PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES - publications.parliament.uk · “go early”CFDs—has far exceeded our expectations. I believe that there will be some good news on offshore wind shortly

Thursday Volume 57128 November 2013 No. 84

HOUSE OF COMMONSOFFICIAL REPORT

PARLIAMENTARYDEBATES

(HANSARD)

Thursday 28 November 2013

£5·00

© Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2013This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence,

which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/.

House of Commons


The House met at half-past Nine o’clock

PRAYERS

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

Oral Answers to Questions

ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE

The Secretary of State was asked—

Decarbonisation

1. Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab): If hewill set a target to decarbonise the power sector by2030. [901298]

9. Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central) (Lab):If he will set a target to decarbonise the power sectorby 2030. [R] [901307]

11. Karl Turner (Kingston upon Hull East) (Lab): Ifhe will set a target to decarbonise the power sector by2030. [901314]

The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change(Mr Edward Davey): I agree that there should be apower sector decarbonisation target for 2030. That iswhy the Government are legislating so that adecarbonisation target range can be set in 2016, oncethe fifth carbon budget has been set. When that targethas been set, we believe it will be the world’s first suchlegally binding decarbonisation target.

Joan Walley: I am interested to hear that the Secretaryof State agrees with me. We have all-party support forthe Climate Change Act 2008, a recommendation fromthe Committee on Climate Change that the target forclean power should be set now, rather than later, and aBill going through Parliament that could get rid of allthe uncertainty. By delaying this decision until 2016, ishe not simply creating greater investor uncertainty,risking green jobs and kowtowing to the Chancellor?

Mr Davey: I should like to pay tribute to the hon.Lady, now that she has told people that she will not bestanding at the next election. She has been a doughtychampion of green issues in the House. However, I donot believe that this short delay of two years will havethe impact that she describes. She should rememberthat we have the EU 2020 targets for energy efficiency,renewables and emissions; the Climate Change Act,with the carbon budgets running up to 2027; and theEnergy Bill which provides the most secure framework,the levy control framework going up to 2020, and

industrial strategies. This country is arguing for themost ambitious 2030 greenhouse gas emissions targetof any EU member state. It is just not true that investorsthink that this Government are not committed to thisissue.

Chi Onwurah: This Government talk loudly, and attimes obscenely, about the costs of decarbonisation, butthey say little about the benefits, such as the potentialfor green jobs on Tyneside, which leads the world inclean power. If the delay is not causing the lack ofinvestment, why has investment in clean energy fallenby billions of pounds since this Government came topower? And what is the Secretary of State going to doto bring more green jobs to Tyneside?

Mr Davey: The hon. Lady should not talk down thesector or her own area. She ought to know, because wehave debated the matter at the Dispatch Box, that£31 billion has been invested in renewable electricitysince 2010. We have doubled the amount of renewableelectricity generation since we came to power.

Karl Turner: Does the Secretary of State agree thatsetting a decarbonisation target for 2030 would greatlyassist the much needed investment in Hull by Siemens?Or does he agree with the Prime Minister that this is alljust “green crap”?

Mr Davey: The whole Government, working withcolleagues like the hon. Gentleman, are doing our verybest to ensure that we get that supply chain investmentin the UK for our green sector. He knows that we areworking with him and other hon. Members from Hullto do just that.

David Mowat (Warrington South) (Con): The Secretaryof State will be aware that the UK now has among thelowest emissions per capita and per unit of GDP inEurope. For example, they are 25% lower than those ofGermany, which has just embarked on a programmeof building coal power stations. Is there anything morewe can do to help our European partners have any kindof meaningful targets?

Mr Davey: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for hisquestion. We are working with all our EU partners toraise ambition in the EU. This Government have proposedthat we should have an EU target of a 40% reduction indomestic greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, and beprepared to go up to 50% if we can get a global deal in2015. We are leading the way in Europe on ambition.

Sir Nick Harvey (North Devon) (LD): My right hon.Friend will have noted that progress towards thedecarbonisation goal was interrupted this week by thewithdrawal of the Atlantic Array offshore wind projectoff the north Devon coast. Is he concerned that if thatwere to be followed by other decisions by utility companiesto withdraw from such schemes, we could lose controlof those critical national infrastructure decisions? Is hecontent with a situation in which the big six and foreignutilities effectively have a veto over those critical investmentdecisions?

Mr Davey: I do not see it quite as my hon. Frienddoes. We were initially disappointed when the decisionon the Atlantic Array was announced, but when welearned that it was for technical reasons and that the

385 38628 NOVEMBER 2013

further analysis of the seabed that was needed wouldhave increased the cost, we understood why it had beentaken. My hon. Friend should be reassured, because thenumber of applications that we have received for finalinvestment decision-enabling contracts for difference—the“go early” CFDs—has far exceeded our expectations. Ibelieve that there will be some good news on offshorewind shortly.

Julie Elliott (Sunderland Central) (Lab): As has beensaid, RWE pulled the plug on the 240 turbine, 1.2 GWwind farm in the Bristol channel this week, saying thatit was not the right time to invest, although I accept thatit also cited some technical reasons. That is the patternwith this Government: investment has gone down from£7.2 billion in 2009 to a point where it is expected to be£1.9 billion this year. Nearly four of the five projectscoming on line since 2010 were started under Labour.Does the Secretary of State accept that his refusal toadopt a 2030 power generation decarbonisation targetnow is scaring away investment, damaging green jobsand jeopardising our future energy security?

Mr Davey: That, of course, is absolutely not the case.If anything is damaging green jobs, it is the Leader ofthe Opposition and his irresponsible position on freezingenergy prices. That has had a damaging effect on investment,and the right hon. Member for Don Valley (CarolineFlint) knows it. We have a very good record in this area,and I am looking forward to making more announcementsof more investment.

Switching Suppliers

2. Mr Alan Reid (Argyll and Bute) (LD): Whatassessment he has made of the process involved when aScottish and Southern Energy customer on its “TotalHeating, Total Control” tariff tries to switch to anotherelectricity supplier. [901299]

The Minister of State, Department of Energy andClimate Change (Michael Fallon): The ability to switchsupplier is a key driver of a competitive market, and it isimportant that we address areas where this is difficulty.I therefore welcome the opportunity to discuss with myhon. Friend the particular difficulties faced by customerson the “Total Heating, Total Control” tariff.

Mr Reid: The Government are right to encouragepeople to switch their supplier to get a better deal.However, consumers on SSE’s “Total Heating, TotalControl” tariff find in practice that they cannot switchbecause wiring and meters need to be changed andother suppliers simply do not want to know. What canmy right hon. Friend do to make it easier for theseconsumers to switch?

Michael Fallon: My hon. Friend is right to say thatcustomers who have dynamic teleswitched meters inevitablyhave a narrower choice of supplier. It is therefore all themore important that Ofgem ensures that the tariffs theyare on are kept reasonable. I would like to discussfurther with him how we might help those particularcustomers to switch more easily.

Mr Mike Weir (Angus) (SNP): Following on fromwhat the Minister just said, one reason why people wantto switch from this tariff is that they are finding that

although the headline increase announced by the companyis high enough, they are being quoted sometimes twicethat increase in their electricity prices. Is there anythinghe can do to press Ofgem as to why there is such a hugeincrease in this tariff ?

Michael Fallon: I shall certainly do that. When Ofgemlast looked at this tariff, it thought that the price wasreasonable compared with some other time-of-use tariffsoffered by other suppliers, such as Economy 7. However,I am very happy to take the matter up again withOfgem.

Sir Robert Smith (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine)(LD): In taking the issue up with Ofgem, the Ministerneeds to emphasise just how trapped these people feel.They feel that they cannot shop around and they wantto be completely reassured that they are getting thefairest deal possible. In the long run, will he examinewhether it would be worth accelerating and prioritisingthe roll-out of smart meters for these customers tomake it easier for them to switch?

Michael Fallon: As I have said, it is not satisfactorythat dynamic teleswitched meter customers have a choiceof fewer suppliers than other customers, although thereare technical reasons for that. I am happy to take thismatter up again with Ofgem to see what we can do tomake it easier for such customers to switch.

Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab): A number of myconstituents who have switched recently have been hitby significant charges—in one case, thousands of pounds.Given that switching is the Government’s main policyon energy, what can they do to ensure that mistakes arenot being made by energy companies and that there is afair deal for all customers who switch?

Michael Fallon: If the charges are at that level, it isclearly unacceptable. We will look at this with Ofgemto make sure that everybody is entitled to a choice—everybody is entitled to switch—and if there are particulardifficulties with dynamic teleswitched meters, they needto be looked at.

Green Levies

3. Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con):What representations he has received on the level ofgreen levies; and if he will make a statement. [901300]

The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change(Mr Edward Davey): I have had a number of representationson the level of green levies, and the Government expectto make a statement on the conclusions of our currentreview shortly.

Miss McIntosh: I am grateful to my right hon. Friendfor that reply. There is concern not only about theincrease of the green levies, but about a lack of choicein where the green levies go. Is it feasible that on ahousehold energy bill there could be a box for people totick to show their preferred renewable to support?

387 38828 NOVEMBER 2013Oral Answers Oral Answers

Mr Davey: We certainly want to ensure that we aredoing everything to help consumers; that is why we arehaving this review. The hon. Lady’s proposal mightcreate a little more uncertainty than we are trying toachieve and we need certainty for the investment.

Mr Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op): Willthe Secretary of State stand up to the Conservatives onthis? There is no doubt that the Conservatives are usingthe green levy as a fig leaf. The fact is that we need anintelligent policy that delivers great environmental changein our country; he should not let the Tories defer that.

Mr Davey: My colleagues and I will stand together.On the green levy review, we need to do all we can tohelp consumers with energy bills and I should havethought that the Opposition supported that, but I havemade it clear that we will not do that on the backs of thefuel poor—we will keep our support for them in thelevy—and that we will ensure that there is investment inrenewable energy.

Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD): Will the Secretary of Stateensure that in any review of the green levies measuresare taken to protect the fuel poor, particularly those inrural Somerset?

Mr Davey: The House will be pleased to know thatthe social and green levies protect everybody, whetherthey are in rural Somerset or anywhere else in thecountry. On a number of occasions, I have made clear inthis House and elsewhere my commitment to maintainthe support for the fuel poor.

Nic Dakin (Scunthorpe) (Lab): Why is the Secretaryof State persisting with the carbon price floor tax,which is unilaterally damaging core foundation industriessuch as steel and chemicals, when even his predecessorsays it has no green benefit and is simply about liningthe Chancellor’s pocket?

Mr Davey: The Chancellor introduced the carbonprice floor at the beginning of this Parliament andconfirmed the rates in the Budget this year. The purposeis to send a clear incentive message to people investingin low carbon, which I believe the hon. Gentlemansupports. I also hope that he supports the compensationpackage this Government have put together to helpenergy-intensive industries, to support them and to helpthem defray those costs.

Tom Greatrex (Rutherglen and Hamilton West) (Lab/Co-op): One element of the levies applied to consumerbills funds the renewables obligation certificate payments,as the Secretary of State knows. He will also be awarethat a third of those payments go to generators inScotland, but, with 8.4% of the consumer base, they arefunded by bill payers across Britain. When Infinis, aScottish-based renewables generator, published its flotationprospectus a couple of weeks ago, it cited the outcomeof separation as one of its key risks. On Monday, thenationalists in Edinburgh published their plan for Scotlandto separate from the rest of the UK, asserting that“shared support for renewables and capital costs of transmissionamong consumers in Scotland and the rest of the UK”

would continue. Can the Secretary of State guaranteethat that will definitively be the case?

Mr Davey: I cannot, of course, guarantee that. ShouldScotland decide to vote for independence, there wouldhave to be a negotiation. We cannot prejudge thatnegotiation, not least because despite the publication bythe Scottish Executive this week, there was a lack ofdetail on some key elements. The hon. Gentleman isright to point out to the House and the country that ifScotland votes for independence and there can be noguarantee of support for renewables in Scotland fromEnglish, Welsh and Northern Irish consumers, Scottishconsumers and industry could see price rises.

Energy Efficiency

4. Caroline Lucas (Brighton, Pavilion) (Green): Whatrecent assessment he has made of the contribution ofenergy efficiency to reducing energy costs. [901301]

The Minister of State, Department of Energy andClimate Change (Gregory Barker): Since 2010, morethan 4.8 million insulation measures have been installedthrough Government schemes. For the average home,installing such measures can typically save between£25 and £270 on an annual energy bill.

Caroline Lucas: This week, we have heard that excesswinter deaths are up 29% on last year, with up to31,000 excess winter deaths. That should be a nationalscandal. Why, in that context, have the Governmentabolished the duty to eliminate fuel poverty, why will henot agree to amend the Energy Bill to include mandatoryminimum energy efficiency standards for the homes oflow-income households, and will they reverse theiropposition to a binding EU 2030 energy efficiencytarget?

Gregory Barker: I share the hon. Lady’s concernsabout the winter deaths, but one has to say, being veryobjective about it, that there was a clear link betweeninfluenza and those deaths in the last period looked at.

We cannot be complacent about the impact of coldhomes. That is why we have a national energy efficiencystrategy—we are the first Government ever to have sucha strategy—and why we have an ambitious public andmarket-based programme to roll out energy efficiencyacross the housing stock.

Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): If we reallywant to target help with energy bills on those who needit most, why do we not insist through building standardsthat all new build social housing has solar panels on theroof?

Gregory Barker: I am not unsympathetic to that idea,but the responsibility for building standards rests withthe Department for Communities and Local Government.We have zero-carbon homes, but the key challenge forthis country is the existing housing stock in which thevast majority of people live now and in which they willlive for decades to come. The real challenge for us is notto build relatively few great homes but to retrofit theentire housing stock, to the benefit of everyone.

Jonathan Reynolds (Stalybridge and Hyde) (Lab/Co-op):Following that answer and speculation in the presstoday, does the Minister accept that cutting the energycompany obligation by extending the deadline for


companies to meet it would punish the companies thathave so far sought to meet the obligation, cause seriousjob losses in the insulation industry and, most important,leave vulnerable people who have been promised thatthey will have that work done sitting in the cold thisChristmas?

Gregory Barker: I cannot prejudge any announcementthat will be coming shortly, but it is clear to all of usthat Labour stands for what is effectively a green polltax. It is right behind regressive levies on bills; it has nointerest in driving value for money. The coalition isstanding up not just for green values but for green valuefor money. Unlike the shadow Secretary of State, werecognise that £112 on bills matters to hard-workingfamilies, and if we can get better value from greenmeasures we will extract it. Only the coalition willensure that we get good value as well as meeting ourgreen targets.

Mr David Amess (Southend West) (Con): QuestionNo. 5, Mr Speaker.

The Minister of State, Department of Energy andClimate Change (Gregory Barker): With permission, Iwill answer this question and questions 5, 9, 13, 18, 20,and 21 together.

Mr Speaker: Order. The Minister is a little confused.I will try to rescue him. We have been advised of thedesire of the Government to link questions 5, 6, 12,13 and 14, and I am sure that that is what the right hon.Gentleman really has in mind. I should say for thebenefit of the House that the reason why we cannotgroup questions 18, 20 and 21 is that they do not exist.

Gregory Barker: I apologise, Mr Speaker, and standcorrected.

5. Mr David Amess (Southend West) (Con): Whatsteps he is taking to ensure the UK leads the way inenergy efficiency. [R] [901302]

6. Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab): What steps he istaking to help households improve their energyefficiency. [901303]

12. Chris Evans (Islwyn) (Lab/Co-op): What steps heis taking to help households improve their energyefficiency. [901315]

13. Grahame M. Morris (Easington) (Lab): Whatsteps he is taking to help households improve theirenergy efficiency. [901317]

14. Ian Murray (Edinburgh South) (Lab): What stepshe is taking to help households improve their energyefficiency. [901318]

The Minister of State, Department of Energy andClimate Change (Gregory Barker): Driving householdenergy efficiency take-up to help consumers controltheir energy bills is at the heart of our approach, andwith policies such as the green deal we have establishedthe conditions to grow energy efficiency markets inGreat Britain. Thousands of innovative businesses are

investinginthisnewmarket,andmorethan100,000consumershave begun the green deal improvement journey tomake their homes more efficient.

Mr Amess: As the promoter of the Warm Homes andEnergy Conservation Act 2000, may I ask my right hon.Friend to join me in commending National EnergyAction for its efforts to encourage people to be energyefficient and help to eliminate fuel poverty?

Gregory Barker: I certainly commend the NEA. I wasdelighted to attend its annual reception on Tuesday. Ialso commend my hon. Friend, whose record on fightingfuel poverty is second to none in the House. He has longbeen a champion of the fuel poor. We continue to workhand in hand with the NEA, developing the energysaving network. The Department has provided £900,000to fund the creation of the network and the NEA isdeveloping and delivering training to 500 energy advisers,and that is in addition to the community action awardson which we are also working with the NEA.

Wayne David: Earlier in the year the Minister saidthat he would have sleepless nights if his target of10,000 people signing up to the green deal before theend of the year was not met. We are almost at the end ofthe year; is he preparing for a period of prolongedinsomnia?

Gregory Barker: The hon. Gentleman is absolutelyright; I did anticipate around 10,000. The number ofpeople taking up finance so far has been significantlylower—about 1,200 as of last month. However, theextraordinary thing is that over 100,000 homes havehad green deal assessments, and the compelling responsehas been that over 80% of the people who have had agreen deal assessment are installing measures. If consumerslike the green deal and the products and if they areinstalling the measures, the fact that they are not yetusing the finance does not worry me. I am delightedthat over 100,000 green deal measures are being installedin people’s homes. It is fantastic news.

