You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Lords Publications > Lords Hansard > Lords Hansard by Date > Daily Hansard
Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I recognise my noble friend’s representation on this matter. Of course, accurate statistics always aid policy. She will recognise that before the 2001 census the Government had already begun to develop their National Carers Strategy, giving

23 July 2007 : Column 549

priority to this area. She is right that accurate information assisted the development of the policy.

Lord Tebbit: My Lords, I suppose that I should declare an interest as a carer myself. Will the noble Lord encourage those responsible for taking this decision to look at which of the other competing questions could be answered more easily by other methods of opinion survey? Much of the information that we have gathered about the role and number of carers could not have been discovered in any other way. Taking that into account, surely we should look at putting that question on the census form as a priority.

Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the noble Lord makes a most valuable contribution and that is a very important point. He will appreciate that we are increasingly concerned that we identify the number of carers and the necessary support for them in the very valuable work that they do. The other potential questions for the census—indeed, all questions—are examined with regard to whether the information could be gathered in any other way. I give one element of encouragement to the House, and a constructive response. The three departments for Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales are in favour of a question on carers being on the census.

Baroness Massey of Darwen: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that there are a number of unknown carers such as grandparents? Does he further agree that children’s services at a local level and collaboration between those services could be put at jeopardy by not knowing who those carers for children are?

Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, my noble friend speaks with great authority on this point and reinforces the importance of our having the maximum amount of information on carers. I merely emphasise again that such representations can be made on other priorities, too, which is why the Government are still evaluating the position as a whole. When they have done so, they will produce a White Paper and eventually an order, which will be put before both Houses of Parliament.

Earl Howe: My Lords, without wishing to labour this question more than necessary, perhaps I may follow up a point alluded to by the noble Baroness, Lady Pitkeathley. The Minister will know that, in the 2001 census, 175,000 young carers in the UK were identified, but it turns out that only 30,000 of those are currently known to carers support services. Will he bear in mind the usefulness of including a suitably worded question in the census to identify these young carers with a view to supporting them as appropriate?

Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I accept the point that the noble Earl has made. The whole House is aware that we needed to develop a much greater understanding of the role and needs of carers than we had a decade ago. That is why the Government have made strenuous efforts in that regard. We are looking at whether other strategies and organisations can provide the requisite information for us, but I accept the point made on all sides this afternoon that the census could play a very important role in this respect.



23 July 2007 : Column 550

Food: Labelling

2.59 pm

Lord Taylor of Holbeach asked Her Majesty’s Government:

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, food labelling is an area of EU competence. The European Commission is conducting a review of food labelling, and country of origin requirements are being considered as part of this. The UK has already indicated to the Commission that in principle it is in favour of an extension to the rules, subject to satisfactory cost-benefit analysis.

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: My Lords, I declare an interest as a British farmer and grower. I am sure that the noble Baroness will agree with me that British shoppers would prefer to buy food from British farms. At the moment, it is possible for all the constituent parts of a processed product to be produced abroad and for it still to be labelled as British if it is processed or packed here. What does the Minister propose to do to close that loophole?

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I wholeheartedly agree that we all prefer to buy British produce from British farmers and producers whenever possible. The FSA produces assisting guidance, as the noble Lord may be aware. It advises, for example, that bacon produced from imported pork should be labelled “Made from Danish pork cured in Britain” or something similar. FSA guidance is extremely important. All the issues raised by the noble Lord will be taken into account in the context of the European Commission review, because we want to ensure that more people buy British whenever possible.

Lord Swinfen: My Lords, given that Welsh lamb exported to France and butchered there can be labelled as French, what is being done to make certain that the French understand that it is Welsh not French lamb?

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, the fact that these are European rules should mean that they are consistently applied throughout the European Union; therefore, I hope that the standards will be upheld in France as they are in the United Kingdom.

