---

31 Mar 2003 : Column 563W—continued

Insurance

Clive Efford: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to his answer of 18 March, Official Report, column 677–8, on insurance, (1) how many responses he has had to the consultation on regulating insurance mediation; if he will place copies in the Library; and what representations he has received from travel agents and tour operators; [106543]

(2) if he will carry out a cost benefit analysis of each of the three options proposed in the consultation on the adoption of the insurance mediation directive. [106542]

Ruth Kelly: The Government has received some four hundred responses to the consultation on the adoption of the insurance mediation directive including many from travel agents and operators. A summary of the responses will be placed in the Library when decisions are announced in the second quarter of this year. In accordance with the usual procedure, a regulatory impact assessment will be published at the time the legislation is presented to Parliament.

Iraq

Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent assessment he has made of the effect a conflict in Iraq will have on (a) the UK and (b) the world economy. [105677]

Mr. Boateng: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary gave to the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Mr. Flight) on 27 March, Official Report, column 340W.

Landfill Tax

Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to his statement of 3 February 2003, Official Report, column 5WS, on the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme, how the Government is ensuring that the transitional funding is applied across the UK on a basis fully compliant with European Union laws, with particular reference to laws governing state aids. [103632]

John Healey: The Landfill Tax Credit Scheme transitional arrangements for England allow continued funding, for a one year period, of waste projects that are on-going under the scheme, subject to EU state aid rules. A process has been put in place to make decisions on allocating funding to projects on the basis of the

31 Mar 2003 : Column 564W

criteria set out in the announcement of 3 February. Spending is subject to state aid rules if the resources not only benefit selected undertakings or sectors, but also have the potential to distort both competition and trade across the EU. Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales are responsible for ensuring that their spending programmes comply with European Union treaty obligations.

Mr. Bercow: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer which community projects based in the Buckingham constituency have benefited from the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme in (a) 2002 and (b) 2003; and how much funding was granted for each project. [105699]

John Healey: Details of projects funded by the scheme are available from the scheme's regulator, ENTRUST whose address is as follows:

ENTRUST

Acre House

2 Town Square

Sale

M33 7WZ

I have asked ENTRUST to write to the hon. Member with a response to his question.

Net Worth

Mr. Flight: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what assumptions were made in forming the expectation of a modest decline in net worth, as set out in paragraph 2.56 of the pre-Budget Report 2002; [105326]

(2) what cautious assumptions are referred to in paragraph 2.61 of the pre-Budget Report 2002, on which projections of the cyclically-adjusted treaty deficit are based; [105327]

(3) what the assumptions are on which the projections (a) concerning output and (b) in Table B3 of the pre-Budget Report 2002 are based; and what assumptions were made about (i) the state of the world economy and (ii) oil prices in compiling the data in Table B3; [105330]

(4) what the assumptions are on which the projections concerning (a) fairness and prudence, (b) long-term sustainability, (c) economic impact, (d) financing and (e) European commitments in Table 2.6 of the pre-Budget Report 2002 are based; and what assumptions were made about (i) the state of the world economy and (ii) oil prices in compiling Table 2.6; [105323]

(5) what are the cautious assumptions referred to in paragraph 2.62 of the pre-Budget Report 2002, which were used to make public finance projections; [105328]

(6) what the assumptions are on which the projections of (a) surplus on current budget, (b) net borrowing, (c) cyclically adjusted surplus on current budget, (d) cyclically adjusted public sector net borrowing and (e) net debt in Table 2.3 of the pre-Budget Report 2000 are based; and what assumptions were made about (i) the state of the world economy and (ii) oil prices in compiling Table 2.3; [105316]

(7) what assumptions were made about (a) the state of the world economy, (b) oil prices and (c) the size of automatic stabilisers in compiling the projections of the changes to the current budget since Budget 2002, as set out in Table 2.4 of the pre-Budget Report 2002; [105317]

31 Mar 2003 : Column 565W

(8) what assumptions were made concerning (a) the state of the world economy, (b) export demand and (c) levels of foreign investment in the UK in the fiscal projections set out in the pre-Budget Report 2002. [105332]

Ruth Kelly: A full description of the assumptions on which the fiscal projections contained in the pre-Budget Report 2002 are based is given in paragraph B20, Table B3, and Box B1 of the same report. The key assumptions are audited by the National Audit Office (NAO) under the three year rolling review process to ensure they remain reasonable and cautious. Annex A of the pre-Budget Report 2002 presented a full discussion of economic developments and prospects, including the world economy, trade and the balance of payments, oil prices, and UK output growth.

Projections for the cyclically adjusted fiscal balances and automatic stabilizers are based on the average impact of changes in the output gap on the public finances over the previous cycles, as set out in 'Fiscal policy: public finances and the cycle', HM Treasury, March 1999. Updated coefficients for estimating cyclically-adjusted fiscal balances taking into account changes in the corporation tax regime were set out in paragraph C14 of Budget 2001.

Pensions

Mr. Heald: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list the (a) funded and (b) unfunded public sector pension schemes for which his Department, its agencies and its non-departmental public bodies are responsible; when the last actuarial valuation was of each scheme; what the value was of the assets at the last actuarial valuation of each scheme; what deficit is disclosed by the last actuarial valuation of each scheme; and if he will make a statement. [104931]

Mr. Boateng: The only public body which the Treasury sponsors that has a pension scheme is the Bank of England. The Bank has a funded defined benefit scheme providing benefits based on final pensionable pay.

The actuarial value at the valuation of February 2002, using the projected unit method, gave the Fund's assets as £1,431 million, representing 112 per cent. of the benefits that have accrued to date. There was a surplus of £150 million.

Public Finances

Mr. Flight: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what (a) anticipated changes in asset prices and (b) other determinants of tax receipts were used in predicting changes in the output gap on the public finances, as referred to in paragraph 2.43 of the pre-Budget Report 2002; [105319]

(2) what changes in the output gap on the public finances were anticipated in making the estimates of the changes in the size of automatic stabilisers as set out in Table 2.4 of the pre-Budget Report 2002. [105318]

Mr. Boateng: The relationship between the output gap and of the main components of tax receipts and public expenditure is outlined in 'Fiscal policy: public finances and the cycle', HM Treasury, March 1999,

31 Mar 2003 : Column 566W

which describes the Government's methodology for producing cyclically adjusted fiscal aggregates. This methodology is based on the historical relationship between the output gap and key fiscal aggregates and therefore reflects the average impact of previous economic cycles on the public finances.

Its application only requires estimates of the output gap.

Stock Exchange

Mr. Flight: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the performance of the London stock exchange since January in comparison to other leading stockmarkets. [105349]

Ruth Kelly: Performance of UK stock market indices has been comparable with performance of US indices and better than European indices since January 2003. Between 2 January 2003 and 24 March 2003, the FTSE All-Share index declined around 7 per cent., compared with a 5 per cent. decline in the S&P 500, a 15 per cent. decline in the French CAC-40 and an 18 per cent. decline in the German DAX. Falls in UK market capitalisation since January have been smaller than in Europe but greater than in the US. Increases in the volume of shares traded on the FTSE All-Share index since January have been greater than US and German volume increases but less than French volume increases.

---