Chris Evans (Islwyn) (Lab/Co-op): Joyner PA in myconstituency has been providing wall insulation to peoplein Islwyn for over 30 years, making homes energy-efficient.When I visited the company last Friday, I was told thatapplying for Government green schemes is slow andbureaucratic. What are the Government doing to addressthat?

Gregory Barker: I am not sure which particular schemesthe hon. Gentleman is referring to, but if he would liketo write to me, I would be happy to address his queriesor concerns in detail. I take on board what he saysabout bureaucracy. That is why we have got rid of thecommunity energy saving programme, which we inheritedfrom the previous Government and which was incrediblybureaucratic. That is why we are looking to make theenergy company obligation and the green deal lessbureaucratic and as easy to understand for the consumeras possible. We will continue to iterate both schemes tomake them as consumer-friendly as possible.

Grahame M. Morris: May I draw the Minister’s attentionto a Lords amendment to the Energy Bill, which we willconsider next Wednesday, regarding measures to tackle


fuel poverty and using the energy efficiency certificatesas a means of targeting help at the poorest households?Will he give some consideration to accepting that, or aform of it, as a way of targeting help at the poorest?

Gregory Barker: The Energy Bill is on course forRoyal Assent and it is very important that it does notget held up. It has been considered in both Houses. It isabsolutely imperative for unlocking investment that weproceed with passing the Bill as a matter of urgency, sowe remain committed to that. I am always looking fornew ideas on energy efficiency, but I think that we havein place the most robust framework and the mostambitious strategy that any Government have had, butwe continue to look to improve that.

Ian Murray: Despite the Minister having slight problemswith the question numbers, we know that he is exceptionallynumerate, so can he tell the House how many householdshave actually had work done, according to his Department,under the green deal?

Gregory Barker: There were 1,173 plans in the system,as of October, and 594 are having measures installedand 219 at the end of October—[Interruption.]

Mr Speaker: Order. Afford the Minister a courteoushearing. Let us hear the rest of his answer.

Gregory Barker: Opposition Members might havehad a bit too much Red Bull this morning.

The figure was 219 at the end of October, but that isthe number of measures installed using finance. Thereally exciting thing is that tens of thousands of greendeal measures have been installed, with people using thecash-back or their own money. So compelling is thegreen deal that people want all the savings now. Ifpeople want to take all the savings now by recognisingthat green deal measures are a great investment, that is agood thing. We will continue to improve the financeoffer, but the green deal is up and running and it is along-term programme.

Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD): Earlier this monthI was fortunate to hear a presentation to the Transcoco—Transition Community Corsham—group in Corshamby an early adopter of the green deal. Although he wassatisfied with the payback period on his green deal loan,what was striking from his presentation was that theassessment revealed some pretty fundamental flaws inhis home’s energy insulation, despite the fact that it wasbuilt less than 10 years ago. Will the Minister speakwith colleagues in the Department for Communitiesand Local Government about the enforcement of theexisting building standards on new housing developments,because the failure to do that is costing ordinary peoplea lot in their bills?

Gregory Barker: The hon. Gentleman is right. For13 years, under the previous Government, there waslamentable enforcement of building standards. In fact,none of us can think of a single case that was prosecuted.He makes a very valid point. I will talk with my righthon. and hon. Friends in DCLG to see what more wecan do to ensure that standards are adhered to.

Energy Costs

7. Karen Lumley (Redditch) (Con): What steps he istaking to help consumers reduce energy bills. [901304]

The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change(Mr Edward Davey): The Government are providinghelp to consumers with energy bills in three basic ways:through direct financial support, with energy efficiencyinitiatives, and by boosting competition. In 2012-13,with the winter fuel payment, with the warm homediscount, and with cold weather payments, the Governmentspent over £2.5 billion on direct subsidies to reducebills. With the energy company obligation and the greendeal, we are helping consumers to reduce bills permanently.Along with Ofgem, our policies in the retail and wholesalemarkets are intensifying competition to help consumersreduce their bills this winter and every winter.

Karen Lumley: Does my right hon. Friend agree thatwhat the people of Redditch want are fair and firmenergy policies, in the realisation that no Governmentcan fix international oil and gas prices, despite whatthey are being told locally by the Opposition?

Mr Davey: The hon. Lady is absolutely right. It is acomplete con to pretend that fixing prices is going tohelp with bills, because no Government proposing orimplementing that could fix the prices before or afterthe freeze period. The price freeze offered by the Oppositionis not just a con but would not work.

Albert Owen (Ynys Môn) (Lab): Small businesses areimportant customers, and many have had huge energyprice rises. They do not have the opportunity to switcheasily; they do not even have a comparison website inorder to look at what at other companies are offering.What are the Government going to do about this? Willthey look seriously at helping small businesses with verypoor margins, many of which are going under becausethey cannot afford energy costs?

Mr Davey: The hon. Gentleman raises an importantpoint. We have been working very hard on this with No.10 and with small business organisations and looking atthe real issues—for example, the automatic roll-oversthat cause so many problems. We are gaining agreementswith the industry to stamp out these bad practices andto help small businesses.

Mr Tobias Ellwood (Bournemouth East) (Con): Aquarter of our energy needs were once met by nuclearpower, but that is no longer the case because six of thereactors that closed down under Labour Governmentswere not replaced. Does the Secretary of State agreethat it would be fair to say that energy bills are tougherto control because we are now over-reliant on importedfuel sources in order to make sure that our generatorsare fuelled?

Mr Davey: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Themain reason people’s fuel bills have gone up over thepast few years is that there has been a huge increase inwholesale gas prices, which accounts for 60% of theincrease in people’s bills. We are becoming more dependent


on imports of gas, and that is partly to do with the factthat the previous Government failed to make the essentialinvestments that this country needs.

Caroline Flint (Don Valley) (Lab): I know that theSecretary of State will share the whole House’s concernabout the number of excess winter deaths last year, andit is revealing that 80% were among the over-75s. On12 January 2012, Labour tabled a motion calling for theenergy companies to put all those over 75 on the cheapesttariff, but sadly the Government opposed it. Given thatthe evidence clearly shows that the over-75s are leastlikely to be on the lowest tariff, most likely to live inpoorly insulated properties and most vulnerable to thecold weather, will he reconsider and make the energycompanies put all those over 75 on the cheapest tariff intime for winter?

Mr Davey: Of course the excess winter deaths figuresare disturbing. I think that every Member and everyparty in this House is committed to tackling this, notleast because it is a problem that every Governmenthave faced. The solution lies in a combination of policies—health policies, social care policies, housing policies andenergy policies. That is why our fuel poverty strategy,which we will publish early in the new year, is a cross-Government attempt to make sure that we are tacklingthe real problem. I am afraid that once again the righthon. Lady is offering a simplistic solution, and sheforgets that this Government have already acted withOfgem to make sure that everyone is put on the lowestavailable tariff.

Caroline Flint: To be very clear, our policy is aboutputting all those over 75 on to the cheapest tariffregardless of how they pay and regardless of whetherthey are online, which is one of the factors preventingthem from getting the cheapest tariff. The Secretary ofState’s policy does not affect 90% of people and will stillleave those over 75 who are not online and do not payby direct debit paying more than other people. I remindhim that in his own constituency nearly 8,000 peopleover 75 would save up to £200 as a result of our policy.For those people, and for 4 million like them around thecountry, why will he not make the energy companies putthem on the cheapest tariff and refocus the ECO budgeton those living in fuel poverty?

Mr Davey: Because we are doing more for the elderly.This Government brought in the warm home discount,which is taking £135 off the bills of the poorest pensioners.That is real action, taking money directly off their bills.We will certainly take no lectures from the right hon.Lady.

Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con): My right hon. Friendwill be aware that consumers pay £60 extra on theirenergy bills because of VAT rates. Will he seek torenegotiate our VAT with the European Union so thatwe can get control over it and cut our energy bills?

Mr Davey: My hon. Friend gives me too much credit,because I am not in charge of VAT. I am sure my righthon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will listento what my hon. Friend says, but he sets even theChancellor a tall order by wanting him to renegotiatethe sixth VAT directive.

Green Policies

8. Kevin Brennan (Cardiff West) (Lab): What recentassessment he has made of the Government’s progresson implementing green policies. [901305]

The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change(Mr Edward Davey): There has been huge progress inthis area. In the Energy Bill, we are building the world’sfirst ever low-carbon electricity market and have alreadyseen renewable electricity generation double. To date,the UK Green Investment Bank has committed £740 millionof public money to projects in a range of green sectors,including waste, offshore wind and energy efficiency,helping to mobilise an additional £1.9 billion of financefrom the private sector. From the largest investment inthe railways since Victorian times to our leadership onclimate change in Europe and the world, our record inthis area is a vast improvement on the past.

Kevin Brennan: According to EUROSTAT, we wereone of only four countries in the EU 27 whose carbonemissions went up in 2012. They went up by 3.9%. Thatcannot be right, can it, if this is the greenest Governmentever? Is the Secretary of State’s new slogan, “Voteyellow, go blue”?

Mr Davey: If the hon. Gentleman looks at our workover this Parliament, he will see that we have beenreducing carbon emissions. It is true that last year therewas a small increase, because we have been burningmore coal than anyone expected. As a result of shalegas, the United States has been exporting its coal. Thatis why this Government are working so hard to reformthe EU emissions trading scheme, to make sure that wesend signals so that the same amount of coal is notburned in future.

Andrew George (St Ives) (LD): In order to be able toboth maintain the hundreds of thousands of green jobsin this country and to secure hundreds of thousandsmore, the Government need to reassure the renewablessector and major investors through consistent messagingand certainty. Is my right hon. Friend able to reassureme that such messaging is certain and secure not only inhis Department, but across all levels of other GovernmentDepartments, including the Prime Minister?

Mr Davey: It is interesting that when the Energy Billreceived its Third Reading in this House, only eightMembers voted against it. All the Front Benchers of allparties bar one—and that party has only one Member—voted for the Bill. I think that sent a sign, not just fromthe Government, but from this whole House and acrossthe British political system that this country supportsinvestment in renewables.

Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op): The Minister of State, Department of Energyand Climate Change, the right hon. Member for Bexhilland Battle (Gregory Barker) talked earlier about goodvalue for green money, but the green deal has been acomplete failure. What is the Secretary of State’s assessmentof the enormous amount of money spent on this complex,bureaucratic project that has delivered no results?


Mr Davey: A scheme that has already led to 100,000assessments and a huge number of very good satisfactionratings from people acting on those surveys is a success.When the Labour party talks down the green deal, let usremember what it is doing: it is talking down reductionsin carbon emissions and action on fuel poverty. Itshould be ashamed.

Neil Carmichael (Stroud) (Con): Does the Secretaryof State agree that one of this Government’s manyachievements has been to create an economic frameworkfor innovative firms to start developing new ways intechnology to improve our green performance so thatour green economy is alive and well, generating jobsand producing good results on CO2 reduction?

Mr Davey: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. It isnot just my Department that has been involved ininvesting in research and development and technologicalinnovation, vital though that is in our area. My righthon. Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovationand Skills has ensured investment in ultra-low emissionvehicles. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State forTransport is investing in the railways in a way that hasnot happened since the Victorians. We have a veryproud record of investment, both in infrastructure andin innovation and technical development.

Mark Lazarowicz (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab/Co-op): RenewableUK published a report today onoffshore wind. It recognises what the Government havedone, but it also warns:

“Industry is facing a hiatus in confidence that the large scaleeconomic rewards associated with sustained high delivery levelswill be achieved.”

We have heard warnings about the Atlantic array andthere are signs elsewhere that offshore wind might notget the increase in deployment that was hoped for andexpected. May I ask the Secretary of State not to becomplacent about the issue and recognise the real problemfaced by the industry?

Mr Davey: I assure the hon. Gentleman that I amcertainly not complacent, but I am aware of majorinvestments that we believe will go forward, and thatwill reassure the industry and the supply chain. Wealready have the world’s largest deployment of offshorewind, and we are already recognised by Ernst andYoung as the top place in the world in which to invest inoffshore wind. With the Energy Bill going through theHouse with cross-party support, that gives a real signalto investors in offshore wind.

Energy Security

10. David Rutley (Macclesfield) (Con): What recentassessment he has made of the UK’s energy security.

[901311]

The Minister of State, Department of Energy andClimate Change (Michael Fallon): We published theannual “Statutory Security of Supply”report last month.National Grid is preparing stronger balancing measuresfor the short term. We plan to run a capacity marketauction next year for the medium term. Beyond that, weare incentivising new infrastructure, including new nuclear,through the Energy Bill.

David Rutley: I congratulate my right hon. Friend onagreeing terms for the first new nuclear power stationsince 1995, which is in marked contrast to the previousGovernment’s failure to replace ageing power stations.Will he tell the House what other steps the Governmentare taking to find additional sites further to secure andimprove UK energy security?

Michael Fallon: It is very telling that in the year thatHinkley Point will come on stream—2023—eight of thenine existing plants will be off the system, unless theirlives are extended, which shows the legacy of under-investment that we have to face. There are now proposalsfor 12 reactors in total, spread over five different sites.

Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent) (Lab): A quarter of ourpower supply will go off line in the next decade, so whyis investment in new, clean energy infrastructure oncourse for a new low?

Michael Fallon: Since this Government came to office,five new gas plants have come on to the system andanother is being built at Manchester, while two largewind farms opened this year and four more are underconstruction, and we have agreed terms, as we haveheard, for the first new nuclear station in a generation.All that investment would be put at risk by the threat ofprice controls from a future socialist Government.

Sellafield

15. Katy Clark (North Ayrshire and Arran) (Lab):Whether the Government overruled the NuclearDecommissioning Authority on the decision to extendthe contract with Nuclear Management Partners to runSellafield; and if he will publish all the relevantdocuments. [901320]

The Minister of State, Department of Energy andClimate Change (Michael Fallon): The contract reviewprocess and the decision to renew were the responsibilityof the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. Given theimportance of Sellafield, Ministers were kept fully informed,and we endorsed the decision to extend the contract,which gives Sellafield the opportunity to build on theprogress made so far.

Katy Clark: I thank the Minister for that answer. Willhe publish the documents in relation to this decision?Will he agree to meet me and any other interested MPsto discuss the Government’s relationship with the NuclearDecommissioning Authority, given some of the decisionsthat will be taken over the coming period?

Michael Fallon: I am always happy to meet anycolleagues from the House, and I am certainly happy tomeet the hon. Lady and other hon. Members to discussthe performance of the company at Sellafield. I thinkthat she is referring to the KPMG report, which wascommissioned by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority,and its use and disclosure—whether or not it should bepublished—is the responsibility of the authority.

Rural Energy Costs

16. Mr David Heath (Somerton and Frome) (LD):What steps he is taking to reduce energy costs forresidents in rural areas. [901322]


The Minister of State, Department of Energy andClimate Change (Michael Fallon): The Government haveworked with industry to co-ordinate the “Buy oil early”campaign, which I launched in September, and to provideguidance on setting up or joining oil-buying groups. Wealso provide assistance to the most vulnerable consumersvia the warm home discount, winter fuel payments andcold weather payments.

Mr Heath: Will the Minister bear in mind that thoseof us who live in the countryside very often live in oldhouses with solid or rubble-built walls, and very often inareas of water incursion? We cannot benefit from dualfuel tariffs, and we often rely on liquefied petroleum gasor fuel oil, which is cripplingly expensive. May I justremind him that people in rural areas have no ambitionto be cold, damp and forgotten?

Michael Fallon: I assure my hon. Friend that thosepeople have certainly not been forgotten. We haveparticularly addressed the issue of off-grid customersthrough publicising the adoption of a code of conductso that petroleum suppliers treat their customers fairly.Ofgem is considering whether heating oil is properlycovered by its consumer protection measures. We areworking with the Fuel Poverty Advisory Group toimprove the information available on vulnerable customersso that all the different agencies better understandwhere those customers live.

Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con): I thank theMinister for his comments. Is he aware that there areconstituencies such as mine that are regarded as urbanareas, but that contain substantial rural areas? Thepeople in those rural areas are sometimes overlooked inthis regard.

Michael Fallon: I understand that. My hon. Friend isa great champion of his constituents, whether urban orrural. There are off-grid consumers in suburban andmore urban areas. We treat all consumers equally. Iencourage him to look at the guide to keeping warmthis winter that the Secretary of State has sent to allMembers on how we can best promote such matters inour constituency.

Topical Questions

T1. [901323] Paul Maynard (Blackpool North andCleveleys) (Con): If he will make a statement on hisdepartmental responsibilities.

The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change(Mr Edward Davey): I recently published the annualenergy statement, which focuses on security of supplyand on competition in energy markets. Since then, Ihave focused on driving forward our ambitious agendafor more competition. For example, I held a recentround table with industry leaders and consumer groupsto consider the practical steps that we need to take todeliver faster and easier switching for consumers. Therehave been significant new investments in renewableenergy and I expect to make further announcements onthat shortly.

Finally, the Minister of State, Department of Energyand Climate Change, my right hon. Friend the Memberfor Bexhill and Battle (Gregory Barker) and I recently

attended the global climate change talks in Warsaw,where a good agreement was reached that put in placethe foundations for the critical talks in Paris in 2015 andestablished a work programme to prepare for them.

Paul Maynard: The Secretary of State will be awarethat we will shortly lose more than 12 GW of generatingcapacity at oil and gas-fired power stations due to EUdirectives. What consideration has he given to placingthose power stations in our strategic national energyreserve, in order that we can retain them for when wemost need them in the coming years?

