27 Nov 2006 : Column 541
House of Lords
Monday, 27 November 2006.
The House met at half-past two: the LORD SPEAKER on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Manchester.
EU: Non-metric Terms
Lord Pearson of Rannoch asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Whether they support the European Union’s proposal to make the commercial use of non-metric terms a criminal offence from 1 January 2010.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Truscott): My Lords, the use of imperial units alongside metric units is permitted by current legislation until 31 December 2009. The Government think that there is a strong case for extending this permission beyond that date and, perhaps, permanently. We await with interest a consultation paper from the European Commission, which is expected to address this issue.
Lord Pearson of Rannoch: My Lords, my pleasure at finding myself in agreement with one of Her Majesty’s Government’s initiatives is almost too great to bear. Do the Government therefore agree that trade associations in this country, and all over Europe, are very disturbed by these proposals, as indeed is the United States of America, which shares our system? Further, is the noble Lord aware that the commissioner, Martin Bangemann, in 1996 revealed that the reason for this unfortunate measure was that the United Kingdom shared that common system of weights and measures with the United States and thereby enjoyed an unfair competitive advantage? Would the noble Lord care to comment on that? It perhaps gives the flavour of so much of the legislation coming our way from Brussels.
Lord Truscott: My Lords. First, I confess that when metrication was introduced to this country through Parliament, I did not follow the debate very closely—partly because I was six years old at the time. I do not believe that the dual labelling of cauliflowers will lead to the end of civilisation as we know it. Having said that, the Department of Trade and Industry is well aware of the attitude of industry, particularly on metrication. We have had useful meetings with representatives of a wide range of sectors, and we are very up to date with their views. Currently, most transactions are dealt with through metric units. Of course, we are aware that there are countries such as the United States, for example, that do not use the metric system.
27 Nov 2006 : Column 542
Lord Dykes: My Lords, can the Minister be a little bit bolder on modernisation, bearing in mind the Labour pride in past modernisation? Is he not aware that metrication is wanted by the vast majority of trade associations in this country and in the other member states, including some of the new ones? Why do we not press ahead with it, allowing for the consultation and bearing in mind that even the youngest school child understands the metric system in this country perfectly, unlike the noble Lord, Lord Pearson of Rannoch?
Lord Truscott: My Lords, of course there are arguments on both sides. There are those who support the metric lobby and there are others, not necessarily the youngest people, who are more comfortable with imperial measurements. We need to take both strands of opinion into account. The European Commission is looking at the area, so we should await its consultation before holding our own in this country.
Lord Howe of Aberavon: My Lords, is the Minister aware that the decision to proceed to metrication in this country—
Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that, when in 1799 compulsory metric measures were forced on France, the system was so badly received by the populace that the old measures remained in use? Napoleon in 1812, when he had more pressing problems on his mind, authorised the usage of what he called mesures usuelles, which relegalised traditional French measures. They are still in use in France today. With that historical lesson in mind, will Her Majesty's Government tell the European Commission that they will not criminalise the use of non-metrical measures?
Lord Truscott: My Lords, I do not want to go back in history quite so far as 1812, bearing in mind that we are in 2006. The noble Lord has a point, but the Commission will look at the issue. It has already granted one extension on the regulations on dual labelling that came in in 1989, which have been reviewed and extended until 1999 and then again to 2009. The Commission is looking at a further extension of the use of dual labelling, and even a permanent derogation, so it is too early for me to comment on the issues that he raises.
Lord Waddington: My Lords, is it not important to hammer home the point that this is nothing whatever to do with the merits or demerits of metrication? What possible public benefit would follow from the likes of me being deprived of the right to know whether I was buying a shirt with a 15 and a half-inch collar? How will the banning of those so-called supplementary indications hamper free trade or the completion of the single market?
Lord Truscott: My Lords, far be it from me to deprive the noble Lord of his size 15 and a half shirt. However, supplementary indications or dual labelling help the consumer to make an informed choice and allow for proper price comparisons. That is sensible.
27 Nov 2006 : Column 543
Lord Howe of Aberavon: My Lords—
Lord Taverne: My Lords, leaving aside the question of the confusion caused—
The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Rooker): My Lords, it is the Cross-Benches’ turn, to be honest, and a Cross-Bencher did stand up.
Lord Monson: My Lords, I declare an interest as a patron of the BWMA. Is the Minister aware that, unless something is done, in just over three years it will be illegal to sell not only the shirt with a 15 and a half-inch collar to which the noble Lord, Lord Waddington, referred, but a pair of size 9 shoes? It will be illegal to advertise a car that does 50 miles to the gallon or an executive jet that cruises at 30,000 feet above the weather. Moreover, what will happen about bicycles? The Minister may not be aware, but they are sold with 26 or 28-inch wheels all over Europe, not merely in the United Kingdom.