Baroness Barker: My Lords, will Her Majesty’s Government, as part of the EU review, recommend that, across the EU, product-origin marks be given solely to meat from animals born, reared and slaughtered in the same country?

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I am sorry for a very tedious reply but, again, the review will look at whether it will be cost-effective and appropriate for a label to give information about where meat products are reared and so on.

Lord Dubs: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that, whatever legal requirements come from Brussels, many people in this country would like not only that

23 July 2007 : Column 551

producers label their products as being of British origin, but to know how local they are to the point of purchase. The success of farmers’ markets indicates that people want to buy not just British but as local as they can. Will the Government encourage supermarkets and producers voluntarily to label in such a way that we know just how local a product is?

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, producers are at liberty to put that information on their products now. As the noble Lord suggests, it is a voluntary scheme. As I shop in many farmers’ markets and in supermarkets I note that more and more products indeed have labels going into great detail about the locality in which they are produced. I, for one, always buy those products.

Baroness Oppenheim-Barnes: My Lords, is the Minister aware that I introduced country of origin markings legislation in 1980 but subsequently it had to be withdrawn because the EU described it as a non-tariff barrier? I am delighted to hear that it appears to be changing its mind. I hope, too, that it will change its mind about the ridiculous E numbers in foods, which cover up a number of toxic substances and are incomprehensible to the public.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I congratulate the noble Baroness on her far-sighted proposed legislation in the previous Conservative Government. I note what she says about E numbers, but that is a rather different question.

Baroness Tonge: My Lords, what progress is being made in ensuring that food grown in the Occupied Territories of Palestine, including the settlements, is labelled as grown in Palestine and not labelled as Israeli?

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I do not have that specific information to hand but I know that Her Majesty’s Government pay great attention to it. We want to ensure that more people are aware of produce that is produced by Palestinians in their territories.

Baroness Byford: My Lords, further to the Minister’s first reply, if the EU decides not to change the present circumstances, what will the Government do about it?

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, as ever, the Government will make very firm, strong and robust representations in the European Union.

Business

3.05 pm

Lord Grocott: My Lords, we shall have two Statements repeated today, after the debate on the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill. The first, on flooding, will be repeated by my noble friend Lord Rooker, and the second, on housing, by my noble friend Lady Andrews.



23 July 2007 : Column 552

Private Security Industry Act 2001 (Amendments to Schedule 2) Order 2007

Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Investigation of Protected Electronic Information, Code of Practice) Order 2007

Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Acquisition and Disclosure of Communications Data, Code of Practice) Order 2007

Railway Pensions (Transfer of Pension Schemes) Order 2007

Lord Grocott: My Lords, I beg to move the four Motions standing in the name of my noble friend Lord Bassam of Brighton on the Order Paper.

Moved, That the draft orders laid before the House on 4, 7 and 11 June be approved. 19th Report from the Statutory Instruments Committee, considered in Grand Committee on 17 July.—(Lord Grocott.)

On Question, Motions agreed to.

Terrorism (Northern Ireland) Act 2006 (Transitional Provisions and Savings) Order 2007

Regulatory Reform (Deer) (England and Wales) Order 2007

The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Rooker): My Lords, I beg to move the two Motions standing in my name on the Order Paper.

Moved, That the draft orders laid before the House on 28 June and 5 July be approved. 22nd Report from the Statutory Instruments Committee and 12th Report from the Regulatory Reform Committee, considered in Grand Committee on 17 July.—(Lord Rooker.)

On Question, Motions agreed to.

Companies Act 2006 (Commencement No. 3, Consequential Amendments, Transitional Provisions and Savings) Order 2007

Scotland Act 1998 (Transfer of Functions to the Scottish Ministers etc.) Order 2007

Scottish Parliament (Elections etc.) (Amendment) Order 2007

Lord Evans of Temple Guiting: My Lords, I beg to move the Motions standing in my name on the Order Paper.