Mr Davey: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for thatquestion. However, power stations that have opted outunder the large combustion plant directive must closeby the end of 2015. The directive provides no derogationfrom that requirement. As a safeguard against the riskof low capacity, National Grid has consulted on a newsystem of balancing services to procure additional capacityin the winters of 2014-15 and 2015-16 if it is needed.

Caroline Flint (Don Valley) (Lab): My hon. Friendthe Member for Scunthorpe (Nic Dakin) asked animportant question about the impact of the carbonprice floor on energy-intensive industries. Those industriesare concerned that they are not getting the compensationthat the Secretary of States suggests they are getting.May I ask the Secretary of State about the carbon pricefloor again? Who does he agree with—his deputy, theMinister of State, Department of Energy and ClimateChange, the right hon. Member for Sevenoaks (MichaelFallon), who said that it was an “absurd” waste ofmoney and “assisted suicide” for British manufacturers,or his Liberal Democrat predecessor Chris Huhne, whosaid,

“We do not need it to drive decarbonisation… It was astraightforward revenue-raising measure by the Tories”?

Mr Davey: The idea that energy-intensive industriesare not getting some of the support is not true. Paymentsunder the scheme of compensation for the indirect costsof the EU emissions trading system are being made. Itis true that the proposals for compensation for thecarbon price floor are still going through the state aidprocess. However, we have a scheme that will come outand people will get those payments.

T2. [901324] Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire)(Con): Will the Secretary of State reassure the Housethat neither he nor his Department would seek to blockthe production of any Government report on theimpact of energy infrastructure and specifically theplanned Department for Environment, Food and RuralAffairs report on the correlation between onshore windand residential property values?

Mr Davey: No, we do not block reports. We workwith colleagues across Government. We are workingwith our friends in DEFRA to produce a report on thearea that my hon. Friend mentions.

T3. [901325] Diana Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North)(Lab): Does the Secretary of State accept that therecent comments on rolling back green levies havecaused serious concerns to companies such as Siemens?


Exactly what will he do to ensure that the investment inHull is not jeopardised by the mixed messages fromGovernment?

Mr Davey: I reassure the hon. Lady that I have madeit clear that the review of green levies does not coverrenewables obligation certificates, feed-in tariffs or contractsfor difference. That should be a great reassurance toSiemens. I hope that she will take that message back toher constituency. I look forward to meeting her and hercolleagues shortly to discuss the important investmentin Hull by Siemens.

T4. [901326] Mr Robin Walker (Worcester) (Con): Agreat deal of information is available to help ourconstituents save money on their energy bills byswitching, fixing or insulating their homes, but it can bea challenge to ensure that the right information reachesthose who need it most. Will the Minister commendlocal business Worcester Bosch for sponsoring a freeinformation pack for my constituents in Worcester?

The Minister of State, Department of Energy andClimate Change (Gregory Barker): I certainly commendnot only Worcester Bosch but the work my hon. Frienddoes in his constituency with the public and the fuel-poor,and particularly in getting that information to them.Last month, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of Statewrote to all Members of the House and asked them toshare with their constituents a guide developed by ourDepartment, in conjunction with charities such as AgeUK and National Energy Action, which explains howhouseholders can cut their energy bills and where theycan go for help this winter. There is help on offer.

T7. [901330] Mr Mike Weir (Angus) (SNP): Thismorning it has been reported that in looking atthe costs of energy, the Government are consideringchanging the cost of transmission. Will they take theopportunity finally to get rid of the discriminatorylocational system for transmission and distributioncosts that raises prices in the north of Scotland?

The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovationand Skills (Michael Fallon): National Grid has beenlooking at the balance in cost between north and south,but a lot of energy is generated in Scotland, not least inrenewables, and Scotland has an interest in ensuringthat that energy is transmitted to England.

T5. [901328] Mr David Amess (Southend West) (Con):Will the Government continue to encourage people toswitch energy suppliers if they feel they are beingripped off, as I was by British Gas and E.ON UK? Ihave switched to M&S Energy, and saved two thirds onmy bill.

Gregory Barker: I commend my hon. Friend; he isclearly one of the biggest switchers in town—but I thinkwe always knew that. I would encourage everyone tofollow his example, check their bills, and see whetherthey can move to a better deal. That is why we are givingstatutory backing in the Energy Bill to Ofgem’s retailmarket reforms which will make it easier for all consumersto follow my hon. Friend’s example, compare tariffs,and get a much better deal.

T8. [901331] Katy Clark (North Ayrshire and Arran)(Lab): The number of excess winter deaths more thandoubled in Ayrshire and Arran last year. Earlier theMinister referred to influenza, but my constituents areincreasingly coming to tell me that they have to choosebetween eating and heating, particularly those inreceipt of benefit cuts, sanctions and other difficultfinancial circumstances. Does the Minister accept thatthe cost of energy is a major factor in people turningoff their heating and in that increase in deaths?

Gregory Barker: We absolutely get the importance ofensuring that people are able to afford the energy they need.Nobody should have to make a choice between heatingand eating, and anybody concerned about that shouldcall the energy saving advice service on 0300 123 1234.As we are so concerned about the cost of energy, theGovernment are determined to do their part to ensurethat bills are kept as low as possible. That is why we arelooking at the regressive levies that Labour put onenergy bills.

T6. [901329] Mr Aidan Burley (Cannock Chase) (Con):Nine out of 10 consumers agree they could get a betterdeal on their gas and electricity supply if switchingcould be speeded up, and a third of people would bemore likely to change providers if the process werequicker and simpler. What is the Minister doing toforce energy companies to reduce the time it takes toswitch providers, and when can my constituents inCannock Chase expect to see the new rules in place?

Mr Davey: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for thatquestion, and he will know that in the annual energystatement I challenged the industry to come forwardwith proposals on how the process could be speeded upwithout compromising quality of services or consumerrights, or putting up consumer bills. The industry hasstarted to put forward proposals. I met industryrepresentatives early in November and was encouragedby the discussion, and I hope to make some announcementsin the new year.

Ian Lavery (Wansbeck) (Lab): Coal generates up to50% of electricity in the UK, but sadly most of thatcoal is imported—there has been a 37% increase in thepast year. What are the Government prepared to do tosecure the future of the British deep-mining coal industry?

Michael Fallon: My Department played a role inensuring that UK Coal Operations survived this year,following the serious fire at the Daw Mill colliery, andhelped preserve 2,000 jobs at Killingworth and Thoresby.We continue to work with the UK Coal Forum andother bodies to ensure that the place of coal is properlyrecognised in our energy mix.

T9. [901332] Lorely Burt (Solihull) (LD): What assessmenthas my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State made ofthe implications for fuel poverty if the suggestion by theFree Enterprise Group of Conservative MPs to upgradeVAT on fuel to 15% is implemented?

Mr Davey: For the sake of clarity, let me say that theGovernment have no plans to change the rate of VATapplied to domestic energy. Any such policy wouldcertainly put up energy prices and risk a very negativeimpact on the fuel-poor.


Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab): At 9 o’clockthis morning, npower announced that 1,460 jobs are tobe outsourced to India, and in addition that there willbe 550 job losses in Stoke-on-Trent. Does the Secretaryof State agree that that is the last straw, given the totallyirresponsible behaviour of the energy companies? Whatwill he and his colleagues consider doing in order toprovide jobs in Stoke-on-Trent, which the Governmenthave so far failed to do? We do not have a localenterprise zone. We need a joined-up approach fromthis Government.

Mr Davey: The hon. Lady is right to raise that matter.The announcement is obviously very worrying for allthe people involved, not just in her constituency, but inother parts of the country. We will work across theGovernment to see what we can do to help the peopleaffected.

Sarah Newton (Truro and Falmouth) (Con): Followingthe publication of the Atkins report, will the Secretaryof State publish a plan to implement its recommendations?The local enterprise partnership and I would like thedeep geothermal demonstrator site in Cornwall to beexpedited.

Mr Davey: The hon. Lady knows that we are consideringthe Atkins report and that we must make choices onwhich renewable electricity supplies we can back. I hopeshe will be pleased that, through the renewable heatincentive, we are supporting geothermal heat, whichwill be a big boost for the industry. That might not be aswelcome to her constituents in the case she raises, butwe want to back geothermal heat.

Tom Blenkinsop (Middlesbrough South and EastCleveland) (Lab): Further to the question from my hon.Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent North (JoanWalley), 560 workers at the npower call centre in Thornaby,where many of my constituents work, will be affectedby npower’s announcement to remove 1,400 jobs fromthe UK and send them to India—that is what it hasinformed the public. What communications have theSecretary of State and the Department had with npowersince April? The Government will be aware that itsreview of call centres has been going on since then.

Mr Davey: We have not had specific discussions onthe proposal announced today, so I am afraid I cannotgive the hon. Gentleman any background detail. However,as I have told the hon. Member for Stoke-on-TrentNorth (Joan Walley), we will work across the Government,particularly with the Department for Business, Innovationand Skills, to do what we can to help the people affectedby the announcement.

Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): Work startsthis week on the installation of nine super-efficientGeneral Electric wind turbines at the Burton Woldwind farm extension, which will generate 14 MW ofgreen electricity and power 11,000 homes. Will theSecretary of State congratulate First Renewable on its£45 million investment in the Kettering economy?

Mr Davey: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for hisquestion. We are seeing major investment in all sorts ofrenewables, including onshore wind and the farm towhich he has referred. I very much support his call andcongratulate the companies involved.

Caroline Lucas (Brighton, Pavilion) (Green): Historywas made at the UN climate talks last week—not,unfortunately, by an unprecedented breakthrough innegotiations, but by the unprecedented walk-out by 800civil society groups and trade unions. What assessmenthas the Secretary of State made of their concerns thatthe talks are being unduly influenced by the fossil fuelindustry? Does he agree that, if that is the case, it isunfortunate, because it does not give the talks a fightingchance of delivering what science and equity demand?

Mr Davey: I met the NGOs before they walked out. Iexplained the progress we were making in the talks, andafter they walked out, we made further progress. Noone expected the Warsaw climate change talks to be abreakthrough. They were an important building block—a foundation—for Lima next year and for Paris and thecritical talks in 2015. I have laid a written ministerialstatement on the Warsaw talks.

Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD): Parish councillorsnear Melksham in my constituency are looking forwardto the community dividend on offer from developerswho propose new solar power farms in the area. Whenwill we have more clarity on such arrangements andwhen will the Government publish their communityenergy strategy?

Gregory Barker: My hon. Friend will not have long towait before we publish the community energy strategy.This Government are gripping the potential of communitystrategy. No previous Government have recognised thepotential of communities to take control of energy.Thanks to innovation and new technologies, and thefinancial support we are putting in place, communityenergy has an exciting future, solar included.

Albert Owen (Ynys Môn) (Lab): Distribution andgrid transmission costs account for between 20% and25% of energy bills. Areas such as mine, which producean awful lot of electricity, pay even more for theirelectricity. When will the Government review thetransmission system so that we can have a level playingfield across the country and National Grid can act inthe national interest?

Michael Fallon: Ofgem and National Grid have beenlooking at transmission costs between north, south anddifferent parts of the country. They are looking specificallyat the distribution costs of local distribution operatorsto ensure that they are kept as low as is reasonablypossible.

Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con): What doesthe Secretary of State say to my constituents in the ruralpart of Wellingborough who duly elect councillors, butwhen planning applications for wind farms come forward,councillors and my constituents are against those plansyet they are overturned by a planning inspector? Myconstituents think that democracy is not working.

Mr Davey: We understand people’s concerns not justabout onshore wind but about other forms of energyproduction, such as shale and so on. We need to ensurethat the planning system is responsive. The hon. Gentlemanknows that what he has said could be applied to many


other developments outside energy. It is often the casethat the unpopular development of housing or asupermarket gets overturned by the Planning Inspectorate.

Nic Dakin (Scunthorpe) (Lab): The Secretary of Stateadmitted, in answer to my right hon. Friend the Memberfor Don Valley (Caroline Flint), that due to Governmentincompetence no money has been paid to energy-intensiveindustries in mitigation for the carbon floor tax. However,he did say that money is being spent on the EuropeanUnion emissions trading scheme. In answer to aparliamentary question, the Minister of State, the righthon. Member for Sevenoaks (Michael Fallon) told me:“£16 million has been paid to 17 companies.”—[Official Report,5 November 2013; Vol. 570, c. 142W.]

When I asked him to name those companies, he wrote:“We are still assessing applications.”—[Official Report,

18 November 2013; Vol. 570, c. 663W.]

How can money have been paid out when applicationsare still being assessed?

Michael Fallon: More than 60 applications have beenreceived and we have paid out on more than 20 of them.We have done that in the past few weeks. We areprocessing the others as quickly as possible. The schemethat my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State referredto was the carbon price floor compensation scheme, forwhich we are still awaiting approval under state aidrules from Brussels.

Mr Speaker: Let us have the remaining two questionswith extreme brevity.

Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD): I know the Secretary ofState will want to commend the work of the SomersetCommunity Foundation. Under its “Surviving Winter”appeal, people can redistribute their winter fuel allowance,if they do not need some or all of it, to those who needmoney to heat their homes. Will the Secretary of State—[Interruption.] Will the Secretary of State have furtherdiscussions with the Department for Work and Pensionsto ensure that notice of that is included in the letter thatgoes out to everybody?

Mr Speaker: As the House knows, I am a perennialoptimist.

Mr Davey: I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s question.I will certainly bring her point to the attention of theSecretary of State for Work and Pensions.

Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent) (Lab): Why has the UKfallen to seventh in the world for investment in cleanenergy since the Government came to power?

Mr Davey: I do not recognise the hon. Gentleman’sfigures. A recent Ernst and Young survey had the UKas the fourth most attractive place in the world to investin renewable energy.


Tobacco Packaging

10.33 am

Luciana Berger (Liverpool, Wavertree) (Lab/Co-op)(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State forHealth if he will make a statement on the Government’spolicy on standardised packaging of tobacco products.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health(Jane Ellison): In accordance with the notice I gave theHouse yesterday afternoon, this morning I made awritten statement announcing that Sir Cyril Chantlerwill carry out an independent review of the evidence onthe impact of standardised tobacco packaging on publichealth.

Tobacco use, especially among children, remains oneof our most significant public health challenges. Eachyear in England more than 300,000 children under theage of 16 try smoking for the first time. Most adultswho smoke started before they were 18 years of age. Asa result, we must do all we can to stop young peoplefrom taking up smoking in the first place, if we are toreduce smoking rates.

We have listened to the strong views expressed onboth sides of the House, including when we debatedstandardised packaging in a Back-Bench business debateearlier this month, to which I responded. Many Membersthen told me that the evidence base for standardisedpackaging continued to grow and urged the Governmentto take action. Similarly strong views have been expressedin the other place. As a result, I believe the time is rightto seek an independent view on whether the introductionof standardised packaging would be likely to have aneffect on public health. In particular, I want to know thelikely impact on young people.

I have asked Sir Cyril to undertake a focused review,reporting in March next year. It will be entirely independent,with an independent secretariat, and he is free to drawevidence from whatever sources he considers necessaryand appropriate. It will be up to him to determine howhe undertakes the review, and he will set that out inmore detail in due course. As the House will know, SirCyril has confirmed that he has no links with thetobacco industry. The review is not a public consultation.The Government ran a full public consultation in 2012and the responses will be available in full for the review.To maximise transparency, the Department will alsopublish the substantive responses received as soon aspossible.

The Government will also take advantage of theopportunity offered in another place by tabling anamendment to the Children and Families Bill to providefor a regulation-making power. If, on receiving Sir Cyril’sreview, the Government decide to proceed, that willallow standardised tobacco packaging to be introducedwithout delay. The Government have been consistent intheir desire to take an evidence-based approach topublic health, and we will introduce standardised tobaccopackaging if, following the review and consideration ofthe wider issues raised, we are satisfied that there aresufficient grounds to proceed.

Luciana Berger: We have seen plenty of U-turns overthe past three years, but only a Government as shambolicas this one could U-turn on a U-turn. It is not so muchthat they have lost their way on public health—they arerunning around in circles.

Will the Minister answer a straight question: does shesupport standardised packaging for cigarettes—yes orno? In the week running up to this being debated in theother place, does she honestly expect us to believe thatthis has nothing to do with the fact that the Governmentare on the brink of a humiliating defeat?

The Minister says that we need another review, butthe Government have already had a review and theevidence is clear for all to see. Did that not already findthat standardised packaging made cigarettes less attractiveto young people and health warnings more effective,and did it not refute the utter falsehood that somebrands are safer than others? All the royal colleges andhealth experts are united behind the case for standardisedpackaging—I commend everyone who has campaignedfor this measure—but is it not the case that if thelobbying Bill goes through in its current form, it willprevent charities such as Cancer Research UK fromever raising such issues in an election year?

Is not the Prime Minister more interested in listeningto Lynton Crosby and the vested interests of big tobaccothan cancer charities and health experts? What furtherevidence does the Minister need? What do Ministersknow now that they did not already know when theyU-turned on this before the summer recess? Why are theGovernment delaying this still further? Some 79,230 childrenwill have taken up smoking in the 139 days since theGovernment U-turned on standardised packaging inJuly, and about 70,000 more will have had their firstcigarette by the time the review reports next March. Weshould be legislating now, not delaying.

Jane Ellison: I thought that was a rather disappointingand naive response. This is a complex area of publichealth policy, and it is important to follow a clearprocess and to follow the evidence. The hon. Ladymight not believe me, but perhaps she will believe theright hon. Member for Leigh (Andy Burnham), who inNovember 2009, when he was Health Secretary, wrote:“we would need…convincing evidence showing the health benefitsof this policy before it would be acceptable”.

