---

9 Jun 2005 : Column 643W—continued

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

Citizens Advice Bureaux

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many citizens advice bureaux there were in each year since 1997. [2420]

Mr. Sutcliffe: This information is published regularly in Citizens Advice's annual report. Copies of these reports are available in the Libraries of the House.

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many citizens advice bureaux offices there were in each local authority area in each year since 1997. [2461]

Mr. Sutcliffe: The Department does not hold this information.

Coal Health Claims

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what legal advice was given to his Department on the signing of separate coal health agreements with Vendside Ltd. and the Union of Democratic Mineworkers. [2354]

Malcolm Wicks: Following the judgments against British Coal in both the vibration white finger and respiratory disease litigations, the High Court ordered the DTI to set up schemes, in agreement with miners' solicitors, to assess compensation for both types of claim. Claims had by then been registered through the Claimants Solicitors Group (the CSG), some of which were sponsored by the main mining unions, the NUM and NACODS. The UDM had also registered a large number of claims directly on behalf of their members, through their dedicated claims handling company, Vendside Ltd. The CSG and the UDM were unable to work together or enter into single arrangements for historical reasons. The legal advice received by the Department was that it was appropriate to enter into
 
9 Jun 2005 : Column 644W
 
separate claims handling arrangements with the CSG and the UDM, provided that the compensation delivered to the claimant under both schemes was the same.

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what legal advice was given to his Department on the signing of a coal health claim agreement with Vendside Ltd. [2355]

Malcolm Wicks: Vendside Ltd. were, at the time of entering into the claims handling arrangements, the vehicle through which the UDM presented claims on behalf of their members. Vendside Ltd. entered into the vibration white finger claims handling arrangement for and on behalf of the UDM. The legal advice received at the time was that Vendside Ltd. had authority to enter into arrangement for and on behalf of the UDM.

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when his Department was first informed of complaints about double charging by (a) claims handlers and (b) Vendside. [2582]

Malcolm Wicks: The Department first became aware of the scale of administration charges by both claims handlers and some unions in 2003.

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many times (a) Ministers and (b) officials in his Department met the Union of Democratic Mineworkers in (i) 1998 and (ii) 1999 regarding coal health claims. [2583]

Malcolm Wicks: Detailed information on such meetings is no longer readily available.

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what investigations his Department has undertaken into (a) Walker and Co Ltd. and (b) Indiclaim Ltd. [2584]

Malcolm Wicks: The Department has not undertaken any investigations into Walker and Co Ltd. and Indiclaim Ltd.
 
9 Jun 2005 : Column 645W
 

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when the claimants' solicitors group was first informed of the (a) Vendside and (b) Union of Democratic Mineworkers coal health agreements by his Department. [2585]

Malcolm Wicks: Claimants' solicitors were first informed of the agreements with Vendside and the Union of Democratic Mineworkers in 1999.

Mr. Todd: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on progress made to date in introducing a minimum payments scheme for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease claims by former miners and their families. [1597]

Malcolm Wicks: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann) on 24 May 2005, Official report, column 51W.

Mr. Todd: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what proportion of claims for compensation for cases of vibration white finger initially classified as Group 3 and for which liability was denied by claims handlers were reclassified to Groups 1 or 2 on further review; and what proportion of claims initially classified as Group 3 were accepted on review as Group 3 with exposure. [2346]

Malcolm Wicks: A total of 169,197 claims have been received for vibration white finger of which an initial Group 3 denial was made in 46,913 cases. This denial was contested in 16,260 cases and 9,937 of these cases have been investigated, with further information being provided at this stage. Completed investigations show that 36 per cent. of investigated claims are classified as Group 1 or 2 and 9 per cent. are accepted as Group 3 with exposure. So, of the 46,913 initially classified as Group 3 and denied, so far, 8 per cent. have been reclassified as Groups 1 or 2 and 2 per cent. have been accepted as Group 3 with exposure.

Mr. Todd: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the performance of claims handlers in accurately determining liability in claims for compensation for vibration white finger. [2347]

Malcolm Wicks: Decisions which confirmed occupational group (and therefore liability) were originally taken by claims handlers. From late 2001, disputed Group 3 claims have been investigated by a separate team who have substantial direct mining experience. This team also reviewed all claims which were initially denied to ensure the correct liability decision had been made. I am confident that the significant experience of this team, amounting to some 1,300 years in total, has resulted in sound decisions on liability being made. There are dispute procedures where claimants think otherwise

Non-fossil Purchasing Agency

Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) what the size of the fund administered by Ofgem resulting from surplus revenue collected by the Non-Fossil Purchasing Agency has been in each year since 2001; how much and what percentage of the fund
 
9 Jun 2005 : Column 646W
 
was invested to promote the use of renewable energy in each year; and for what purposes the remainder of the fund was allocated in each year; [2690]

(2) what estimate he has made of the surplus revenue to be collected by the Non-Fossil Purchasing Agency in the 2005–06 financial year; and what percentage of that revenue he plans to invest in the promotion of the use of renewable energy. [2691]

Malcolm Wicks: The size of the fund administered by Ofgem, resulting from surplus revenue collected by the Non-Fossil Purchasing Agency (NFPA), in each year since 2001 is as follows:

Year ending March	Size of the fund (£ million)
2001	63.8
2002	28.6
2003	87.1
2004	146.5
2005	169.1

Section 7 of the Sustainable Energy Act 2003 authorised the transfer of £60 million on 14 July 2004 for the support of renewable energy projects. This £60 million forms part of the £500 million that the Government are spending on R and D and capital grants for emerging renewable and low carbon technologies between 2002 and 2008. The remainder will be returned to the Consolidated Fund, which is held by HM Treasury, subject to the need to keep a £30 million reserve.

In its business plan, the NFPA projected a forecast surplus of about £100 million for the financial year 2005–06. This would increase the fund to approx. £270 million by the end of March 2006 if no further distribution were made from the fund during this year.

Nuclear Industry

Mr. Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether consent from the Scottish Executive is required for nuclear generation stations to be built or extended in Scotland. [R] [530]

Malcolm Wicks: Yes.

---