23 July 2007 : Column 553

Moved, That the draft orders laid before the House on 20 June and 2 and 9 July be approved. 21st and 23rd Reports from the Statutory Instruments Committee, considered in Grand Committee on 17 July.—(Lord Evans of Temple Guiting.)

On Question, Motions agreed to.

European Communities (Definition of Treaties) (Stabilisation and Association Agreement) (Republic of Albania) Order 2007

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 20 June be approved. 21st Report from the Statutory Instruments Committee, considered in Grand Committee on 17 July.—(Baroness Royall of Blaisdon.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Housing Benefit (Loss of Benefit) (Pilot Scheme) Regulations 2007

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Lord McKenzie of Luton): My Lords, I beg to move the Motion standing in my name on the Order Paper.

Moved, That the draft regulations laid before the House on 20 June be approved. 21st Report from the Statutory Instruments Committee, considered in Grand Committee on 17 July.—(Lord McKenzie of Luton.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Parliamentary Constituencies (Amendment) Bill [HL]

Read a third time, and passed, and sent to the Commons.

Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill

3.08 pm

The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Ashton of Upholland): My Lords, I beg to move that the Commons amendments be now considered.

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

[The page and line references are to HL Bill 19 as first printed for the Lords.]

“(d) a duty owed to a person who, by reason of being a person within subsection (1A), is someone for whose safety the organisation is responsible.(a) he is detained at a custodial institution or in a custody area at a court or police station;

23 July 2007 : Column 554

(b) he is detained at a removal centre or short-term holding facility;(c) he is being transported in a vehicle, or being held in any premises, in pursuance of prison escort arrangements or immigration escort arrangements;(d) he is living in secure accommodation in which he has been placed;(e) he is a detained patient.”““custodial institution” means a prison, a young offender institution, a secure training centre, a young offenders institution, a young offenders centre, a juvenile justice centre or a remand centre;“detained patient” means-“immigration escort arrangements” means arrangements made under section 156 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 (c. 33);”““prison escort arrangements” means arrangements made under section 80 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 (c.53) or under section 102 or 118 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (c. 33);“removal centre” and “short-term holding facility” have the meaning given by section 147 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 (c. 33);“secure accommodation” means accommodation, not consisting of or forming part of a custodial institution, provided for the purpose of restricting the liberty of persons under the age of 18.”“Power to extend section 2(1A)(a) is required by virtue of a statutory provision to remain or reside on particular premises, or(b) is otherwise subject to a restriction of his liberty.

23 July 2007 : Column 555

““premises” includes land, buildings and moveable structures;"

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I beg to move Motion A, That the House do not insist on its Amendments Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 10, or on its Amendments Nos. 10P and 10Q proposed in lieu of Commons Amendments Nos. 10K to 10N, and do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 10R, 10S, 10T, 10U, 10V, 10X, 10Y, 10Z and 10AA in lieu of Lords Amendments Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 10, 10P and 10Q.

We turn to the discussion of fresh amendments sent to us from another place. It might be helpful if I say a few words about the deadline for considering the Bill. The noble Lord, Lord Hunt, and other noble Lords raised the question of the deadline in our previous discussions and noble Lords will be aware from previous debates that, under the procedures of the other place, proceedings on a Bill that has been carried over from the last Session—as was the case for this Bill—must be completed within 12 months of the Bill being introduced unless that period is extended. That period has been extended, by a week, to provide the other place and your Lordships’ House with further time to consider the very significant further amendments that the Government have brought forward.

The nub of concern with the Government’s amendments so far has been that they would leave a discretion whether to extend the offence to custody. The further amendments tabled by the Government remove that doubt by extending the relevant duties of care in the Bill to include duties owed to those in custody. In a nutshell, the amendments make custody an integral part of the offence. I hope that noble Lords will agree that that is a very significant change. This is achieved by Amendment No. 10R, which also sets out a wide definition of custodial environments that will be covered. This comprehensively addresses the forms of custody identified in the amendments proposed in your Lordships’ House.

Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page