Hon. Members: We have got that evidence.

Mr Speaker: Order. I gently say to the House that theMinister is among the most courteous of Ministers, andin fairness she deserves also to be treated with courtesy.There are strong views, but let us hear the Minister.

Jane Ellison: The Government have held a consultation,but we have not had a review before. We said in July thatwe would pause to consider the emerging evidence base,and that is exactly what we have done. I am happy toaccount for my actions, but it appears that I am beingasked to account for the cynicism of the Opposition,too. This weekend sees the anniversary of the passing ofthe legislation in Australia, and new evidence is emergingrapidly, as was pointed out in the very good Back-Benchbusiness debate to which I responded earlier this month,as well as in the other place, so this is the right time todo this.

407 40828 NOVEMBER 2013 Tobacco Packaging

Of course we have listened to what Members of theother place have said. They rightly take extremely seriouslysuch an important public health issue as stopping childrenfrom smoking, but we have to proceed in a measured,step-by-step way to ensure that, if and when a decisionis made, it will be robust and will deal with all theinevitable challenges that might come its way.

Several hon. Members rose—

Mr Speaker: Order. We are dealing with an extremelyimportant matter, which I judge as urgent, but we havebusiness questions and two ministerial statements tofollow, so the model is what might be called “the Gibraltarmodel” of Mr Nigel Evans, whereby a good exchangewas had, but it was a brief one. I will not be able toaccommodate everybody who wants to speak.

Philip Davies (Shipley) (Con): Idiotic, nanny stateproposals such as the plain packaging of tobacco arewhat we expect from the Labour party. What we expectfrom Conservative Ministers is for them to believe inindividual freedom and individual responsibility, and tostand up to the health zealots and nanny state brigadewho, if they could, would ban everything and haveeverything in plain packaging. Will the Minister committo sticking to those Conservative principles and toignoring the nanny state brigade of Labour Members?

Jane Ellison: I know my hon. Friend feels stronglyabout this issue, but nobody is banning anything. Werethe Government to proceed following receipt of thereview, the proposal would be about packaging, not theability to purchase tobacco. All the sorts of points thatmy hon. Friend has often articulated were well madeduring the consultation, which, as he knows, receivedan enormous response, and all the responses will bemade available to Sir Cyril.

Mrs Madeleine Moon (Bridgend) (Lab): Some 190health organisations recognise that plain packaging willcut smoking, particularly among the young, and haveurged action. Is this not just a further delay while theGovernment get their house in order so that they knowhow and when to introduce the legislation that is sourgently needed?

Jane Ellison: The hon. Lady is right to say that manycharities feel strongly about this issue and I was pleasedthat the chief executive for Action on Smoking andHealth said this morning:

“This decision is a victory for public health, for common senseand for future generations”.

Paul Burstow (Sutton and Cheam) (LD): Smoking isa childhood addiction, not an adult choice. Theannouncement is welcome, in that it moves us in theright direction, but if the review should recommendwhat is, in my judgment, a much-needed change when itis published in March, just how quickly would theGovernment be able to bring in the necessary regulations?

Jane Ellison: My right hon. Friend is right that wewould need to be able to act quickly if, following therecommendation, we decided to proceed. The power tomake regulations is being proposed in the other placeexactly so that we may move quickly at the point we

receive Sir Cyril’s review. I have looked at the draftschedule, and if the Government were minded to goforward with this policy, I see no reason why it couldnot be put through before the end of this Parliament.

Chris Ruane (Vale of Clwyd) (Lab): As chair of theall-party group on heart disease, I pay tribute to thework of the British Heart Foundation, Cancer UK,ASH and other campaigning organisations that havehelped to bring about this U-turn. My hon. Friend theMember for Liverpool, Wavertree (Luciana Berger)specifically mentioned the impact on such charities ifthe lobbying Bill goes through—they will be neuteredand silenced in the run-up to the general election. Whatlessons should be learned from this?

Jane Ellison: The hon. Gentleman refers to anotherBill, rather than the issue we are discussing now. I haveheard none of those concerns from the charities hementioned, which I understand have warmly welcomedtoday’s announcement.

Mr John Baron (Basildon and Billericay) (Con): I, forone, very much congratulate the Minister on this welcomenews. As she well knows, the all-party group on cancerhas been one of many that have argued for addedurgency on this issue. The Government have listenedand responded, which is a sign of strength, not weakness.To follow up a previous question, will the Minister givean assurance that the regulations will be in place beforethe end of this Parliament, because if the recommendationsare in favour of introducing standardised packaging,they will need to be implemented quickly?

Jane Ellison: That is certainly the objective of thetimetable that has been drafted, once the Governmenthave received the review and made a decision. I see noreason why what my hon. Friend suggests could not bethe case.

Heidi Alexander (Lewisham East) (Lab): The Ministersaid that she had not held a review, but had carried outa consultation. Is that not just a pathetic excuse forinaction, and does she not accept that for every day shedelays this policy, another 570 children start smoking?

Jane Ellison: We have had a consultation and now weare having a short review of the emerging evidence base.I think that that is sensible. We want to make goodpolicy that is robust, and this is the right way to do it.

Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con): I congratulatethe Minister on listening to the arguments and actingfar more quickly than any Opposition Member did in13 years. Will she assure us that the House will have theopportunity to vote in favour of standardised packagingso that we can demonstrate our cross-party support forthis much-needed health measure?

Jane Ellison: At present, we are strongly minded tointroduce regulations under the affirmative procedure.

Pete Wishart (Perth and North Perthshire) (SNP): I,too, welcome the Government’s U-turn. I am sure thatthe Minister has been following attentively the progressmade on this issue by the Scottish National partyGovernment, who have been able to make that progress

409 41028 NOVEMBER 2013Tobacco Packaging Tobacco Packaging

[Pete Wishart]

because Lynton Crosby’s remit does not extend northof the border. Will she commend the SNP Governmentfor taking the lead and work closely with ScottishMinisters to secure the best possible outcome for everyoneon these islands?

Jane Ellison: I repeat that the Government are proceedingalong the track that they laid out in the summer. Weknow that the Scottish Government have expressedclear views, and we will be working closely with all thedevolved Administrations.

Jeremy Lefroy (Stafford) (Con): I welcome the statementand trust that we will see a Conservative-led Governmentintroduce standardised packaging. When that happens,will the Minister take the opportunity to step up healtheducation on this subject?

Jane Ellison: My hon. Friend is right to remind us allthat, even if the Government decide to implement thepolicy at the end of the review, there will still be manyother things to be done in relation to this importantissue. Major public health campaigns will proceed asthey have been doing under Governments of all colours.

Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op): My hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend(Mrs Moon) pointed out that 190 health organisationswere in favour of standardised packaging. While Iappreciate that there may be tensions within theGovernment, the hon. Lady is Minister for public health.Will she tell us whether any health organisation isopposed to plain packaging?

Jane Ellison: We have asked Sir Cyril to conduct anindependent review and to weigh all the different evidence.I do not wish to seem to pre-empt the review, because itis important that it is independent, but I will say that Iam not aware of any health organisations that are not infavour of plain packaging. Indeed, as the hon. Lady canimagine, such organisations have expressed the oppositeview to me with considerable strength.

Dame Angela Watkinson (Hornchurch and Upminster)(Con): Will the Minister remind the House of all theinvestment that the Government have already made inanti-smoking strategies so that no one smokes out ofignorance? Does she agree that the main responsibilityfor children’s smoking habits lies with their parents?

Jane Ellison: Of course we want parents to set a goodexample to their children and to try to prevent themfrom starting to smoke. The important public healthmeasures to which my hon. Friend has referred areproceeding but, sadly, a great many children start smokingat a very young age.

Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab): This is just a cynicalploy to get beyond the humiliating defeat that theGovernment face in the House of Lords. Notwithstandingwhat has been said by the Minister’s hon. Friends, nodecision has been made to introduce plain packaging.Who does she think will win this war of attrition for theear of the Prime Minister: Lynton Crosby, or bothHouses of Parliament?

Jane Ellison: I could not have made myself plainerduring my first session of Health questions and when Iresponded to the Back-Bench debate. The policy isunder active consideration, and it was under activeconsideration before—this is evidence of that.

Nigel Mills (Amber Valley) (Con): Will my hon.Friend confirm that Sir Cyril is not only independent ofbig tobacco, but independent of the health lobby?

Jane Ellison: One of the reasons we asked a distinguishedpaediatrician to conduct the review, rather than someonefrom a public health background, was that he would beable to bring a fresh mind to it. Sir Cyril will set his ownterms, which he will announce in the next few weeks.

Sheila Gilmore (Edinburgh East) (Lab): Does the Ministerappreciate that one of the reasons for the scepticismamong Opposition Members is that in the summer lastyear, either there was a U-turn or the policy was stillunder review. Why was an independent review not requestedthen? If that had happened, it would have been completedby now, and we could have gone ahead.

Jane Ellison: As Members on both sides of the Housereminded me forcefully during the Back-Bench debateearlier this month, new evidence has recently emerged,and we are also coming up to the anniversary of thelegislation being passed in Australia, so this is the righttime to do this.

Mr David Nuttall (Bury North) (Con): Will the Ministerreassure me that this will not be the thin end of thewedge, and that the Government will not look forevidence to support the contention that selling childrensweets in brightly coloured packets contributes to childhoodobesity and, as a result, seek to ban such packaging?

Jane Ellison: That is a slightly different topic. I knowthat my hon. Friend feels strongly about these issues,and he will know that, through the Government’sresponsibility deal, we are working in voluntary partnershipwith business to make good progress on public healthissues relating to obesity.

Alex Cunningham (Stockton North) (Lab): Now thatthe Government have started to make this U-turn onstandard packaging, will they also back the amendmentin the other place that would ban smoking in cars whenchildren are present?

Jane Ellison: We are not persuaded that legislation isthe right way forward on that matter. There is still a lotof room for education, and I am sure that the hon.Gentleman would like to believe, as I do, that whenparents are made aware of the dangers of smoking incars when children are present, they will wish to desistfrom doing so.

Steve Brine (Winchester) (Con): I welcome the Minister’sstatement. In September, I visited the Cancer ResearchUK centre in Southampton to meet my constituent,Tim Underwood, who leads the oesophageal cancerteam there. I suspect that the team will be pleased tohear today’s announcement. Will she assure us that,whatever happens at the end of this process, it will


remain the Government’s intention resolutely to preventyoung people from picking up this habit that kills in thefirst place?

Jane Ellison: Preventing children from smoking is amajor priority for the Department of Health and forthe Government, and my hon. Friend is absolutely rightto suggest that, irrespective of this piece of policy—important though it has the potential to be—theGovernment are committed to spending significant amountson public health campaigns and all the other mechanismsavailable to us to prevent children from smoking.

Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab): The Ministerkeeps mentioning the evidence, but the evidence fromAustralia is overwhelmingly in favour of plain packagingfor cigarettes, so why on earth is she waiting? Sheshould bring in plain packaging now to save childrenfrom taking up smoking in the first place.

Jane Ellison: The hon. Gentleman refers to the evidence,as have other Members. That is exactly why we haveasked someone who, with all due respect, is far moreexpert than he is or I am to look at the evidence andreport to the Government swiftly. That will be a productiveway forward. It will ensure that, however the Governmentdecide to proceed, we do so in a way that is robust.

Lorely Burt (Solihull) (LD): Does my hon. Friendagree with the EU majority decision that e-cigarettesshould not come under the same regulations as medicines?Does she agree that they should be subject to the samemarketing controls as cigarettes, whether that involvesplain packaging or not?

Jane Ellison: The hon. Lady will know that that is thesubject of negotiations, so I hope that she will forgiveme if I do not comment on it further at this point.

Steve Rotheram (Liverpool, Walton) (Lab): Far fromdoing nothing in 13 years, the Labour Governmentlegislated to ban smoking in public places. We said thatwe would need convincing evidence on plain packaging,and this Government’s own consultation has now providedthat convincing evidence. What further evidence doesthe Minister think the review will uncover?

Jane Ellison: As I have said, I am not going topre-empt the findings of the independent review, and Iam sure that Members understand why it is importantnot to do so. It will be good to have a review of theevidence, and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman willshare my confidence that the review will be extremelyworth while and useful.

Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con): I confess that I enjoyeda Henri Wintermans Café Crème after breakfast thismorning on the way to work. Does my hon. Friendagree that there are many lawful smokers who want tobe sure what they are buying? Has she made any assessmentof the effect that plain packaging could have on theblack market by making it easier to smuggle counterfeitcigarettes?

Jane Ellison: That point came up during the consultation.To be clear, the review that we have asked Sir Cyril toundertake will cover the public health aspects of thepolicy. It will then be for Ministers to decide how totake forward the findings of the review and to makepolicy. The points that my hon. Friend and others havemade will be borne in mind at that time.

John Pugh (Southport) (LD): The Minister says thatthis is a complex matter, but I am a bit puzzled. Whatexactly is the downside of plain packaging, apart fromfewer fags being sold?

Philip Davies: A left-wing, nanny state wallah likeyou would not understand.

Jane Ellison: The hon. Member for Southport (JohnPugh) may be aware that there has been a challenge tothe policy in Australia, so it is important to proceed in ameasured and evidence-based way.

Mr Speaker: The sedentary remarks of the hon.Member for Shipley (Philip Davies) are almost asentertaining as those he makes when he is on his feet.

Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con): I sometimesfeel sorry for the Government. We have an excellentMinister at the Dispatch Box who is listening to Parliamentand asking for an independent report, yet she getsMembers of Parliament complaining about that. Thatis ridiculous. I think I understood her to say that ifregulation is to be introduced, that will be done bystatutory instrument. I hope that the Government arenot going to proceed in that way, because we can onlyreject or approve a statutory instrument—we cannotamend it. Will she think again on that point?

Jane Ellison: I thank my hon. Friend for his support.The exact technicalities are still under review. As I said,we are strongly minded to use the affirmative procedure,but that matter is not completely resolved. Of course,we do have a little time, because we expect the review toreport in March 2014.

Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): What stepsare being undertaken with other Departments to enforceagainst the illegal sale of tobacco products to youngpeople?

Jane Ellison: My hon. Friend is right to draw attentionto the issue. He may or may not know that when Iresponded to a recent Adjournment debate that wassecured by the hon. Member for Solihull (Lorely Burt),we discussed that point, and I invited trading standardsofficers to submit evidence on the enforceability of justthose sorts of measures. I will be interested to hear fromMembers and others about how they think those mightwork.

Mr Speaker: I thank the Minister, in particular, andcolleagues for being so succinct.


Business of the House

10.56 am

Ms Angela Eagle (Wallasey) (Lab): Will the Leader ofthe House give us the business for next week?

The Leader of the House of Commons (Mr AndrewLansley): The business for next week will be as follows:

MONDAY 2 DECEMBER—Second Reading of theMesothelioma Bill [Lords], followed by a debate onmotions relating to Backbench Business (Amendmentof Standing Orders) and Select Committee statements.

TUESDAY 3 DECEMBER—Opposition day [14th allottedday]. There will be a debate on “Cyber Bullying”,followed by a debate entitled “Persecution of Christiansin the 21st Century”. Both debates will arise on amotion in the name of the Democratic Unionist party.

WEDNESDAY 4 DECEMBER—Consideration of Lordsamendments to the Energy Bill, followed by Oppositionday [unallotted half day]. There will be a debate onbusiness rates. The debate will arise on a motion in thename of the official Opposition.

THURSDAY 5 DECEMBER—My right hon. Friend theChancellor of the Exchequer will deliver his autumnstatement, which will be followed by a general debate onmodern-day slavery. The subject for this debate wasdetermined by the Backbench Business Committee.

FRIDAY 6 DECEMBER—The House will not be sitting.The provisional business for the week commencing

9 December will include:MONDAY 9 DECEMBER—Second Reading of the

Intellectual Property Bill [Lords], followed by businessto be nominated by the Backbench Business Committee.

TUESDAY 10 DECEMBER—Remaining stages of theNational Insurance Contributions Bill.

WEDNESDAY 11 DECEMBER—Motion to approve a Waysand Means resolution relating to the Financial Services(Banking Reform) Bill, followed by a motion to approvea money resolution relating to the Financial Services(Banking Reform) Bill, followed by consideration ofLords amendments to the Financial Services (BankingReform) Bill.

THURSDAY 12 DECEMBER—Business to be nominatedby the Backbench Business Committee.

FRIDAY 13 DECEMBER—The House will not be sitting.

Ms Eagle: I thank the Leader of the House forannouncing next week’s business. May I also take theopportunity to congratulate colleagues who haveparticipated in Movember this month? I applaud theirefforts and labours for an important cause, although Imust admit that I find some of them a bit disconcerting.Some of them even remind me that this Governmentare trying to take us back to Victorian times.

Yesterday, the Government proposed some very sensiblemeasures to toughen rules for European Union migrants,including banning out-of-work benefits and quadruplingfines for bosses not paying the minimum wage. Giventhat Labour proposed some of these changes eightmonths ago, will the Leader of the House tell us why ithas taken the Government so long to announce anyaction? Will he confirm that none of the Government’sproposed changes will be in place by 1 January, when

work restrictions for Romanians and Bulgarians willend? Much of the Government’s plan could be implementedusing secondary legislation. Given that we have 13 daysof parliamentary time remaining before the Christmasrecess, it is clear that we could work together to getsome of these sensible changes in place. So will he agreeto work with us to get this done in time?

