friend aware of the scale of the task that confronts the Government in regenerating rural communities? Is she aware that, under the Conservatives, between 1982 and 1997, 450 village schools closed, and that our record in government is the closure of six schools since 1997? Is she aware that the deregulation of buses led to 86 per cent. of my parishes in Shropshire being deprived of a daily bus service? Is she aware that privatisation of the railways led to the deletion of the Shrewsbury-Telford to London intercity service in 1992? Is she aware that nine cottage hospitals closed in Shropshire and that 18 rural--
Madam Speaker: Order. I know that the hon. Gentleman applied for an Adjournment debate on this
subject. It is for that reason that I gave him an opportunity to ask one question. I think that he has done rather well and I must ask for a response now.
Marjorie Mowlam: I thank my hon. Friend for the work that he is doing with his Back-Bench committee on rural affairs. Its members have brought a number of specific best practices from their constituencies that we as a Government have considered. I hope that they will see many of the results that they are looking for in the rural White Paper. We are making an effort to join up Government Department's initiatives to make a real difference in rural communities.
Mr. Paul Tyler (North Cornwall): Will the Minister deal with specific questions in relation to organic food production? Can she give an undertaking on behalf of her group that, across government, there will be positive action to deal with the potential contamination of organic crops by genetically modified crops? Can she give an undertaking that she will tackle the trade imbalance? She will be aware that three quarters of the organic food available to consumers in this country is imported. Can she give an undertaking that that situation will be addressed and that specific targets will be included in the rural White Paper?
Marjorie Mowlam: The comments made by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Environment yesterday were a straightforward, clear statement of the nature of the risk and how it operates. I fully concur with those comments.
As for organic farming, we inherited a difficult situation. It is all very well for Opposition Members to say what we should be doing. It would have been much easier if we had inherited a better based policy. In 1998, only £1 million was available to help farmers become organic. Last year, we put £11 million in. We are looking in the rural development plan to spend £140 million over the next seven years to help the transformation to organic farming. So an effort is being made to help farmers who want to join the organic farming scheme. We are clearly working towards an increase in organic farming.
Let me say to the hon. Gentleman that what is important--
Madam Speaker: Order. This is Question Time. I insist that Ministers as well as Members make it a brisk exchange. That is really what it is all about.
Tony Wright (Cannock Chase): Everyone in rural areas and elsewhere will have welcomed the Government's decision to ask the performance and innovation unit to have a look at the future of the Post Office. Is my right hon. Friend yet in a position to tell the House when the report is likely to appear?
Marjorie Mowlam: I cannot give my hon. Friend a specific date, but I can assure him that, alongside what my hon. Friend the Minister for Competitiveness has done, we will look carefully at the PIU report. In view of previous reports, I hope that some constructive suggestions and lateral thinking will come out of it to help post offices. We are determined to do all that we can in addition to the 50 per cent. rate relief that we already offer
and all the other efforts that we are making, including extra money for e-commerce and financial services, to ensure that post offices stay open in rural areas.
Mr. Dafydd Wigley (Caernarfon): Does the right hon. Lady accept that in some areas, especially hill areas, there is a real rural crisis? Subsistence farmers have negative incomes and many small businesses have suffered the knock-on effects. Can she confirm that, in her role as co-ordinator of Government policy, she will co-operate with Ministers in the National Assembly for Wales to produce an integrated policy to tackle those problems?
Marjorie Mowlam: As I said, we are more than willing to work alongside Ministers from Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman realises that it is a two-way street.
Mr. Andrew Lansley (South Cambridgeshire): Does the Minister realise that the role of sub-post offices in rural areas is vital, that 383 of them have closed in the past financial year and that, as chairman of the Rural Affairs Group, she has a classic opportunity to bang heads together in the Departments of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, of Trade and Industry and of Social Security? Will she therefore pledge today that the rural White Paper will include a commitment to maintain the network of rural sub-post offices?
Marjorie Mowlam: I pledge today that we will work as hard as we are doing--not, as the hon. Gentleman's party suggested, to privatise post offices, but to support them. We have already given them 50 per cent. rate relief. We are committed to protecting the rural network, even though, as I readily acknowledge, some sub-post offices have closed. We regret every one that closes because that limits the possibilities for rural communities. My hon. Friend the Minister for Competitiveness has made it clear that we are committed to ensuring a future for the post offices and, at the moment, we are providing access to financial services, e-commerce and Government services. We are investing a lot to ensure that the Post Office network is viable in future.
Mr. Bill Olner (Nuneaton): When my right hon. Friend looks into rural affairs, will she ensure that the truth is told about how many jobs may be lost if hunting is banned?
Marjorie Mowlam: The Burns report did exactly that. The facts are there; we hope that hon. Members read them. There will be a free vote so that hon. Members on both sides of the House may vote the way that they want.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |