|Previous Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|
Lord Carter: My Lords, as I am sure my noble friend knows, the Factortame judgment is still in front of the Court of Appeal on the issue of liability. Therefore, it would be wrong for me to comment further at this stage. Moreover, it is much too early to discuss the likely size of the compensation package because no detailed claims for compensation have yet been received.
Lord Mackay of Ardbrecknish: My Lords, does the Minister recall that, before 1st May last, the then Opposition said that this was an easy and not a complex question? Does the noble Lord further agree that the Spanish are not playing ball in this; indeed, they are indicating that they will challenge any decisions made by the Commission? Further, as my noble friend Lord Campbell said, does the noble Lord agree that it is 10 months since the exchange of letters between "Dear Tony" and "Dear Jacques"; it is two months since the Government submitted their paper to the Commission; and one month since, as a result of Written Questions tabled by me, publicity for that submission was dragged out of the Government? Indeed, does the phrase "stringing along" perhaps come to the Minister's mind? Who is stringing us along: is Tony being strung along by Jacques, or is Tony stringing British fishermen along?
Lord Campbell of Croy: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Donoughue, kindly provided me with a copy of the UK paper dated December last. Is the Minister confident that the scheme will be any more acceptable to the European Court than the previous British attempts to solve the problem, as features from those schemes reappear in this one? For example, I have with me the Law Report of October 1991 when the Court pronounced on the matter.
Lord Carter: My Lords, as I said, the protocol negotiated by the previous government said that there was absolutely no chance of acceptance. The Commission is expected to agree that our proposals are compatible with the EC treaty and in accordance with European case law. Therefore, any measures which are taken should withstand successful legal challenge.
Lord Peyton of Yeovil: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his Answer. Is he satisfied that sufficient is being done to ensure that the arrival of the millennium is not attended by massive chaos resulting from the fact that few computer systems were originally designed to cope with the arrival of that year? If the utmost care is not taken in the limited time available, the millennium could turn into a sour joke.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I would be foolhardy if I were completely satisfied--to use the word which the noble Lord has used. All I can say is that we appear to be ahead of the field compared with other countries. For example, we were the first to raise this issue in NATO. We have taken the lead in the G7 and in other international organisations. I think it is generally recognised that we are doing more both in the public and the private sectors to tackle the problem than most other people.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, will the Minister confirm that anyone who buys a PC now can be satisfied that it is fully year 2000-compliant? Will he also confirm that there is software available in the public domain on the web to check whether the BIOS (basic input operating system) of an old PC is year 2000-compliant?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I can certainly confirm the noble Lord's second point. Software at under £30 is available which will enable a private user to check his PC and even to find out what to do in the event of a problem. All public purchasing has been millennium bug-compliant since September 1996. I am told that there are still some suppliers who refuse to give cast-iron guarantees to the private sector that what they are selling is millennium bug-compliant.
Lord Shore of Stepney: My Lords, I think the House will well understand why my noble friend cannot give cast-iron guarantees on the generality of the problem. But can he at least assure us that those computer control systems which operate in the Palace of Westminster will be adjusted before the terminal date?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I think that question should be addressed to the chairman of the Library and Computers Sub-Committee rather than to the Government. However, my understanding as a member of that committee is that we are well advanced in our plans for tackling the millennium bug.
Viscount Chelmsford: My Lords, some six months ago I wrote to several Ministers in the DTI and several Cabinet Ministers, including the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, enclosing a report from the parliamentary group, EURIM which highlighted concern about information and communication technology skills arising out of the combination of the year 2000 problem and the need to make provision for EMU. At that time we flagged up the concern we had that legislators needed to take account of the ICT consequences that will arise out of future legislation proposals. Can the Minister tell me whether any formal monitoring proposals have been set up to consider problems that may arise for the private sector out of future legislation? Obviously, pensions is a classic case. As regards the public sector, is there any reason why we should not, in addition to the information on financial consequences and human resource consequences that appears at the front of Bills, also refer to information and communication technology consequences?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the noble Viscount raises wide questions far beyond the issue of the millennium bug itself. That is not to say they are not valid and important questions. Certainly the extension of the remit of the Action 2000 working group which I mentioned, which has been set up by the President of the Board of Trade, would be considerable if it took into account all the matters that the noble Viscount has mentioned. We ought to concentrate for now on the millennium bug. However, the points made about future legislation are certainly valid.
Lord Ezra: My Lords, will the noble Lord indicate whether in the time now available the difficult problem of the embedded micro-processor chip can be effectively dealt with? Have the Government found that this is all likely to be rather more expensive than they indicated last November when the noble Lord repeated a Statement made in another place? I believe that the figure then quoted was £370 million. On review, is that figure still valid?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, as regards the review I mentioned in my first Answer, which was published on 3rd March, the figure of £370 million is now £393 million. Frankly, I do not believe that figure either. I am sure that it will change as further inquiries are carried out. As regards embedded chips, that applies to real time clock chips and to BIOS firmware. These are cheap components; but, as the noble Lord says, they are deeply embedded. I think that probably the best solution for most users will be the kind of low cost programmes to which the noble Lord, Lord Avebury, referred, which can identify the problem and apply a durable fix.
Baroness Miller of Hendon: My Lords, given the difficulties that the noble Lord opposite has mentioned and the fact that he is unable to guarantee that everything will be all right, will he say why the ministerial group has met only once since 1st May 1997? Will he also say why Taskforce 2000, which was set up by the previous government under the energetic leadership of Mr. Robin Guenier, has been replaced by Action 2000, which is now led by a part-timer who, I believe, was responsible for the fact that the latest telephone numbers have to be changed now every four years?
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page