Despite stuffing the other place with 158 new coalitionpeers since the election, on Tuesday the Governmentlost yet another key vote on the licensing of bankers.Will the Leader of the House tell us whether theGovernment will now accept that important amendmentand keep it in the Bill? The Financial Services (BankingReform) Bill has provided yet another lesson in how notto legislate. After ignoring our request to delay the Billuntil after the publication of the report of the ParliamentaryCommission on Banking Standards, the Governmentpresented this place with a shell of a Bill, which has nowgrown fivefold in the other place. That makes it a verydifferent piece of legislation from the one that we scrutinisedin this place, and it is a disgrace that the Governmenthave developed a Bill of such importance in the unelectedChamber while treating this place with contempt. Willthe Leader of the House give his assurance that whenthe Bill returns, we will have more than sufficient timeto debate properly the vast amounts of it that are new?

In a week of spectacular U-turns, perhaps theChancellor’s damascene conversion on payday loanswas the most surprising. After all, the Government hadvoted three times against a cap. Will the Leader of theHouse confirm that it was the prospect of yet anotherdefeat on the banking Bill that changed the Chancellor’smind? It seems that the Chancellor is developing aproclivity for ideological flexibility. Perhaps it is just apublic relations strategy to say one thing and then doanother. After all, he said he would stop tax evasion buthe refused to close the giant eurobond loophole. Heattacked unacceptable City bonuses and then went toBrussels to fight for them. He promised to cut borrowing,but he has borrowed more in three years than Labourdid in 13. He said that we are all in it together, but priceshave risen faster than wages in 40 of the 41 monthssince he has been Chancellor. Will the Leader of theHouse now give us a debate in Government time on thewidening gap between this Government’s rhetoric andthe reality?

We are all eagerly awaiting next Thursday when twoparliamentary Titans can tussle over the key issues ofthe day—and that is just the business statement. I knowthat colleagues will be keen to ensure that they are in theChamber to hear the unfailingly witty ripostes of theLeader of the House. Will he confirm which will comefirst next Thursday, the autumn statement or the businessstatement?

This week has revealed that we have a Chancellorwho thinks it is Marxist to intervene in energy prices,but positively Thatcherite to intervene in the paydaylending market. We have a sports Minister who appearsto know nothing about sport, and a Health Ministerwho did not know how to access a walk-in centre.

It is no wonder that coalition tensions have beenrising, and that is only in the Tory party. Apparently25 Conservative modernisers have been to visit thePrime Minister to warn him of a split if he abandonsgreen levies. The Leader of the House must be wonderingwhere it all went wrong for the Prime Minister and his

415 41628 NOVEMBER 2013 Business of the House

modernisation project. The Prime Minister promised abig society and delivered the politics of division andfear, and now his self-styled successor, the Mayor ofLondon, thinks greed is good and that some people aretoo stupid to be equal.

Today’s news that the Prime Minister is U-turning onhis U-turn on plain packaging for cigarettes says it all.He is a Prime Minister running round and round incircles.

Mr Lansley: I am grateful to the shadow Leader ofthe House for her response, and I join her in congratulatingMembers who have been participants in Movember. Weshall, in some cases, regret the passing of their facialadornments. I suspect that not many of them will bepersuaded to keep them on a permanent basis, but it isall in an important cause. I am sure that, across theHouse, we feel very strongly about the importance ofsupporting them in their endeavours to promote researchinto prostate and testicular cancers. We have madeconsiderable progress, but there is much more to bedone. I know that prostate cancer is the most commoncancer affecting men and if we can secure investment inresearch and treatment such as that characterised bysuccessful breast cancer campaigns, men—and, I suspect,women—in this country and beyond will attach considerableimportance to that.

The hon. Lady asked about migration and I heard theHome Secretary answer her questions yesterday inthe course of a rather comprehensive statement of whatthe Government are doing. Considering that that statementwas the answer to an urgent question asked by theshadow Home Secretary, it turned out to be an owngoal. The Home Secretary made it very clear that wewill put a bar on migrants claiming out-of-work benefitsfor the first three months, stop welfare payments aftersix months unless a claimant has a genuine chance of ajob, stop migrant jobseekers claiming housing benefitto subsidise accommodation costs, and introduce furthermeasures on the minimum wage. She also made clear—Iheard her do it—those measures which would be inplace by January.

The shadow Leader of the House asked for a debateon banking reform. I announced that the House wouldconsider Lords amendments to the Financial Services(Banking Reform) Bill. We did not send a shell of a Billto the other place—far from it. It was an importantmeasure that ring-fenced everyday banking from investmentbanking, ensuring that banks are never again too big tofail. It reformed the failed tripartite system that weinherited from the Opposition. It is staggering that theyare now trying to engage in procedural politics on theBill. We, as a Government, are having to put in place abanking regulatory system that will not allow the appallingmess we inherited from the previous Government tooccur again as that failed this country and beyond in amajor way.

We quite rightly established the ParliamentaryCommission on Banking Standards and the Bill respondeddirectly to it. We gave the commission an opportunityto consider the measures in the Bill as part of thescrutiny of it before its introduction and the commissionproduced a second report. It was never in anybody’sinterest for the Bill not to be completed during thisSession and so we used a mechanism whereby thesecond report was reflected in measures incorporated

into the Bill in the House of Lords. That is perfectlyreasonable and as the hon. Lady and the House willhave gathered, we anticipate a full day’s debate onLords amendments when the Bill returns to the House.

The hon. Lady also asked for a debate on the rhetoricand reality of the Chancellor’s policies. I would welcomesuch a debate as it would give us an opportunity tocontrast not just rhetoric and reality but the rhetoric ofthe Labour party and the reality of Labour in office.Yesterday, Labour tried to talk about the economicpolicy of this Government but throughout the debateLabour Members failed to recognise or acknowledgethe mistakes their party had made. The facts are simpleand straightforward; for example, under a LabourGovernment there was a 7.2% reduction in the GDP ofthis country during the deepest recession we have seenin the past 100 years, which led to unprecedented deficitsin this country. That was the consequence of a LabourGovernment. As for the rhetoric and reality of theChancellor’s policies, I look forward to hearing himmake the autumn statement next Thursday and set outhow this coalition Government are making tremendousprogress—not least by assisting people in this countrythrough more jobs, reduced taxation, controls on fuelduties, a council tax freeze available to councils throughthe whole of this Parliament, and the largest increasesin the state pension we have ever seen—in helpingfamilies with the cost of living, which the Oppositionwould signally have been unable to do had they continuedto borrow and spend in the way that they did in thepast. It has always been the same old Labour: spend,borrow and see the economy of this country collapse.

Andrew Selous (South West Bedfordshire) (Con): Maywe have an urgent debate on the variability in the dieseland petrol prices that our constituents are often forcedto pay? Prices in Leighton Buzzard are often 5p to 6p alitre more than those in surrounding areas. Tesco, forexample, charges considerably less in Milton Keynesand Dunstable than in Leighton Buzzard. Does theLeader of the House think there is an onus on companiessuch as Tesco and Morrisons to treat all their customersfairly?

Mr Lansley: I understand the point that my hon.Friend makes because his constituency and mine arenot far apart. I quite often note the difference in pricesas I go around the country. Of course, that is happeningfor a simple reason—there are different markets indifferent parts of the country. So I have noticed in thepast that if one is buying petrol in the Wirral close towhere it is refined it might be a little cheaper than inCambridgeshire. But the truth is that, wherever peopleare buying petrol or diesel, they are buying it 13p a litrecheaper than would have been the case if the fuel dutyescalator introduced by the Labour party was still inplace. That is £7 for an average fill-up.

Mr Dave Watts (St Helens North) (Lab): May wehave a debate on the appalling employment practices ofAmazon, which were demonstrated on “Panorama”, sothat the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation andSkills can set out what action he intends to take to stopthose practices and stop Britain slipping into someform of sweatshop economy?

417 41828 NOVEMBER 2013Business of the House Business of the House

Mr Lansley: I cannot promise a debate, but if thehon. Gentleman is in his place he will have an opportunityto raise those issues with my right hon. and hon. Friendsin the Department for Business, Innovation and Skillsnext Thursday when they respond to questions. None ofus in the House believes that we have or should have asweatshop economy. That is why over many years wehave instituted employment protection measures, includinga minimum wage. It is important that it is enforced. It isalso important that we create jobs, and in this economysince the general election we have created 1.4 millionprivate sector jobs. That should never be forgotten.

Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD): May we have a debateabout Somerset county council’s rush to axe children’scentres when it has done a skewed consultation, questionswere loaded, and the staff have been gagged? Its reportshows that it does not even know how many childrenare affected, and the only failings in the Ofsted reportfor the two children’s centres that I have seen werecaused by the council’s failings to resource them. Lastweek the council agreed that it would have a four tosix-week period of further consultation with parentsand children, and yesterday it suddenly announced thatit would make the decision today. It is absolutely notfair on the children or parents.

Mr Lansley: My hon. Friend will recall that there arestatutory requirements about the character of a consultationrelating to local authority proposals to reconfigure children’sservices. I am not in a position to comment directly onthe circumstances that my hon. Friend describes, but Iwill ask my right hon. and hon. Friends at the Departmentfor Education to respond to what she has said.

Mr Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op): Acrossthe House, we all believe in supporting social impactenterprises and social innovation. May we have a quickdebate—I know that it would have to be very urgent—aboutthe barriers to crowdfunding that are coming throughfrom the Financial Conduct Authority? Can we dosomething quickly to keep alive the ability of people toinvest in local enterprises in their community?

Mr Lansley: I am interested in the point that the hon.Gentleman makes. I will ask my right hon. and hon.Friends in the Treasury or perhaps my right hon. Friendthe Minister for the Cabinet Office and PaymasterGeneral, who has responsibility as the Minister for civilsociety, to respond to that point. The hon. Gentlemanand other hon. Members across the House who shareenthusiasm for social enterprises may wish to bring thesubject before the Backbench Business Committee, whichhas opportunities for debates not only here but inWestminster Hall.

Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con): May we have adebate on equal pay for women? Does the Leader of theHouse agree that in the 21st century it is unacceptablethat far too many women in the private sector are paidless than men despite doing the same job?

Mr Lansley: I cannot promise an immediate debate,but I know that my hon. Friend and other hon. Membersmight seek to have a debate in due course. Myrecollection—I may be incorrect—is that the Office forNational Statistics, for technical reasons, has not published

the latest data on the gender pay gap, but will do so inDecember. We share the view that, while the gap mayhave reduced, we have not achieved what we need toachieve. It may be something on which he and others, inthe light of the latest data, may wish to seek a debatefrom the Backbench Business Committee.

Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Lab): May we havea debate in Government time on the situation facingpeople living in the private rented sector, many ofwhom have six-month tenancies, great difficulty gettingrepairs done and the danger that the tenancy will beended if they complain to the landlord? In particular,those living in central London, where benefit levels donot meet the excessive rent levels, can then be forced tomove out, leading to a social cleansing of whole swathesof our communities. It is a serious issue facing a lot ofpeople, so it should be dealt with by the Government,not on a Back-Bench business day.

Mr Lansley: I agree that those are important issues,and I know that we will continue to have opportunitiesto debate them. Many issues that are for the Governmentto respond to are debated in time granted by the BackbenchBusiness Committee. I do not subscribe to the view, andneither does the House, that Government time is allocatedto discuss things that are the Government’s responsibilityand Back-Bench business time is allocated to discussthings that are not. On the contrary, Back-Bench businesstime is available, as indeed is Opposition time, so thatMembers can raise issues that are predominantly for theGovernment to respond to.

Oliver Colvile (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport)(Con): On Wednesday that well-known press organ thePlymouth Herald reported that the Secretary of Statefor Transport had said that he would look closely atimproving the rail and road links to Plymouth followingthe closure of Plymouth airport a couple of years ago.Specifically to deliver growth, I have been campaigningfor the A303 to be dualled, for trains to get into Plymouthby 9 am, rather than 11.17 am, and for more trainjourneys to and from London. After repeated failedrequests for a debate, will my right hon. Friend supportmy calls for a debate on this important matter, or at thevery least may we have a statement from the Secretaryof State?

Mr Lansley: I am grateful to my hon. Friend, whoraises an issue that is important not only to his constituents,but to those of other Members in that travel corridor inthe south-west. Given that wider interest, he might findthat there is a wider constituency of Members whomight be able to seek a debate. I certainly encouragehim in that regard. He knows that our right hon. Friendthe Secretary of State for Transport was with him in hisconstituency over the summer to discuss those issues. Iwill of course ask him to respond further, but it is verymuch in the minds of Ministers, not least because theyhave a feasibility study looking at some of the mostnotorious hot spots on roads across the country, includingthe A303, the A30 and the A358 in that travel corridor.

Ian Lucas (Wrexham) (Lab): The Secretary of Statefor Work and Pensions is presiding over increasingchaos in his Department, with a black hole existingwhere the independent living fund used to be, and there


are still questions about interference with the PublicAccounts Committee. Will the Leader of the Housearrange for him to come here and speak for himself ?

Mr Lansley: I seem to remember that the Secretary ofState was here last week—on Monday, I think—toanswer questions and speak for himself and for theGovernment, and I am delighted to say that when hedoes so he contrasts the situation in which we arecreating jobs with the one under Labour in which jobswere not being created. He contrasts the situation inwhich every time people move off benefits and intowork, work pays, which was not the case under Labour,ensuring that there is serious benefit associated withworking. He also talks about the fact that we haveeffective systems, including under the Work programme,that are delivering effective routes back into work forthe long-term unemployed.

Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con): Has my hon. Friendseen my early-day motion 784 on fuel duty?

[That this House welcomes the Government’s actionscutting fuel duty in 2011 and the freeze in fuel duty untilthe end of the present Parliament announced by theChancellor of the Exchequer; and urges the Government,if the economic conditions allow, to continue to cut costsfor hard-pressed motorists and to consider a further fuelduty cut.]

May we have a debate on fuel duty, given that inyesterday’s debate on the cost of living the Oppositionforgot to mention that they increased fuel duty 12 timesand that our Government have frozen it in the lifetimeof this Parliament? Will my right hon. Friend urge theChancellor to go even further and cut fuel duty in theforthcoming Budget?

Mr Lansley: I am grateful to my hon. Friend andhave seen his early-day motion. I thoroughly endorsethe congratulations that the Financial Secretary offeredhim in yesterday’s debate in recognition of his campaigning.Of course, matters relating to the future of fuel duty arefor the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but he has made itclear that by the end of this Parliament, as a consequenceof the decisions he has already announced, motoristswill be paying 20p per litre less on petrol and diesel dutythan would have been the case under Labour’s fuel dutyescalator.

Simon Danczuk (Rochdale) (Lab): Last week peoplein Rochdale commemorated the Holodomor faminethat occurred in Ukraine, killing 7 million people in oneof the most horrifying episodes in European history.Does the Leader of the House agree that it would befitting on this 80th anniversary to debate recognition ofthe Holodomor as genocide?

Mr Lansley: The hon. Gentleman and the House willknow that the Holodomor was an horrific man-madedisaster of unimaginable scale. We recognise the appallinghuman tragedy that occurred and its importance in thehistory of Ukraine and Europe. The Government paytribute to the people who continue to work to keep alivethe memory of all those who perished in the Holodomor.There is a complex debate about this, as the hon.Gentleman will recall. For an explanation of that, Iwould, if I may, direct Members to the speech by my

right hon. Friend the Minister for Europe in reply to adebate initiated by my hon. Friend the Member for MidDerbyshire (Pauline Latham) on 11 June.

Andrew Jones (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (Con):The most recently published unemployment data showthat the Harrogate and Knaresborough constituency isamong the top 1% in the country for falling long-termunemployment. May we have a debate about the progressthat has been made in getting people back to work,particularly the long-term unemployed?

Mr Lansley: The more we can show, particularly tothose who are long-term unemployed, the benefits ofthe Work programme, the better it is. We have recordnumbers of vacancies. While we have seen a modestreduction in the number of long-term unemployed, wewant that number to come down further, and the Workprogramme has been increasingly successful in achievingthat. According to industry figures, 383,000 people havestarted work, and we have reached the point where168,000 have found lasting work for more than sixmonths. That represents tremendous progress so far,but we want to achieve more.


Mr Speaker: Order. May I remind colleagues aboutthe pressure of time? If people could avoid preambleand launch straight into their question, and I know wewill have pithy replies from the Leader of the House,then we will make good progress, but we must move on.

Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth)(Lab): Given that £1.5 million-worth of donations fromprivate health care companies resulted in £1.5 billion-worthof NHS contracts for those companies, and that theprivate supper arrangements with the Tory party haveresulted in donations of £1.5 million to the Conservatives,may we have a statement from the Leader of the Houseon who these anonymous donors are and what exactlyhas been paid for?

Mr Lansley: I am afraid that the hon. Lady is completelywrong in all her assertions. For 20 years in the Conservativeparty it has been clear that we do not take anonymousdonations and we do not take donations to whichstrings are attached. It is absolutely not true to say thatdonations lead to contracts in the NHS. Those contractsare administered independently and fairly, and relationshipswith Ministers before they came into office and whilethey are in office have absolutely no bearing on that.Indeed, the number of private sector contracts in theNHS has not increased overall since the election.

Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con):On a recent visit to the Jobcentre Plus that serves myconstituency, I was told that the long-term unemployedare now finding jobs and, equally importantly, keepingthem. May we therefore have a debate on the success ofthe Work programme in getting the long-termunemployed—a group abandoned by Labour—into long-term, sustainable employment?

Mr Lansley: My hon. Friend is right. The Workprogramme is the largest welfare-to-work programmesince the 1930s. What he describes in his constituency is


[Mr Lansley]

very important; it replaced a patchwork of poorlyperforming and expensive schemes under the LabourGovernment. We expect 2.5 million people to be supportedover five years. What we saw under Labour, as we haveseen under every Labour Government, is an increase inunemployment. Under this coalition Government weare seeing a substantial reduction in unemploymentand, even more importantly, a record level of employment.

