---

Dagenham Ford Plant

Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what discussions he has held with the Greater London Authority with regard to the future of the Ford Dagenham plant; and what plans he has for future discussions. [125611]

Mr. Alan Johnson [holding answer 12 June 2000]: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry discussed the future of the Dagenham plant directly with the mayor both before and after Ford's announcement on 12 May. A representative of the Greater London Authority also attends the fortnightly meetings on the regeneration of Dagenham and the Thames Gateway organised by my Department and involving other Government Departments, local councils and regeneration bodies, TUC and Ford. My right hon. Friend and I intend to remain in close contact with the mayor, the Greater London Authority and the London development agency.

Insolvency (Creditors)

Mr. Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations he has received about the priority given to creditors of companies in administration under the Insolvency Act 1986; and if he will make a statement. [125770]

14 Jun 2000 : Column: 657W

Dr. Howells: Under the Insolvency Act 1986 certain debts (principally for employee claims and taxes collected but not paid over) have preferential status up to defined limits.

Representations are received about this from time to time and many representations received since the failure of UNO plc and World of Leather plc urged that preferential status should be reduced or abolished or that the categories of eligible claims should be extended. Last year the Department published a consultation document entitled, "A Review of Company Rescue and Business Reconstruction Mechanism", which invited views on, among others, the question of whether Crown preference in insolvency should be abolished. A report of the review group will be published in due course.

Mr. Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations he has received from creditors of World of Leather plc and UNO; and if he will make a statement. [125769]

Dr. Howells: Many representations have been received from or on behalf of customers of both UNO plc and World of Leather concerning payments made for furniture ordered but not supplied. The issues raised are set out in the record of the debate held in the House on 24 May 2000, Official Report, columns 247-55WH. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Trade subsequently also wrote to hon. Members who had participated in the debate and a copy of this letter has been placed in the Library of the House.

Sub-post Offices (Transfer)

Mr. Webb: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will investigate the financial transactions which take place between Post Office Counters Ltd. and prospective sub-postmasters at the time of a transfer of a post office business to new ownership; and if he will assess the effect of these transactions on the long-term future of the Post Office network. [125461]

Mr. Alan Johnson [holding answer 12 June 2000]: The contractual and financial arrangements relating to the transfer of a post office business to new ownership are matters for the Post Office and the prospective sub-postmaster. I am not aware that the financial terms relating to licence and relocation fees are having any significant implications for the long-term future of the network and I understand that the Post Office offers some flexibility where particular circumstances merit it.

Chronic Bronchitic Emphysema

Mrs. Browning: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many claims from widows have been settled in respect of mineworkers who died of chronic bronchitic emphysema in the last two years. [125880]

Mr. Byers [holding answer 13 June 2000]: We have made interim payments of bereavement awards to 2,577 widows seeking compensation for chronic bronchitis and emphysema, totalling £22.5 million. At present 262 claims from widows have been assessed through the medical process. We expect these claims to be settled shortly.

14 Jun 2000 : Column: 658W

My Department has also received estate claims in respect of some 7,400 miners who died between 1992 and May 1997.

Mrs. Browning: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many claims his Department has received from mineworkers claiming compensation for chronic bronchitic emphysema; and, since May 1997, how many such claims have been settled. [125882]

Mr. Byers [holding answer 13 June 2000]: After years of neglect by British Coal and a blind eye from the previous Administration, this Government have reached an agreement which gives former miners fair compensation for their suffering resulting from these diseases.

The Department's claims handlers have registered nearly 107,000 claims for chronic bronchitis and emphysema from former miners and their families. To date, we have made 21,500 payments in full and final, and part settlements, totalling £60.5 million.

Mrs. Browning: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he appointed respiratory consultants to examine and report on claims from mineworkers for chronic bronchitic emphysema; how many have been appointed in (a) England, (b) Wales and (c) Scotland; and when he expects the reports to be complete. [125881]

Mr. Byers [holding answer 13 June 2000]: Healthcall commenced recruitment on 1 November 1999. To date 170 respiratory consultants have been recruited including 77 who are not allocated to a specific location. Reports are to be completed as soon as possible.

