---

Earl Russell: I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. I accept a great deal of what he says. If the DSS were a pianist, I would not shoot it. It tries to do its best. I accept that what is wanted can be done under existing law. I accept that it will do that to the best of its ability.

However, the Minister is aware of the Change Programme. He is aware of the pressure that it is putting on the DSS staff. He was sitting on the Bench last Thursday night when I told his noble friend Lord Henley about a recent case where the Benefits Agency was faced with the task which was its duty but passed it on to the local CAB because it said it was simply too busy to do it. In that situation there may be a case for a clear statutory duty and, moreover, for that clear statutory duty to be embodied in social security law which I am sure most DSS officers know rather better than they know the Data Protection Act.

As the Minister has answered hundreds of such amendments, he will be familiar with amendments that seek to lay a clear statutory duty to do this or that on a local authority. Since the funding of local authorities has become so tight, it has become normal form in this Chamber for any amendment giving a function to a local authority to seek to make it a statutory duty because it is believed that otherwise the task will not be done. I fear that the effect of the Change Programme may be that we have to do the same with the DSS. It is a point about which the Minister might like to think.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: I am grateful for the Minister's reply. It is obvious that he recognises the provision as a self-evidently virtuous amendment. Indeed, the more he explained it the more I became convinced of its self-evident virtue. He did a much better job than I did.

Before I address some of the possible remedies outlined by the Minister, at the core lies the sense that once information is handled by a computer, or is in the computer's data system, there is often little scope for the individual at the other end to intervene to correct and remedy. In a sense, however often one may try to contact it, the system is inexorable; it is overwhelming. The noble Earl referred to his experience of the American bank. In the usual way of these things, I paid my TV licence in December. Three weeks later someone called round on the ground that I had not done so and demanded to see my licence which I happily produced. Three weeks later I received a letter demanding that

11 Mar 1997 : Column 239

I pay my TV licence. Two weeks after that I had a letter threatening me with prosecution, whereupon I wrote a letter to the computer saying, "Dear Computer, will you stop persecuting me", which it apparently then did. It was only when one treated the computer as faintly human that one received a faintly human response--which was to take no action.

That trivial story suggests what happens when there is no way of penetrating the system. I understand from information technology that it should not be difficult to log the paths of information so that the subject of the incorrect data knows that the appropriate remedy has been applied. Otherwise there are consequences not only in terms of credit rating but in other areas of life.

An individual may find that he is receiving unfair or adverse treatment but may not know the cause unless he knows who has had the information corrected. That is the dilemma. The Minister perfectly properly listed ways in which that information could be corrected. Some, for example going to court, sounded extremely heavy-handed and cumbersome. We shall not press the amendment, but perhaps we may consider the issue over the next week or two to see whether by technological means we can find a more reliable and less heavy-handed way to stop the multiplication of data to bodies of which the subject is not aware which may adversely affect that individual. None of us wants that to happen. It will simply bring the system into disrepute. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

[Amendments Nos. 10 to 15 not moved.]

Lord Lucas: I beg to move that the House be resumed. In moving the Motion, perhaps I may suggest that the Committee stage begins again not before 8.30 p.m.

Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.

House resumed.

Deregulation (Gaming on Sunday in Scotland) Order 1997

7.26 p.m.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Scottish Office (The Earl of Lindsay) rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 20th January be approved [13th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble Earl said: My Lords, this order, if approved, will amend the Gaming Act 1968 to reduce the hours during which gaming is prohibited in Scotland to between 4 a.m. on Sunday morning and 2 p.m. on Sunday afternoon.

Currently gaming is prohibited until 7.30 p.m. on Sunday and the purpose of the amendment is to enable casinos and bingo clubs in Scotland, if they wish, to open additionally from 2 p.m. until 11 p.m. in the case of bingo clubs and from 2 p.m. until 4 a.m. in the case of casinos.