Jonathan Ashworth (Leicester South) (Lab): On Mondaythe Government accepted the position of Labour FrontBenchers on capping high-cost credit, ahead of certaindefeat in the other place. Yesterday the Governmentaccepted many of the proposals of the shadow HomeSecretary, my right hon. Friend the Member forNormanton, Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper),in order to take the wind out of a Government Back-Benchrebellion. Today the Government seem to have U-turnedon tobacco plain packaging, again ahead of certaindefeat in the other place. Will the Leader of the Housearrange a debate in this House on why the Governmentseem to have run out of ideas?

Mr Lansley: All the hon. Gentleman is asserting isthat what the Government are doing is supported by theOpposition. Frankly, I am pleased about that.

Julian Sturdy (York Outer) (Con): May we have adebate on the future of independent petrol retailers andthe important role they play in our local infrastructureand in delivering security of supply, especially in ourrural areas?

Mr Lansley: I cannot promise a debate, but I thinkone would be useful, because what my hon. Friend saysis true, especially in more rural areas. There has, ofcourse, been some notable erosion of the number ofindependent petrol retailers. The situation is very difficultand I hope they will hear what my hon. Friend has saidas some encouragement to them that we recognise thecontribution they make in rural communities.

Mr Jim Cunningham (Coventry South) (Lab): TheLeader of the House will recall the tragic deaths ofbaby Daniel in Coventry and of baby P. Would it not befitting to have some form of national memorial or newproposals for dealing with child abuse, given the cutbacksto local authority budgets?

Mr Lansley: I do remember, as will other Members,those tragic events and others like them. Personally, Ithink that the most important memorial we can achieveis to ensure that our child protection and safeguardingarrangements are as effective as we can possibly makethem. We know we are not there yet. We have madeprogress, but we have much more to do to make thathappen. I hope we can achieve that so that children canbe genuinely safe wherever they are in the country.

Philip Davies (Shipley) (Con): Following on from theurgent question, may we have a debate on Governmentinquiries into decision making? Surely it cannot be rightto farm out important decisions to unelected andunaccountable people. If Ministers are not capable ofworking out the evidence for themselves and coming to

a conclusion, or do not have the guts to take responsibilityfor the decision they want to take, perhaps they shouldnot be Ministers.

Mr Lansley: In the context of the urgent question,which I thought the Under-Secretary of State for Health,my hon. Friend the Member for Battersea (Jane Ellison)answered superbly, what was announced was a review,but, as she made clear, the decision that will be made inthe spring will be made by Ministers.

Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough) (Lab): When I madea plea yesterday for disabled people to be exempt fromthe bedroom tax, the Prime Minister said:

“Obviously, what we have done is to exempt disabled peoplewho need an extra room.”—[Official Report, 27 November 2013;Vol. 571, c. 254.]

That is not only a direct contradiction of previouslystated policy, it is at complete odds with what is happeningin the real world. Can we have a statement from aMinister from the Department for Work and Pensionseither to correct the Prime Minister’s erroneous statementor, alternatively, to confirm that disabled people willindeed be exempt from this vicious and nasty bedroomtax that they should never have suffered in the firstplace?

Mr Lansley: The Prime Minister was absolutely rightto say yesterday that those disabled people who need anadditional room for overnight carers will not have thespare room subsidy removed in respect of that room.That has always been the case and the Prime Ministerhas made that clear on a number of occasions.

Dame Angela Watkinson (Hornchurch and Upminster)(Con): Will the Leader of the House make time for adebate on the Standards Committee report on my hon.Friend the Member for South Suffolk (Mr Yeo), so thatwe can seek an apology from The Sunday Times?

Mr Lansley: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for thatquestion. Indeed, I think the House will be grateful tothe Standards Committee and the ParliamentaryCommissioner for Standards for an exceptionally thoroughreport. Having read it, I looked last weekend for anyrecognition in The Sunday Times of its findings, butfound none. I rather regret that. If the press is rightlyquick to criticise, it should equally be ready to admitwhen it has got it wrong.

Pete Wishart (Perth and North Perthshire) (SNP):Can we have a debate about the cost of Governmenthospitality, particularly when this week Scottish celebritiesare tripping over themselves to snub the Prime Minister’slavish St Andrew’s day union bash? We learned thismorning that even the Prime Minister has decided tosnub his own event. Does the Leader of the House haveany idea who is actually going to attend?

Mr Lansley: I have to confess that I have no idea whowill attend it.

Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con): My PrimeMinister (Replacement) Bill is due to have its SecondReading tomorrow. It provides for a line of succession ifthe Prime Minister is killed or incapacitated. My apologiesto you, Mr Speaker: I had listed you as third in line to


succeed the Prime Minister, but unfortunately the powersthat be have said that the House could not contemplatethat. Will the Leader of the House ensure that the firstitem of business tomorrow is concluded very early andthat no filibustering prevents my Bill from being debated?Before he answers, I can let him know that, for hisinformation, he is 20th on the list to succeed.

Mr Lansley: I am grateful to my hon. Friend, becauseI was not aware of that possibility under the Bill. It everso slightly changes my perception of it, but I fear that Iam still not entirely in favour of it, not least because itimpinges on Her Majesty’s prerogatives under theconstitution.

I am sure I am right in telling my hon. Friend thatthere is no prospect of filibustering in this House. It is aterm of usage, but it is not in order to filibuster, and theChair would not contemplate anything disorderly happeningin the House.

Clive Efford (Eltham) (Lab): May we have a statementfrom the Secretary of State for Culture, Media andSport to explain why the Government have refused todesignate the rugby union world cup in 2015 as an eventof national significance, as was done by the previousGovernment for the Olympics and Paralympics in 2012,so that tickets cannot be sold on the secondary ticketingmarket and hoovered up by touts, many of whom areinvolved in organised criminal gangs and in exploitinggenuine rugby fans?

Mr Lansley: If I may, I will talk to my hon. Friends atthe Department for Culture, Media and Sport. It mightbe simpler for them not to make a statement, but torespond to the hon. Gentleman in his capacity as ashadow Minister—

Clive Efford: We would all like to hear.

Mr Lansley: Those Ministers may even want to put acopy of that reply in the Library of the House.

Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): In April, theamount that someone can earn before paying incometax—the personal allowance—will rise to £10,000. Togetherwith cumulative changes made since the coalitionGovernment came to office, that will cut an individual’sincome tax bill by £700 on average and take 3 million ofour poorest people out of income tax altogether, including4,025 people in the Kettering constituency. May wehave a debate in Government time on personal incometax liability and the changes made since this Governmentcame to power?

Mr Lansley: My hon. Friend makes an importantpoint, of which people in his constituency will takepositive note. Other constituencies have similar figures,and those changes in taxation are one reason whyhousehold disposable incomes are rising, which is importantfor people in tough times. On the opportunity to considerthat further, I can say that it may well arise duringquestions following the Chancellor’s autumn statementnext Thursday.

Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent) (Lab): To follow onfrom the question asked by my hon. Friend the Memberfor Eltham (Clive Efford), may we have a debate on the

sale of rugby union world cup tickets? The protectionof Olympic tickets from resale helped to prevent tickettouting. Can we make the rugby world cup a party forordinary people, not just for the rich who can affordtickets?

Mr Lansley: As I have said, I am happy to consult myhon. Friends at the Department for Culture, Media andSport about their response on that issue.

Nigel Mills (Amber Valley) (Con): The Leader of theHouse will be aware of the great concern about liftingrestrictions on Romanians and Bulgarians coming hereafter 1 January. Will he bring back the Immigration Billon Report so that the House has a chance to considermy new clause to extend those restrictions?

Mr Lansley: The House will be aware that I of courseannounce future business every week, and the ImmigrationBill will be part of a future business statement. My hon.Friend was in his place yesterday to listen to the HomeSecretary, and he and Members from across the Housewill have heard about a substantial package of robustmeasures that should make a significant difference. Inthe light of figures on migration from within the EuropeanUnion, it is terrifically important to make it clear thatalthough we value the brightest and best coming here tostudy and work, as is absolutely right, we and othercountries—Germany, France and the like—do not wantthat to turn into an ability for people to come to thiscountry or other countries across the European Unionfor the purpose of accessing benefits.

Alison McGovern (Wirral South) (Lab): Will the Leaderof the House ask the Chancellor to come here andmake a statement on intervention in failing markets,because he seems to be all over the shop? He has rightlygiven in to a cap on the cost of credit, but he will notlisten on a freeze on energy bills.

Mr Lansley: The Chancellor will be here next Thursday.

Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con): Across Londonand the south-east, we have the scandal of accommodationbeing erected in gardens and landlords charging exorbitantrents from people who are not paying council tax butare receiving benefits. May we have an urgent debate inGovernment time on beds in sheds, so that we canexamine that problem in detail and get some action?

Mr Lansley: My hon. Friend raises an interestingpoint. Not least because I would like to hear moreabout the matter, I will ask my right hon. and hon.Friends at the Department for Communities and LocalGovernment to reply to him and to allow me to see thatreply. My hon. Friend and other hon. Members maywant to take further steps to secure a debate on thematter, for instance on the Adjournment.

Andy Sawford (Corby) (Lab/Co-op): Mr and Mrs Lloydlive in Little Addington in my constituency. They havebeen flooded twice because of a burst water main.Anglian Water accepts that the water main needs to bereplaced, but it will not do the work until late in 2014.In the meantime, it has reduced the water pressure andpeople in the village cannot even have a proper shower.


[Andy Sawford]

What advice can the Leader of the House give me onhow we can hold Anglian Water to account and get it tochange its mind and fix the problem?

Mr Lansley: Two things can be done. I will take it onmyself to raise the issue with my right hon. and hon.Friends at the Department for Environment, Food andRural Affairs to secure a response from the Government.Separately, the hon. Gentleman can speak to AnglianWater, as I have done myself. I have made it clear that Ihave supported its bids to the water regulator for a pricecontrol, which incorporates a commitment to investment,but equally that I will hold it to its commitment to makethat investment, for instance to tackle the impact ofsewerage issues on households. He may have similarmeasures that he wants to raise with the company inthat way.

Jeremy Lefroy (Stafford) (Con): Tomorrow, the all-partygroup on malaria and neglected tropical diseases, whichI chair, will publish its report on the neglected tropicaldiseases that affect 1.4 billion of the poorest people onearth. May we have a debate about the excellent researchthat is carried out into those diseases in UK institutionssuch as the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, theLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine,Imperial college and many others? The UK is a worldleader in such research.

Mr Lansley: My hon. Friend is right that we are aleader in research into tropical diseases and into treatmentsfor and responses to them. Increasingly, with thisGovernment’s commitment to dedicating 0.7% of ourgross national income to overseas aid, we are also aleader in combating those diseases across the world.

Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab): Before the lastelection, the Prime Minister promised to lead the “greenestgovernment ever”. Now, he is ordering his officials toget rid of the “green crap”. May we have a debate onwhat the Prime Minister means by “green crap”?

Mr Lansley: I suspect that the hon. Gentleman was inhis place for Energy and Climate Change questions, sohe will have had an opportunity to hear from theSecretary of State that, through our policies, thisGovernment are achieving greater energy efficiency andcarbon reduction than any of our predecessors.

Mr Speaker: I think that the hon. Member for SeftonCentral (Bill Esterson) was quoting. In those circumstances,the use of such a word is perfectly orderly, but I wouldnot want colleagues to think that it is to be encouragedordinarily, for it is not.

Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab): Given the SpanishPrime Minister’s comment that a separate Scotlandwould be outside the European Union as well as outsidethe United Kingdom, may we have a debate on thepossibility of a Scotland that is in not-so-splendidisolation?

Mr Lansley: The hon. Gentleman will be aware thatMembers of this House may well seek a debate onScotland’s future in the United Kingdom. It is perfectlyproper for them to go to the Backbench Business Committeeto seek such a debate. It is instructive that in the spaceof two days, one of the central points in the documentthat the Scottish Government supposed would be theanswer to all the questions has turned out to be basedon false assumptions.


Sexual Violence in Conflict

11.39 am

The Secretary of State for Foreign and CommonwealthAffairs (Mr William Hague): With permission, Mr Speaker,I will update the House on the Government’s initiativeon preventing sexual violence in conflict. This issue isnot about politics but about our common humanity; itis not enough to be united in condemnation of it, unlesswe are united in action against it.

It was only when the true horror of slavery came tolight in the 18th century that our nation acted against it.In our time we have come to understand the true horrorof war zone sexual violence in Bosnia, Rwanda, Colombia,Somalia and many other nations, including Syria. I willnever forget meeting young women in a hospital inGoma who were so damaged by rape that they requiredsurgery; the women in a refugee camp who said theywere being “raped like animals”; male survivors inSarajevo, who 20 years on still live lives shattered bytrauma; or women in refugee camps in Darfur who wereraped collecting firewood. What they all had in commonwas that, unjustly, they bore the stigma, shame andloneliness, while their attackers walked free and unpunished.

This is rape used as a tactic or weapon of war, toterrorise, humiliate and ethnically cleanse. It destroyslives, fuels conflict, creates refugees, and is often a tragiclink in a chain of human rights abuses from sexualslavery to forced marriage and human trafficking. Sexualviolence affects men and boys as well as women andgirls. It undermines reconciliation, and traps survivorsin conflict, poverty and insecurity. Preventing it is amoral cause for our generation.

Our goal must be to end the use of rape as a weaponof war, no longer treating it as an inevitable consequenceof conflict but as a crime that can be stopped. We needto put perpetrators behind bars and restore dignity tothe survivors, who are often rejected by their families,suffer illness, lack proper housing, are not employed,have no access to education, and struggle to survive.Ending war zone rape is the aim of the initiative Ilaunched 18 months ago with Angelina Jolie, the specialenvoy of the High Commissioner for Refugees. I paytribute to her for helping us galvanise world opinion.

In April, during our presidency, the G8 adopted anhistoric declaration that promised to eradicate sexualviolence in conflict. In June, I chaired a meeting of theUnited Nations Security Council that unanimously adoptedresolution 2106—its first resolution on sexual violencein three years. It was co-sponsored by an unprecedented46 nations and strengthened the UN’s capabilities. InSeptember, during and after the UN General Assembly,we put forward a new declaration of commitment toend sexual violence in conflict. That has been endorsedby 137 countries—more than two thirds of all membersof the United Nations.

At our behest, those countries have promised not toenter into or support peace agreements that give amnestyfor rape. Suspects can be arrested in any of thosecountries, all of which have now recognised rape andserious sexual violence as grave breaches of the Genevaconventions, so that the principle of universal jurisdictionapplies. They will support new global efforts to give aidand justice to survivors, and for the first time every UNpeacekeeping mission will automatically include the

protection of civilians against sexual violence in conflict.Furthermore, all 137 countries have agreed to supportthe development of a new international protocol on theinvestigation and documentation of sexual violence inconflict that we have proposed. Those are groundbreakingcommitments to erode impunity and support victims.This month, our attendance at the CommonwealthHeads of Government meeting in Sri Lanka ensuredthat the final communiqué contained the first evercommitment by all 53 members states to prevent andrespond to sexual violence.

We are underpinning that diplomatic campaign withpractical action. Over the past six months we haveworked with leaders in 14 countries who are championsof this initiative in their regions: the Presidents ofLiberia, Malawi, Senegal and Tanzania, the Prime Ministerof East Timor, and the Foreign Ministers of Australia,Croatia, Denmark, Guatemala, Jordan, Mexico, SouthKorea, the UAE and Indonesia. I thank them all fortheir leadership.

We have drawn up the new draft protocol with expertsfrom all over the world, and it sets out ideal internationalstandards for documenting and investigating sexualviolence in conflict zones. Its purpose is to increase thenumber of prosecutions worldwide, by ensuring that thestrongest evidence and information are collected, andthat survivors receive proper support. Since April wehave deployed our team of experts to the Syrian borders,the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Bosnia andHerzegovina, and Kosovo, where they have trainedhealth professionals and human rights defenders indocumenting crimes, investigating standards, and collectingand storing forensic evidence.

In Mali, we are deploying experts with the EU trainingmission. They have trained two battalions of soldiers sofar in international humanitarian and human rightslaw, in a country where men in uniform have often beenaccused of carrying out some of the worst rapes. We aregiving new support to the UN, and have provided£1 million to support the work of the special representativeon sexual violence in conflict, Zainab Bangura, to whomI pay tribute for her inspiring work. We will second anexpert to her team in 2014.

The Department for International Development isplaying a vital part. It has agreed a new approach toprotecting women and girls in emergency situationswith the UN and civil society, and launched a new£25 million research and innovation fund to help addressviolence against women in conflict settings.

All that represents significant progress—action begunby eight nations has become global; we have driven theneed to end war zone sexual violence up the world’sagenda; and we have generated a new willingness fromGovernments around the world to take a stand on theissue—but it is only a beginning. We will not succeeduntil we shatter the culture of impunity, make a realdifference to the lives of survivors and stop such crimeshappening. Therefore, while we continue our diplomacyand practical work, lobbying more countries to join usand urging those who have done so to fulfil theirpromises, we want to achieve another step change inglobal awareness and readiness to act. We need to bringtogether in one place all the people who are drivingforward the initiative, to open the eyes of many othersand to ensure that commitments to practical actions arefulfilled.