Mrs. Browning: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many mineworkers requesting domiciliary visits for tests in respect of claims for chronic bronchitic emphysema died prior to the test being carried out. [125883]

Mr. Byers [holding answer 13 June 2000]: After years of neglect by British Coal and inaction by the previous Administration, this Government have reached an agreement which gives former miners fair compensation for their suffering resulting from these diseases.

My Department has received estates claims in respect of some 7,400 miners who died between 1992 and May 1997. Many of these could have received compensation during their lifetime if British Coal and the previous Administration had not continued to deny responsibility.

Mrs. Browning: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he intends to make bereavement awards to the relatives of deceased widows of mineworkers who would have qualified for payments due under death certificates relating to chronic bronchitic emphysema. [125885]

Mrs. Liddell [holding answer 13 June 2000]: After inaction under the previous Government, this Government have reached an agreement which should give former miners fair compensation for their suffering resulting from these diseases.

The Department has agreed that the sons and daughters of those widows who died in the period between the date of the High Court judgment and the signing of the Handling Agreement may receive an ex-gratia payment.

14 Jun 2000 : Column: 659W

Mrs. Browning: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what recent representations he has received concerning lung function tests carried out on behalf of the Government by Healthcall in respect of compensation claims from mineworkers suffering from chronic bronchitic emphysema. [125884]

Mr. Byers [holding answer 13 June 2000]: I am informed that no such representations have been received.

Young People (Protection at Work)

Mr. White: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the future of the UK opt-outs under the EU Directive on the protection of young people at work. [126395]

Mr. Alan Johnson: The Directive on the Protection of Young People at Work (94/33/EC) provides a time-limited opt-out for the UK from certain of its provisions. The opt-out expires on 22 June 2000 and the UK will not be pursuing an extension. The Government will be undertaking a full consultation of all interested parties on proposals for the necessary amendments to the Working Time Regulations, in order to give effect to the previously excluded provisions in UK law. We will seek views on the most appropriate use of the derogations which are available in the Directive, in order to balance the proper protection of young people from being required to work long hours against the need to avoid unnecessary burdens on business and to respond to practical problems in particular areas and sectors.

Postal Services

Shona McIsaac: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what duty the Postal Services Commission will have to ensure that any infringement of the reserved area is remedied. [126396]

Mr. Byers: The provisions in the Postal Services Bill provide for the enforcement of the reserved area by the Postal Services Commission. That it has a duty to do so is implicit in the Bill. The reserved area (in which it is an offence to operate without a licence) is there to protect the provision of the universal postal service. The primary duty of the Commission (as set out in clause 3) is to exercise its functions in the manner which it considers best calculated to ensure the provision of the universal postal service.

Since, under the European postal services directive, the reserved area can be only such as is necessary to ensure the provision of the universal service, infringement (unlicensed activity) of the reserved area (which is illegal) must be considered a potential threat to the provision of the universal service. This applies as much to relatively small infringements (which could cumulatively undermine the universal postal service) as it does to large infringements which have a significant effect in their own right. It follows, therefore, that there is an implied duty for the Commission to enforce the reserved area to protect the licensing regime and by doing so to protect the provision of a universal postal service.

The Bill makes it clear that, if the Commission considers that the scope of clause 7 of the Bill, and thus the activities requiring a licence, should be changed the mechanism for doing so is to recommend to the Secretary of State that he makes an Order modifying clause 7. It is

14 Jun 2000 : Column: 660W

clear, therefore, that the Commission should not allow de facto reductions in the scope of the reserved area simply by allowing repeated infringements of it.

Both the intention and effect of the Bill is that the Commission will take whatever enforcement action it considers necessary to protect the reserved area by deterring, detecting and prosecuting or otherwise remedying unlicensed activity. Not to do so (without good reason) would be a breach of its duties.

In line with precedents in the utilities legislation (where it is also a criminal offence to operate without a licence) and the application of the criminal law in general, by not creating an express duty to take enforcement action in all circumstances, the Bill recognises that there should be an element of discretion in enforcement. So, while the presumption is that the Commission will usually take action to protect the licensed area where it knows or has good reason to believe an offence is being committed under clause 6 of the Bill, there may be circumstances where formal enforcement procedures, by prosecution or otherwise, are not in the public interest.

---