Lord Truscott: My Lords, as I said, the Commission is looking at that. We have already had two reviews that have extended the use of dual labelling, and we may well have further extensions or a permanent derogation of the scheme, so I do not think that the noble Lord’s fears are justified. After all, we still use the mile, the yard, the foot, the inch, the pint, the troy ounce, the acre and other imperial measurements, so perhaps he is being too doom-laden in his warnings.
Children and Young People: Bullying
2.44 pm
Baroness Massey of Darwen asked Her Majesty’s Government:
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Education and Skills (Lord Adonis): My Lords, the Government fund the Anti-Bullying Alliance to help teachers and schools to tackle bullying, such as through the annual anti-bullying week, last week. Other initiatives to tackle bullying include our widely used anti-bullying guidance, Don’t Suffer in Silence, which we are supplementing with new guidance on prejudice-driven bullying, and the new Education and Inspections Act which imposes new requirements on schools, when framing their behaviour policies, to consult all pupils and parents.
Baroness Massey of Darwen: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that comprehensive reply. I am pleased that he mentioned anti-bullying week when a number of issues were raised about what was being done to and by young people to make them unhappy.
27 Nov 2006 : Column 544
Lord Adonis: My Lords, my noble friend raises an important point. It is vital that schools engage fully with parents on all incidents of bullying. My department, the DfES, provides £200,000 a year to fund Parentline Plus, a telephone advice line offering guidance for parents on a range of subjects, including bullying. As well as the advice line itself, that money funds the Be Someone to Tell information campaign and booklet, aimed at parents whose children are bullies or are being bullied. I am told that schools and parents have been made aware of the campaign and associated resources via the PLP website. At first, I thought that that was a new function for the Parliamentary Labour Party, but I discovered that although that would be an important function for it, the initials stand for the Parentline Plus website, www.parentlineplus.org.uk. We urge all parents whose children are bullied to use the website and to take full advantage of the advice and guidance that is offered there.
Lord Rix: My Lords, does the Minister accept the recent findings of the Children’s Commissioner for England, Professor Aynsley-Green, that children or young people with disabilities are twice as likely to be bullied as their peers and that those with learning disabilities are bullied even more? If so, what do he and the Government propose to do about them?
Lord Adonis: My Lords, the noble Lord raises an important point and he will be aware that, under the Disability Discrimination Act, from December all schools must have in place disability equality plans. The tackling of prejudice against disabled children, including bullying, is one of the features that schools will have to cover in those plans.
Baroness Morris of Bolton: My Lords, I was delighted to see that Bolton Wanderers and celebrities such as Sara Cox led initiatives last week to highlight the problems of bullying. However, how we can avoid our children getting mixed messages, when many reality TV programmes that are widely watched depend on ritual humiliation and when a video game about bullying is just about to go on sale in our shops?
Lord Adonis: My Lords, first, I welcome the noble Baroness to her new duties on the Front Bench and I send the best wishes of the House to her predecessor, the noble Baroness, Lady Buscombe, who we congratulate on her appointment as chief executive of the Advertising Association.
The noble Baroness, Lady Morris, raises an important issue. We expect parents, who should be in the front line of tackling these issues, to exercise proper care and discretion over the activities engaged in by their children, including participation in those sorts of games and the high risks that they carry, as set out by the noble Baroness.
27 Nov 2006 : Column 545
Baroness Walmsley: My Lords, how are the Government working with the various faith and cultural groups to ensure that bullying policies take into account and celebrate the differences between all children who attend our schools?
Lord Adonis: My Lords, the noble Baroness raises an important issue. One of the announcements made last week during anti-bullying week was an important project to examine faith-based and other prejudice-driven bullying in schools, in association with the Beatbullying group. This will cover issues such as Islamophobia and problems faced by pupils with disabilities. I shall certainly let the noble Baroness know when we have the results of that.
Lord Ahmed: My Lords, on Islamophobia, is my noble friend aware that a recent survey by the Mayor of London showed that since the “veil debate” there has been a huge increase in the bullying of Muslim children? What instructions to deal with that, if any, have the Government given to school governing bodies or head teachers?
Lord Adonis: My Lords, we could not be clearer in the guidance and advice we give to schools on bullying. We have also issued guidance on tackling bullying specifically in relation to race, religion and culture, and next year we will publish guidance responding to homophobia and homophobic bullying. So we take all these areas of bullying very seriously indeed and we make advice available to schools. However, ultimately, schools have a duty to take this issue sufficiently seriously, and we rely on them to engage fully with parents and staff to see that that is so. We believe that the new powers in the Education and Inspections Act—particularly the much stronger powers that schools now have in respect of discipline and behaviour—will make it easier to enforce the policies that they have in place.