429 43028 NOVEMBER 2013 Sexual Violence in Conflict

[Mr William Hague]

As the next stage in the campaign, I have decided toconvene a global summit in London from 11 to 13 Junenext year, co-chaired by me and UNHCR Special EnvoyJolie. We will invite the states that have endorsed thedeclaration, and legal, military, civil society andhumanitarian representatives from around the world.We will open up the summit to civil society and membersof the public. There will be a large fringe throughoutthe summit, enabling events on conflict prevention,women’s rights, international justice, and business andhuman rights. We will run simultaneous events in ourembassies and high commissions on every continent, sothat this is not only a summit in London, but aninternational global event that continues around theclock throughout the duration of the summit. We intendit to be the largest summit ever staged on sexual violencein conflict.

We want to bring the world to a point of no return,creating irreversible momentum towards ending warzone rape and sexual violence worldwide. We will ask allthe countries present to make real practical commitments.We will ask them to revise their military doctrines andtraining, and their training and operations on peacekeepingmissions. We will ask them to commit new support forlocal and grassroots organisations and human rightsdefenders. We will encourage groups of nations to formnew partnerships to support conflict-affected countries,to make the matter a priority in their Foreign Ministries,and to set up teams of experts, as we have done. Inaddition, we will launch the new international protocoland ask all countries to ensure its implementation. Wewill work ahead of the summit to secure even widerendorsement of the UN declaration and the participationof all the world’s major powers, and we will seek ideasfrom civil society, other Governments, UN agencies,and regional and multilateral organisations, to build themomentum.

The campaign aims to ensure that sexual violence canno longer be a feature of conflict in the 21st century, butour ultimate objective must be to eradicate all forms ofviolence against women and girls, in all societies. Thereis no greater strategic prize for this century than theattainment of full social, economic and political rightsfor all women everywhere, and their full participation intheir societies. We will not secure that unless we changeglobal attitudes to women, root out discrimination andviolence against them wherever it is found, including inour own countries, and show the political will to makewomen’s participation in peace building and conflictresolution world wide a reality, including at the Genevapeace conference on Syria.

Our work on the initiative stretches across theGovernment. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretaryhas asked immigration officials to look at how to improveguidance and training on gender-based asylum claims,and she is introducing a modem slavery Bill to giveauthorities the powers to investigate and prosecute humantraffickers. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of Statefor International Development has made the protectionand empowerment of girls and women a priority. By2015, the UK will have helped millions more girls andwomen to get access to education, financial services,jobs and land rights, and our new £35 million programmeaims to reduce the practice of female genital mutilationby 30% in at least 10 countries in the next five years.

Our country is putting new effort, new single-mindedfocus, new resources and new political will into advancingthe rights of women and girls, and ending war zone rapeworldwide. In 2014, we will intensify that work in everyrespect, drawing on the united support of this House ofCommons, the work of Members from all parties, theexcellence of our diplomats and aid workers, and thestrength of our alliances. Working to end sexual violencein conflict is part of the attainment of full rights for allwomen everywhere, and in the strong tradition of thiscountry’s championing of human rights and freedom.

11.49 am

Mr Douglas Alexander (Paisley and RenfrewshireSouth) (Lab): I thank the Foreign Secretary for hisstatement and for advance sight of it.

The Foreign Secretary is right to say that condemnationis simply not enough and that action is required againstthese abhorrent and heinous crimes. When this matterwas last debated in this House, I put on record theOpposition’s support for the Government’s preventingsexual violence initiative, and I paid tribute to theForeign Secretary’s considerable and personal efforts inthis area. I am happy to do so again today. Indeed, Iwelcome the steps that have been taken since that debatein March, including by the Foreign Secretary himself, tohelp maintain and to raise the profile of this issue onthe international stage. In particular, I welcome thedecision to host a global summit in London next year,co-chaired by the United Nations High Commissionerfor Refugees Special Envoy Jolie.

The Foreign Secretary did not make reference to thework of campaigning organisations like AmnestyInternational, Human Rights Watch, Saferworld andothers. I hope and trust that that was an inadvertentoversight, but I am sure he will join me in welcomingtheir vital contribution to help advance this cause inrecent months and over many years. Their work hasbeen indispensible in placing this issue firmly on theinternational agenda, so will he assure the House oftheir active and engaged participation in the summit tobe held in London next year?

Sexual violence in conflict is today all too prevalentacross the world. The perpetrators are rarely held toaccount for their crimes, as we have just heard. Indeed,UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described the issue as“the most pervasive violation of human rights across the globe”.

The Foreign Secretary is therefore right when he saysthat this is the time for the international community tostep up its efforts to respond to these continuing andpervasive crimes.

When the Foreign Secretary last addressed this Houseon the matter back in March, he set out a number ofmeasures that the Government were introducing to tryto tackle this issue globally. I would like to ask a seriesof questions about their subsequent implementation.First, sexual violence as a tool of war remains one ofthe least prosecuted crimes, and I welcome the ForeignSecretary’s focus on that work today. Will he set out forthe House how many UK personnel have been deployedin post-conflict areas, as part of the UK team of experts,to help improve local accountability structures since theinitiative was first launched? Will he set out what discussionshe has had with international partners on contributingtheir skilled and experienced staff to an international

431 43228 NOVEMBER 2013Sexual Violence in Conflict Sexual Violence in Conflict

team of experts that can be deployed more widely? Iwelcomed the UK’s commitment to increase funding tothe UN Secretary-General’s special representative onsexual violence in conflict. Will the Foreign Secretaryupdate the House on whether other countries havefollowed the UK’s lead in increasing funding for thisoffice?

The Foreign Secretary covered some specific countriesof concern. Despite our well rehearsed disagreementwith the Government on the Prime Minister’s attendanceat the Commonwealth Heads of Government summitlast month, I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s efforts toraise the issue of preventing sexual violence on theagenda while he was there. During his visit, he emphasisedthat the UK was ready to offer more assistance andco-operation to the Sri Lankan Government to tacklethis issue. What response has he received from the SriLankan Government since the Commonwealth Headsof Government meeting to those offers and how heplans to take this work forward?

In response to a written question in October, theGovernment confirmed that Burma has now been addedto the list of countries, despite being omitted from theoriginal list. Will the Foreign Secretary explain thereason for not including Burma as part of the initiativewhen it was first launched?

The Foreign Secretary spoke about the work that isbeing done today by the UK’s team of experts on theSyrian borders. Can he provide any more details aboutthe nature of the work, and whether there are plans forsupport to be given to those in need in Syria itself ? Willhe also say whether he raised this issue with the SyrianNational Coalition when it was in London last month?

The Government have taken important steps to helpto raise this issue on the international stage and we paygenerous tribute to their efforts to do so. Where theycontinue to pursue steps to help tackle this pervasiveand deplorable abuse of human rights, they can restassured that they will have the support of this side ofthe House in their endeavours.

Mr Hague: I thank the right hon. Gentleman for hissupport for this initiative and our work on it in recentmonths. It is one of those subjects on which cross-partysupport, pursued consistently by all of us, is very importantand helps to make a big impact on the rest of the world.I know that feelings on this will be appropriately strongamong all political parties in the House.

The right hon. Gentleman asked about the campaigningorganisations. I mentioned that I envisaged the summitgiving a big role to civil society, and that certainlyincludes all the organisations he mentioned. I haveoften stressed how our efforts build on the good workdone at the UN and by non-governmental organisationsaround the world. I am pleased to say that many ofthose NGOs sit on the PSVI steering board that I haveestablished, so they advise me directly on the developmentof this initiative. This afternoon, I will also be meetingorganisations like Amnesty—it sits on our human rightsadvisory group, which also discusses these subjects.NGOs and other campaigning groups are thus fullyinvolved in this initiative, and I value their supportenormously.

The right hon. Gentleman is right that this is theleast-prosecuted crime. That, of course, is what we aretrying to change: shattering the culture of impunity isour central objective. We want to break into that andshow that prosecutions can take place. We have morethan 70 people—doctors, lawyers, forensic experts, expertsin gender-based violence—in our very impressive teamof experts. They have deployed in much smaller numbers—they have other jobs in their areas of expertise—tovarious countries, some of which I listed in my statement.For example, we have deployed a team to Libya toassess how best to engage with civil society and women’sorganisations there, while the basic infantry training weprovide to Libyan troops will incorporate a sexualviolence element. As I mentioned, we are doing thesame in Mali.

The right hon. Gentleman asked about Burma. Weare providing support to legal assistance centres inBurmese refugee camps in Thailand and to trauma carecamps in Kachin state, both of which deal with rapecases. Our embassy in Rangoon is currently consideringhow we can do more in Burma, and we are also promotinglegal reforms that address and deter sexual violence.

We have done a lot of work on the Syrian borders,supporting the collection of evidence of human rightsviolations and abuses, including of sexual violence.We have trained more than 300 Syrian journalists andactivists in documenting and exposing human rightsabuses, including crimes of sexual violence. These areexamples of the support our team of experts are providing.

The right hon. Gentleman asked about funds for thespecial representative. We have been the most generousof countries in recent years, but other countries havegiven additional funding—not many of them on thesame scale as us, but I continue to encourage them to domore.

On Sri Lanka, yes we secured the commitment in theCommonwealth communiqué, which I have to pointout we could not have done had we not been there.While I was in Sri Lanka, I also gave a public speech onpreventing sexual violence in conflict that was widelyreported in the Sri Lankan media—on the televisionand across the newspapers—so I think we drew theattention of a far wider audience in Sri Lanka to thissubject. I discussed with the Foreign Minister of SriLanka specific support for our initiative, and we awaittheir reply on whether they will support it. Of course,there are aspects that the Sri Lankan Government willfind difficult to sign up to, which is why it is importantto put it to them and to continue putting it to them. Wecan only do that, however, if we meet them, which wewould not have done had we followed the right hon.Gentleman’s advice.

That, however, is our one disagreement. Otherwise,of course, there is strong cross-party unity on this issue,and I look forward to Opposition Members as well asGovernment Members playing a big role at next June’sglobal summit.


Mr Speaker: Order. Although, untypically, few Membersare seeking to catch my eye on this statement, I remindthe House that there is a statement by the Secretary ofState for International Development to follow, andthereafter, under the auspices of the Backbench Business


[Mr Speaker]

Committee, two debates, the first of which, in particular,is heavily subscribed. As a consequence, there is apremium upon brevity from Back Benchers and FrontBenchers alike, first to be exemplified by Mr AlistairBurt.

Alistair Burt (North East Bedfordshire) (Con): Thankyou, Mr Speaker. This is the second time you havecaught me like this; I will do my best.

Yesterday I had the privilege of chairing a meetingat Portcullis House, which was attended by a number ofMembers. It was organised by the National Alliance ofWomen’s Organisations and the Centre for Global Justiceto discuss the issues raised by today’s statement. Peoplewere full of praise for what has been a quite extraordinaryand exceptional personal effort by my right hon. Friendto bring this matter forward. I do not think anyoneshould minimise that. The same groups will be veryinterested in next year’s meeting.

I would like to raise the difficult subject of abortion.Is my right hon. Friend convinced that there is now acomplete international consensus and that, althoughthere are different attitudes to abortion, there is norestriction on providing aid and support for full medicalaccess to all treatment, including the right to abortionservices, needed by women who have been the victims ofrape in conflict, or is it still the case that some countrieshang back on their aid and support or make themconditional? Will my right hon. Friend raise this issuewith the countries where that might be the case?

Mr Hague: I am very grateful to my right hon. Friendfor the support he has consistently given to this initiative.We will make sure that the organisations he mentionedwill be fully involved in the global summit and in all ourcontinuing work next year.

The position of the UK Government on the issue heraises is that safe abortion reduces recourse to unsafeabortion and thus saves lives, although we do not considerthat there is any general right to abortion under internationalhumanitarian or human rights law. Women and adolescentgirls, however, must have the right to make their owndecisions about their sexual and reproductive healthand well-being. The July practice paper from theDepartment for International Development clearly outlinesthe UK policy position on safe and unsafe abortion indeveloping countries. There are, of course, some countriesholding back on this issue, but we will continue toencourage them to adopt the same approach as us.

Roberta Blackman-Woods (City of Durham) (Lab): Ispoke to some Afghanistan MPs this week and wasquite concerned when they said that, because of theAfghan culture, women there could not achieve equalopportunities. What training is being given to the Afghanarmy so that, particularly post-2014, it sees it as part ofits role to protect women from sexual and other formsof violence?

Mr Hague: As the hon. Lady knows, this is part of animmense subject. We regularly raise with the AfghanGovernment the issue of the rights of women and girlsin Afghanistan in the future. We certainly try to buildthis into our mentoring of the Afghan national security

forces. Given that we will contribute substantially tothose security forces financially after the end of the2014, we will continue to pursue this issue; it should bein their training.

Sir Nick Harvey (North Devon) (LD): May I commendthe Foreign Secretary on his personal commitment tothis important work and welcome the internationalresponse to the Government’s initiative? It is certainly agood start. The Foreign Secretary rightly described acomprehensive approach to this subject and spoke aboutthe work of the Home Office and DFID. Will heconfirm that the Ministry of Defence is also completelycommitted to this—both in principle and in practice?Our military personnel do good work in training foreigntroops in various parts of the world. Is this agenda nowfirmly embedded in their programmes?

Mr Hague: My right hon. Friend the Defence Secretaryis very supportive of this work. I will ask the Ministryof Defence to play its part—along with other GovernmentDepartments, which I know will be keen to do so—inthe global summit next year. One of our objectives is tobuild into the work of militaries around the world theimportance of this issue. That is what we are trying todo with the various training missions I mentioned. OurMOD has a lot to offer—it can contribute a lot in thatregard—and we will discuss further how it can bestcontinue to do so.

Ann Clwyd (Cynon Valley) (Lab): As chair of theall-party group on human rights, I know it has done aconsiderable amount of work over the years in hostingwomen who are the victims of rape. The Foreign Secretaryshould add this one to his list. I have encounteredvictims of rape in many countries of the world, includingin Rwanda, Iraq and East Timor, and in East Timor, inparticular, there has been no follow-up to the rapes thatwere committed by Indonesian forces against many ofits citizens.

May I also ask the Foreign Office itself to be moresensitive towards victims of rape who approach theconsular services? Such victims have been treated withconsiderable insensitivity in the past. I think that theForeign Secretary will know of the specific case towhich I am alluding.

Mr Hague: The right hon. Lady is well aware of theimportance of this issue because of all the work that shedoes. I hope that she will be heavily involved in all thework that we do next year, both personally and throughthe all-party parliamentary group. There are difficultissues for many countries to face in this regard, and weare trying to ensure that they face those issues byinvolving their leaders in what we are doing. That iscontinuing work.

It is very important for the Foreign Office to besensitive to these issues in its consular work. The righthon. Lady will have seen the publicity about one particularcase this week. The Foreign Office has apologisedunreservedly for what happened, and, having lookedinto the case, I am satisfied that it is not representativeof the normal work of the consular service, includingits work in Cairo, where the incident took place. Ourconsular staff have been dealing with an average of fiverapes and up to 25 sexual assaults a year, and the


problems that arose in that case have not been apparentin others. Nevertheless, we will hold ourselves to highstandards.

Mary Macleod (Brentford and Isleworth) (Con): Icongratulate my right hon. Friend on his leadership andprogress on preventing sexual violence in conflict. Itwas excellent to hear about the global summit that willtake place next June, which I think will give hope towomen throughout the world. Can my right hon. Friendconfirm that the Government have a cross-departmentaltaskforce to deal with this issue? I note that both theHome Secretary and the Secretary of State for InternationalDevelopment are present, and I know that they considerit to be a top priority. It would be good for all Departmentsto work together, and to make it clear once and for allthat sexual violence should not be tolerated.

Mr Hague: There is a living, breathing demonstrationof the cross-Government work that is being done, inthe form of not only Foreign Office Ministers but theSecretaries of State for the Home Department and theDepartment for International Development. Their workon the wider agenda is crucial. The Foreign Office leadsthe work on the initiative to deal with sexual violence inconflict, but I have already told the House how helpfulthe work of the other Departments is. There is also aninter-ministerial group on violence against women andgirls, which is overseen by my right hon. Friend theHome Secretary. So the broad answer to my hon. Friend’squestion is yes.

Mr Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield) (Lab/Co-op): Iwelcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement, but mayI press him on just one aspect of it? I think that we canbe a little complacent about much of this violence,whether it takes place in conflict zones or here in ourown communities—and disturbing evidence emergedthis week about rapes of girls in London dens. Is not thereal problem the fact that people in our own communitiesas well as in foreign communities do not believe in equalrights for women, and do not think that women areequal? We must stop avoiding that problem and dealwith it here, as well as dealing with it in other countries.

Mr Hague: I agree, and I hope that none of us will becomplacent. What is happening in some societies—notnecessarily in conflict—is going backwards at the moment.The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right about what liesat the root of the problem, and that is why, in mystatement, I set this initiative in the context of a broadereffort. We are seeking to prevent sexual violence inconflict, but changing the entire global attitude to that—which is what we are setting out to do—would have abeneficial effect on attitudes to women in many othersituations and in many societies. I must emphasise againthe importance of ensuring that all our own domesticconduct and policies also push in that direction.

Heather Wheeler (South Derbyshire) (Con): Icongratulate the Foreign Secretary on his announcement,and congratulate Ministers on all the work that they aredoing. I should also draw attention to my declaration inthe Register of Members’ Financial Interests.

I have visited the Democratic Republic of the Congoand Jordan, where I was able to speak to women inrefugee camps. May I remind the Foreign Secretary of

the point made by my right hon. Friend the Member forNorth East Bedfordshire (Alistair Burt) about the needfor women to have access to full reproductive rights,and to be able to look after their bodies in the way thatthey feel that they should be looking after them? Thatissue really needs to be raised at the conference in June.