11 Mar 1997 : Column 240

This will bring Sunday opening hours in Scotland into line with those currently applying in England and Wales and will give the Scottish public more discretion as to how to choose to spend their leisure time.

Your Lordships will be aware of the special procedures enabling Parliament to consider the substance of proposed orders under the Deregulation and Contracting Out Act 1994. In line with those procedures this order has been subject to thorough public consultation and has been carefully scrutinised by the Delegated Powers Scrutiny Committee which has recommended its approval. The order has been similarly considered in another place and was approved by colleagues there on 13th February. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 20th January be approved [13th Report from the Joint Committee].--(The Earl of Lindsay.)

Lord Carmichael of Kelvingrove: My Lords, I thank the Minister for his explanation. I think it is a reasonable measure. The world has changed a great deal since the period when 7.30 on a Sunday night was the only legal time at which to start gambling in Scotland. I do not think that the provision has done all that much damage in the rest of the country. I can assure the noble Earl that in the parts of Scotland where I was brought up there was gambling at all hours on Sunday. I do not think that the measure will make a great difference except that the gambling will not be in the car park or behind the old wash-houses of the tenements. I approve the Motion.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Advice and Assistance (Financial Conditions) (Scotland) Regulations 1997

7.30 p.m.

The Lord Advocate (Lord Mackay of Drumadoon) rose to move, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 11th February be approved [12th Report from the Joint Committee].

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move the first statutory instrument standing in my name, and it may be for the convenience of the House if I deal with the Advice and Assistance (Financial Conditions)(Scotland) Regulations at the same time.

The Civil Legal Aid (Financial Conditions)(Scotland) Regulations 1997 and the Advice and Assistance (Financial Conditions)(Scotland) Regulations 1997 provide for the uprating of the financial eligibility limits for civil legal aid and for advice and assistance in Scotland.

The Civil Legal Aid (Financial Conditions)(Scotland) Regulations 1997 raise the lower disposable income limit for civil legal aid--below which civil legal aid is available without a contribution by the assisted person--from £2,498 to £2,563 a year. The regulations also increase the upper limit--above which civil legal aid is not available--from £8,158 to £8,370 a year.

The Advice and Assistance (Financial Conditions)(Scotland) Regulations 1997 provide for a similar uprating in relation to advice and assistance. In

11 Mar 1997 : Column 241

these advice and assistance cases the calculation is carried out on the basis of weekly income. The regulations raise the lower limit from £67 to £69, and the upper limit from £162 to £169. The regulations also revise the scale of contributions for applicants with disposable income between the upper and lower income limits for advice and assistance.

The proposed eligibility changes represent a 2.6 per cent. uprating on the 1996-97 levels. This matches increases in the level of income-related social security benefits. All these proposed changes are entirely straightforward and none makes any major adjustment to the scope of eligibility.

We have also laid before the House regulations under the negative resolution procedure. These propose changes which will improve the legal aid system in Scotland, and contain minor and technical amendments which are required. It might be helpful if I briefly explained the substantive changes proposed.

First, we propose that community care direct payments which will be introduced on 1st April should be disregarded in the assessment of income or capital for civil legal aid or advice and assistance. This will ensure that direct payment recipients are not disadvantaged in the legal aid context.

Secondly, we propose to amend the civil legal aid regulations to make provision for an opponent of an assisted person to draw matters to the attention of the Scottish Legal Aid Board if the opponent believes that such matters may affect the assisted person's continuing entitlement to legal aid.

Thirdly, we propose that the fee currently available to solicitors in respect of photocopying be reduced to a level commensurate with commercial costs. This is in keeping with our firm intention to ensure that legal aid expenditure is efficiently and effectively targeted.

Our regulations make provision for the uprating of eligibility limits and for other useful changes to the system of legal aid in Scotland. I commend the instrument standing in my name to the House.

Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 11th February be approved [12th Report from the Joint Committee].--(Lord Mackay of Drumadoon.)

---