Baroness Howe of Idlicote: My Lords, everyone will be concerned to see that parents are thoroughly involved in the procedures, but do the Government think that the special arrangements in place are appropriate for young carers, whose parents are perhaps not as actively involved? For example, mentoring by older pupils of new pupils at a school might very well help in this respect.
Lord Adonis: My Lords, mentoring plays an important role in tackling bullying, not least in respect of young carers—a very important group mentioned by the noble Baroness. Last week, we set out plans to extend the successful peer mentoring scheme by adding nearly £500,000 extra to the Childline in Partnership with Schools scheme to expand the training programmes to cover more than 60,000 young people a year. So we are giving additional support in that area.
27 Nov 2006 : Column 546
Allotments
2.51 pm
Baroness Sharples asked Her Majesty’s Government:
How many allotments have been closed over the past five years; and whether any new allotments have been established in the same period.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Communities and Local Government (Baroness Andrews): My Lords, government office records indicate that in the past five years disposals have affected 225 statutory allotment sites in accordance with the legislative and planning framework, which is in place to protect statutory allotments. We do not require local authorities to provide figures for the disposal of temporary or private allotments, allotment gains or gains for other types of green spaces, as it is a matter for local authorities to determine levels of provision to meet a community’s needs.
Baroness Sharples: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for that reply but is she aware that in one year alone, out of 56 applications, 44 were approved, which is equivalent to 84 football pitches? Is she also aware that in many areas people are looking for allotments without success and that there is a long waiting list for them?
Baroness Andrews: My Lords, I was not aware of those specific figures, but I am glad to have them and should like more details. There is no doubt that we have strengthened protection for allotments since 2002, when we put in place the regime under our planning policy guidance 17, whereby consent can be given only if an allotment is surplus to requirements, if adequate provision is made and if note has been taken of the numbers on the waiting lists. We have also made it clear that local authorities must audit their green spaces. This is an important matter. I am sure that the noble Baroness shares my passion for allotments, which bring great joy to the community. There is an increasing demand for them and we want to see more being provided.
Lord Borrie: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that the provision of allotments on a greater scale than is permitted at the moment could be part of the Government’s campaign to combat obesity? Allotments involve not only the direct production of healthy food but also exercise for the allotment holders. Is it not astonishing that so far the Minister has said only that this matter is up to local authorities when the Government themselves are campaigning on various matters relating to obesity among young people?
Baroness Andrews: Absolutely, my Lords. We are in debt to the 1908 Liberal Government—perhaps the last Liberal Government—who introduced the requirement to provide allotments. There is no doubt
27 Nov 2006 : Column 547
Baroness Scott of Needham Market: My Lords, as things stand at present, local authorities are able to use Section 106 planning agreements to secure land for allotments and funding for various small-scale local projects. Is the Minister aware of the disquiet created by the proposal for a planning gain supplement, which will be distributed centrally, which will put under direct threat small-scale local projects such as allotments?
Baroness Andrews: My Lords, it is certainly true that Section 106 has enabled developers to make provision for allotments. The planning gain supplement is still very much under consideration. We have to be a little patient about the outcome.
Lord Skelmersdale: My Lords, does the Minister accept that obesity exists principally among those under 30? What is the average age of allotment holders?
Baroness Andrews: My Lords, the average age is certainly coming down. Interestingly, we have a very proactive policy for developing green spaces. The Public Accounts Committee praised the way that our green spaces, particularly parks, are improving in quality. We support the British Trust for Conservation Volunteers which has a wonderful scheme called Green Gyms under which young people go to green spaces, clean them up and improve them, and in the process improve their own health.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I invite my noble friend to take a little further the advice given to local authorities. I recognise what the Government have done and that many local authorities have preserved a number of allotment sites against planning stress—I was gratified to find that my grandfather's allotment still existed in an area of great stress in west London—but does the Minister accept that a number of local authorities, including some in rural areas, allow transport, planning and housing decisions to override the need to preserve allotments of all sorts, not simply those that are preserved as a result of earlier statutory provision?
Baroness Andrews: My Lords, allotments have been uniquely protected under the law since 1925. They are not treated as previously developed land. All the evidence suggests that when allotments are disposed of some are used for housing—necessarily so in some cases—but many are used for improving green spaces so they become other kinds of green spaces. That position is not categorical, and such decisions are very difficult to make, especially when they have to weigh up the criteria set out in PPG17.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |