| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether there is evidence from countries, such as the Netherlands, which have civil partnership registration schemes for opposite-sex cohabiting couples, showing that such schemes discourage those couples from marrying each other.[HL4131]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville): The Government are not aware of any evidence that evaluates whether the introduction of civil partnership registration schemes that are open to opposite-sex couples have affected the rate of heterosexual marriage.
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What would be the relative cost to the public purse of including in the proposed civil partnership registration scheme opposite-sex cohabiting couples and same-sex cohabiting couples respectively.[HL4132]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Government are proposing a civil partnership registration for those same-sex couples who choose to make a legally
recognised commitment to each other through registering a partnership. The costs to the public purse will depend entirely on how many couples choose to register. The Government estimate that by 2050 the annual costs could range between £25 million and £240 million, depending on take-up.Opposite-sex couples already have the option of making a legally recognised commitment through marriage. The costs of extending the availability of civil partnership registration to opposite-sex couples would depend entirely on the number of couples who currently choose not to get married but would choose to make a similarly formal commitment by registering a civil partnership.
The Government do not propose to extend the rights and responsibilities proposed under the scheme to cohabiting same-sex couples who choose not to register, or to cohabiting opposite-sex couples who choose not to marry. The costs of doing this have therefore not been quantified.
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether public expenditure implications influenced their decision to exclude opposite-sex cohabiting couples from the proposed civil partnership registration scheme.[HL4133]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Government's decision to propose a civil partnership registration scheme for same-sex couples only was taken on the basis of policy considerations. The Government developed their proposals on civil partnership registration to address a specific shortcoming in the current treatment of same-sex couples. Opposite-sex couples have the option of gaining legal recognition for their relationships, through getting married. Same-sex couples do not have that option. The Government's proposals would ensure that all same-sex couples, like opposite-sex couples, have the opportunity to make a legally-recognised commitment to each other and to gain rights and responsibilities to reflect that commitment.
The Government do not propose to extend the rights and responsibilities proposed under the scheme to cohabiting opposite-sex couples who choose not to marry (or to cohabiting same-sex couples who choose not to register). The costs of doing so were not calculated during the policy-making process.
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 14 July (WA 77–78), how they justify their refusal to amend the law so far as to provide effective protection for opposite-sex cohabiting couples and their children where such cohabitants are unwilling or unable to marry each other, having regard to the fact that legal protection for unmarried opposite-sex cohabiting couples is provided in other Commonwealth and European countries.[HL4255]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The law already provides a mechanism through which opposite-sex cohabiting couples can secure legal recognition for their relationships. Same-sex couples currently have no option. The cross-government working group on raising public awareness about the consequences of opposite-sex couples remaining unmarried will be an important step towards improving the current misunderstandings of people's legal protections. It is important that people make informed decisions about how they take responsibility for themselves and their families.
Post Offices: Urban/Rural Classification
Lord Greaves asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What are the criteria for defining sub-post offices as either urban or rural.[HL3986]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The decision to classify a post office branch as urban or rural is an operational matter for Post Office Ltd. The company classifies as rural any post office within a community of less than 100,000 inhabitants. Above that, the post office is classified as urban. I understand that the company has a sophisticated geographical mapping model that enables it to adopt a consistent approach to classification across the country.
Microchips
Lord Wade of Chorlton asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Further to the Written Answer by Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 14 July (WA 86), (a) why their response in June to the Science and Technology Committee's report Chips for Everything: Britain's opportunities in a key global market relied on the Information Age Partnership in rejecting the report's key recommendation for a new taskforce to bring greater coherence to the United Kingdom's new-style computer industry; (b) why, if the Electronic Innovation and Growth Team has the significance now indicated, the team was not mentioned in their June response; and (c) whether they will now commission advice from the team on the report's wide ranging recommendations.[HL4058]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: (a) The Government did not rely on the Information Age Partnership (IAP) in rejecting the key recommendation for a new task force to bring greater coherence to the United Kingdom's new style computer industry, in the Science and Technology Committee's report, Chips for Everything. The Government saw no need to set up a new task force when existing fora, such as the IAP, provided a mechanism for engaging key partners.
(b) At the time of the Government's response, the Electronic Innovation and Growth Team had not met to agree its work programme.
(c) The Electronics Innovation and Growth Team is tasked to identify the key issues that will shape the future of the electronic industry and how the UK can best respond to the competitive challenges that it will face. Its scope is wider than the computer industry. It will draw on views and evidence from a range of sources, including the Chips for Everything report. It will not however be tasked specifically to advise on the report.
Post Office Card Accounts
Baroness Byford asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Further to the answers by the Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 14 July (HL Deb, cols. 620–21), (a) how many customers have opted for a Post Office card account; (b) whether it is the case that only 57,000 accounts have been opened out of 430,000 requested; and, if so, (c) how quickly this backlog will be resolved.[HL4098]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: I understand from Post Office Ltd that as of 4 July 2003, 120,000 Post Office card accounts had been opened. I further understand from the Department for Work and Pensions that figures for 27 June 2003 indicate that 450,388 customers had opted for a Post Office card account. The number of accounts opened will grow rapidly in the period ahead. However once issued with a personal invitation document it is a matter for individual customers to complete the account application process.
WEEE Directive: Printer Cartridges
Lord Dixon asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Why they plan to classify inkjet cartridges for printers as consumables rather than electrical waste under the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive.[HL4139]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Government have always considered printer cartridges as consumables. The WEEE Directive only applies to whole products placed on the market and not to individual components, sub-assemblies or consumables. Computer memory chips, camera film, CD-ROMS, floppy disks or even batteries are not covered as individual items. They need only be recycled at the end of their life when still retained within the whole device and it is the producer of the original whole product who is responsible, not the manufacturer of each part. However printer cartridges are described, it is clear that they too fall into this cadre of items and are not separately covered.
Wind Turbines: Environmental Assessments
Lord Hardy of Wath asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What studies and assessments have been made on the likely effect of the recently proposed wind turbines upon both residents and migrating bird species.[HL4184]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: A strategic environmental assessment has been completed for the second round of offshore windfarm development. The environment report covers the full range of environmental impacts including economic impacts and visual sensitivity. It also identifies additional studies that need to be carried out. These include further work on the distribution and main flight paths of seabirds including migratory, feeding and roosting patterns and their behavioural response to windfarms. The environmental report is available on the web at http://www.og.dti.gov.uk/offshore-wind-sea/process/envreport.htm.
Recent data on the distribution of seabirds in the Greater Wash Strategic Area are available on the web at http://www..wwt.org..uk/publications/default. asp?PubID=50. The University of Wales Bangor has commenced a project on the displacement of birds (especially Common Scoter) from benthic feeding areas due to wind turbines.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page