Mr Hague: Absolutely. My hon. Friend knows fromher work that the DRC is one of the countries mostaffected by these issues in the world, but I am pleased tosay that its Government are supportive of this initiative.They are involved in it, and I have met some of theirMinisters on my own visits to the DRC. She is right tosuggest that, because the conference will involve aconsiderable fringe that will address a wide range ofissues as well as agreeing our protocol on sexual violencein conflict, there will be scope for addressing fully theissues that she has raised.

Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth)(Lab): I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s announcementon the summit next year, but we need to get our ownhouse in order as well, given that two women die eachweek as a result of domestic violence here. It is good tosee the Home Secretary sitting next to the ForeignSecretary in the Chamber today. May I press the ForeignSecretary further on the answer that he gave to my hon.Friend the Member for City of Durham (RobertaBlackman-Woods) on protection for women inAfghanistan? Will he tell us what protection is beinggiven to women human rights defenders there?

Mr Hague: There is already training in human rightsfor the Afghan forces, but no one should disguise thefact that this is going to be an immense challenge overthe next few years. That is why the hon. Lady and othersare raising these issues. We raise the matter regularlywith Afghan Ministries and I have said that we need tobuild it into the support that we give to the Afghannational security forces. My right hon. Friend the Secretaryof State for International Development has also allocateda substantial amount of development aid for Afghanistanafter 2014. We will ensure that the importance of theseissues runs through all of that, but this will be one ofthe biggest challenges in the world, and the hon. Lady isright to raise it.

Dame Angela Watkinson (Hornchurch and Upminster)(Con): The cultural attitude towards rape victims insome countries, and the rejection of them, means thattheir suffering can be lifelong. In the Foreign Secretary’sdiscussions with the countries participating in theinternational protocol, has he detected any realunderstanding of that fact, or any real determination toaddress those cultural attitudes?

Mr Hague: My hon. Friend is quite right. One of themost haunting and disturbing aspects of this wholething is the fact that the people affected go on to belifelong victims as a result of the stigma, the shame andthe isolation from their families. We have to turn thataround by changing the global attitudes to these subjects,so that it is the perpetrators who suffer the shame andstigma. That is our objective. I have seen a recognitionof the need to do that among the leadership in many ofthe countries that have experienced these terrible crimes.We need to see the full implementation of the protocol


[Mr Hague]

that we will arrive at together, and the fulfilment of thecommitments in the declaration that those countrieshave signed. Our main objective over the next few yearswill be to change the situation on the ground.

Jonathan Ashworth (Leicester South) (Lab): I havelistened carefully to the Foreign Secretary’s remarks onBurma. He will know of the reports of sexual violenceagainst the Rohingya minority in Rakhine and againstother minorities in Kachin state. In the light of thosereports, there is scepticism about the depth of theregime’s commitment to the initiative. What assuranceshas he sought from the regime, and what role does heenvisage it playing at the summit next year?

Mr Hague: That scepticism is understandable. Thiswill require a big change in attitudes and increasedpriority to be given to this issue in Burma. We haveraised the matter with the Burmese Government, butwe will need to go on doing so, because the scale of theproblem is substantial, including in the areas that thehon. Gentleman mentions. I cannot give any categoricalassurances that the Burmese Government will do theright thing, but I can assure him that they will receivevery strong encouragement from Her Majesty’s Governmentto do so.

Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con): Thewhole House has rightly paid tribute to the ForeignSecretary’s remarkable personal leadership in this area.I want to ask him about prosecutions. It is hard enoughto get convictions for rape in peacetime in the UK, letalone elsewhere after the fog of war. Have there beenany successful prosecutions? What would the ForeignSecretary consider to be a good result in this context?

Mr Hague: There have been very few. For instance,there have been just a handful of convictions in Bosniafollowing the many thousands of rape cases. In any ofthe conflicts in recent times, only a tiny percentage ofrape cases have resulted in a conviction—too few tomake any difference to the culture of impunity. Thereare one or two important international prosecutionsproceeding at the moment, but we will be able to judgetheir impact only when they have been concluded.

My hon. Friend asked what would constitute success.Success would be a sufficient number of prosecutions tochange attitudes. Of course, that will take a long time tobuild up, but we will be making progress once militarycommanders know that when they issue such orders,justice will have a long reach and a long memory andthere is a high chance that it will catch up with them.

Diana Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab): Inorder to secure prosecutions, there must be properinvestigation. We have a lot of experience in our policeforces in this country, where huge strides have beenmade in treating victims properly and in runninginvestigations. Is that experience being drawn on by theexpert panel?

Mr Hague: Yes, that expertise is present in our teamof experts. They are focusing on advising organisationsand Governments in other countries on the documentationof these crimes, and on the use of forensics. The protocolthat we want to agree next year will set out international

standards on the investigation and documentation ofsuch crimes, so that evidence can more easily be usedacross the world. Setting such standards will raise thestandard of documentation and records, and the abilityto investigate these crimes, in many countries. So, yes—thehon. Lady’s point is absolutely taken on board.

Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): I praise thepersonal commitment, energy and dedication of theForeign Secretary in pursuing this really importantissue. I also applaud the cross-departmental workingbetween the Foreign Office, the Home Office and theDepartment for International Development; it showsthis Government working at their very best. In whichcountries and regions does my right hon. Friend expectto see the most progress over the next five to 10 years?

Mr Hague: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for hisremarks. We hope that the biggest progress will be seenin those countries that have experienced the most seriousproblems over the past few decades. We have seen thoseproblems in Europe, in Bosnia and Kosovo, as well as inAfrica, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Somalia,Liberia and Rwanda. We have also seen them in southAmerica, in Colombia. Hon. Members have also referredto the problems in Burma. Most of the continents ofthe world contain countries in which we want to see bigprogress being made on tackling these issues. As I havesaid, it is encouraging that, in most cases, the Governmentsof those countries are now signed up to our declarationand our initiative. That means that there is a possibilityof making real progress.

Simon Danczuk (Rochdale) (Lab): A lot of sexualviolence is occurring in Sri Lanka, and it has been goingon for some time. Is the Foreign Secretary really comfortablewith President Rajapaksa playing such a leading role inthe Commonwealth at the moment?

Mr Hague: I am comfortable that it was right to raiseall these issues in Sri Lanka. As I mentioned as gently asI could earlier, we could not have done that had we notbeen there. [Interruption.] It is apparently now thepolicy of the Opposition that we should have beenthere.

Ian Lucas (Wrexham) (Lab): No, it is not.

Mr Hague: So there is a little redefinition, but that isallowed. So we have made an impact on this issue in SriLanka that we could not have made otherwise, particularlyin the speech—[Interruption.] The hon. Gentlemansays that I am misrepresenting the position, but weunderstood the Opposition to be saying that we shouldnot go to Sri Lanka. If we had not been to Sri Lanka,we would not have been able to do anything of this: tosecure the communiqué; to make a speech on sexualviolence to raise the issue with the Sri Lankan Governmentand to have coverage all over the Sri Lankan media. SoOpposition Members can shake their heads or stickthem in the sand, but the effect is the same. The answeris that I am comfortable that we did the right thing toraise this issue in a big way in Sri Lanka.

Mr Speaker: I thank the Foreign Secretary and colleagues.


Typhoon Haiyan

12.20 pm

The Secretary of State for International Development(Justine Greening): With permission, Mr Speaker, Iwould like to update the House on the United Kingdom’sresponse to Typhoon Haiyan. Three weeks after TyphoonHaiyan made landfall in the Philippines, its full effect isbecoming clear. The impact has been devastating. As oftoday, the UN reports that more than 14 million peoplehave been affected, with 3.5 million displaced. Theofficial death toll stands at 5,500.

I visited the Philippines last weekend. The devastationthe typhoon has wreaked was clearly evident as I arrivedin Tacloban in a RAF C-130 that was carrying a cargoof UK supplies. Many of the outer parts of the townhave been flattened and debris from the typhoon littersthe streets, but aid is now getting through at scale. InTacloban, clearance work is well under way andreconstruction efforts were evident throughout the town,with small businesses getting going again and activityon the streets. The Philippines Health Secretary told methat 90% of health facilities in the affected areas arenow operational, although many had suffered damage,but there is still huge need, particularly in the outlyingislands and more remote areas. I heard from non-governmental organisations that only 20% to 30% ofthose people in need of shelter kits had so far receivedthem.

Through our rapid response facility, the UK was oneof the first donors to get relief to the worst-affectedareas. The UK has so far committed more than £50 millionof support, which is helping to get shelter, clean waterand emergency supplies to up to 800,000 people. Ourlogistical support has helped to transform the reliefeffort. Aircraft handling equipment provided by the UKto unload supplies from planes has doubled the airportcapacity at Cebu. The UK has also extended the reachof our overall humanitarian response through thedeployment of the Royal Air Force, HMS Daring andnow HMS Illustrious. That military support has beencrucial in delivering relief to more remote islands, includingthe provision of emergency medical assistance throughthe UK international emergency trauma team. I paytribute to the outstanding servicemen and women ofthe RAF and Royal Navy for their tireless efforts tohelp those hit by Typhoon Haiyan, and to the NHSpersonnel who are working to take care of those injuredand in need of medical assistance.

I believe that the cross-Government nature of oureffort, involving the Ministry of Defence, the Foreignand Commonwealth Office and a range of homeDepartments, has hugely enhanced our effectiveness,allowing us to combine a range of assets that is greaterthan any other country’s response. The British publichave shown, and continue to show, overwhelming generosityin response to this crisis, with contributions to theDisasters Emergency Committee appeal now standingat £65 million. It is an incredible display of support tohelp to maintain the momentum of the relief effort,getting lifesaving supplies to those who need themmost.

It is clear that the people of the Philippines face along road to recovery in the wake of this disaster.During my visit to the Philippines, I met Foreign Minister

del Rosario and other members of the PhilippinesGovernment, and I gave our commitment that the UKwould continue to support their Government as theybegin reconstruction and seek further to improvepreparedness against future disasters. There is muchthat the international community can do in support ofthat goal, and I have already agreed to dedicate £5 millionfrom a regional programme to strengthening the resilienceof four Filipino cities to natural disasters.

While in Manila, I met the United Nations, the AsianDevelopment Bank, the World Bank, other donors andNGOs. I heard about their experience of the responseso far and discussed with them plans for the longer-termrecovery and reconstruction effort. The Government ofthe Philippines have been clear that they will be leadingthe reconstruction effort, and the UK will support thatwork. I raised my serious concerns about the particularvulnerability of women and girls suffering deprivation,a lack of protection and the threat of abuse and trafficking.I hosted a high-level meeting on this issue with manyheads of UN agencies in London on 13 November,when a commitment was made to ensure that protectionwas a core element of the response. We are workingwith the Philippines Government, the UN and NGOpartners to ensure that this important issue is prioritised,and I have deployed UK specialists in this field to thePhilippines to help to ensure that the risks that womenand girls face are fully addressed.

The Government of the Philippines expressed theirheartfelt thanks to the UK Government and the Britishpublic for their response to the typhoon. We should beproud of the generosity of the public, including that ofthe Filipino community living in the UK, and of ourmedics and military personnel, and Department forInternational Development and consular staff, who haveworked tirelessly over recent days in the humanitarianeffort. In addition, we should be proud of the efforts ofUK NGOs in delivering so much so quickly. Thisresponse—the public’s response—truly represents thebest of Great Britain. Our thoughts continue to be withthe people of the Philippines, particularly those whohave lost loved ones. The dire humanitarian situationand the ongoing recovery effort deserve the continuedattention and support of this Government, and I commitmy Department to leading that effort. I commend thestatement to the House.

12.25 pm

Mr Jim Murphy (East Renfrewshire) (Lab): I thankthe Secretary of State for her statement and for advancesight of it. It is three weeks since Typhoon Haiyan, andour thoughts remain with those who have lost lovedones, those still searching for bodies and those seekingto rebuild their homes, lives and businesses. I will betravelling to the area this weekend. The situation on theground remains desperate, but it is now clear that thiswas one of the strongest typhoons ever to make landfalland that many of the communities closest to the shorewere ill-equipped and too poorly constructed to dealwith the brute force of the barrage. Typhoon Haiyanhas obliterated whole towns, destroyed communitiesand shattered lives. Although many will rightly askquestions about climate change, this is also a storyabout poverty. The poorest and most vulnerable werehit hardest, the worst quality homes were those mostlikely to collapse, and families living in some of the

441 44228 NOVEMBER 2013 Typhoon Haiyan

[Mr Jim Murphy]

poorest provinces in the Philippines are now left withno homes, no assets and no savings to fall back on. Iwould also like to join in the praise of our aid charitiesoperating there, of DFID staff and Ministers, and ofthe members of our armed forces who will now,unexpectedly, be separated from their families overChristmas.

Another thing is clear regarding this tragedy: theBritish public should never be underestimated. Theirgenerosity, through their emotional concern and financialcontribution, is a further brilliant reminder that we arenot and never will be a nation that looks the other way.The Disasters Emergency Committee public appeal hasnow topped £65 million. Let us think about that. It is£1 for every person in our country, or an astonishingaverage of more than £3 million every day since thedisaster struck, and all that at a time when many athome are struggling. The appeal started on the sameweekend as the separate Children in Need appeal tosupport families in the UK which, too, broke newrecords.

So absolute was the destruction that the UN comparedthe scene on the ground in Leyte island to the devastationof the Boxing day tsunami of 2004. Although thedestruction was similar in nature, we can at least bethankful that it was different in scale. Yet lessons, ofcourse, must be learned by the international communityabout its response to that previous tsunami.

Let me now deal with some specific questions. TheDepartment has not yet briefed the Opposition and,because of that, the time available today does not allowme to ask the full list of questions that I still have. As aformer Secretary of State, I have always held the viewthat the political relationship between the two FrontBenches is largely set from the Government DispatchBox. I hope that I am not going to have to adjust, onthis or any other issue, to the fact that even my requestfor a telephone conversation with the Secretary of Statewas refused—[Interruption.] It is not weak; it is a fact.

Will the Secretary of State say what assessment shehas made of how the response to Typhoon Haiyan hasbeen informed by the experience of the relief effortsfollowing the tsunami? How much UK aid has beendelivered and what materials have been sent? What isthe plan to help the Philippines Government to ensurethat all donations that arrive in the country are of use inthat country? The previous Government published plansto ensure that 10% of all disaster relief was directedtowards work designed to ensure better preparednessfor future disasters. Will the Secretary of State updatethe House on the progress and delivery of that approach?

The United Nations has said that rehabilitation costswill be more expensive for Haiyan than was the casefollowing the tsunami. With officials on the groundwarning that it may take as long as 10 years to rebuild,it is vital that we get this right. What assessment has theSecretary of State made of the Philippines’ capacity toreturn to growth in the coming years and of the impactof this disaster on the regional economy? I want toconclude on climate change. It is neither wise nor accurateto attribute any specific weather event to climate change,but we do know that climate change is real. Due to thenature of what we are discussing today, I shall make thisobservation gently: there are worrying noises from parts

of the Government regarding renewed scepticism abouttaking action on climate change. Will the Secretary ofState put it on record that she is determined to takerenewed action on climate change, which is one of themost pressing developmental and poverty reductionpriorities for the Government, I am sure, and certainlyfor the Opposition?

Typhoon Haiyan is not just a disaster today, but anecho of our future tomorrow. The Philippines will continueto need our support long after our shock has subdued.As the Government set out their plans in the comingmonths, we will rightly scrutinise them, but we willinstinctively support them.

Justine Greening: Disappointingly, the right hon.Gentleman has shown that the tone of the relationshipcan be set by his side as well as by ours.

The right hon. Gentleman asked what we have delivered.The UK has delivered support to around 800,000 victimsof Typhoon Haiyan, which has included 12 flights. TwoRAF C-17s have landed in Cebu in so far, with a thirdrotation planned. We have also delivered more than17,000 shelter kits, 38,000 tarpaulins, 16,000 hygienekits and 1,500 tents, as well as water and sanitaryequipment, buckets, jerry cans, 4x4 vehicles and JCBs.We have provided heavy-lifting equipment at the requestof the World Food Programme to help to load andunload aid at Cebu airport, and also debris and road-clearing equipment to unblock roads so that we can getaid through. As everyone is aware, we also sent overHMS Daring, which has now been relieved by HMSIllustrious, which enabled medics and supplies to get toisolated and devastated communities. We have also hadan RAF C-130 plane in the region shuttling suppliesbetween Cebu airport and the people who need them inTacloban, for example.

The Government have carried out significant workon disaster preparedness. Through the UN, we areinvolved in the work of Political Champions for DisasterResilience, which works with the Government in Haiti.I have invited the Philippines Government to becomeinvolved so that they can be better prepared for disastersand better able to respond to them.

The right hon. Gentleman asked what we were specificallydoing in the Philippines. As I said in my statement, wehave earmarked £5 million for four main cities in thePhilippines that can benefit from better disasterpreparedness. In 2010, the Philippines Government passeda law setting out a framework for them better to respondto disasters. As I am sure the House is aware, that partof the world is particularly prone to natural disasters.The challenge they faced was simply the scale of thetyphoon, which was possibly the largest ever to makelandfall. We will work to help them to improve theirability to withstand such disasters. Part of that willinvolve looking at how buildings are constructed andhelping local government to improve its capacity towork with communities and evacuate people.

The right hon. Gentleman asked me about my assessmentof the Philippines Government’s capacity to deliver thereconstruction effort that is needed. They are today andtomorrow looking at the initial needs assessment oninfrastructure. I have spoken to the World Bank and theAsian Development Bank, which are likely to mobilisesome of the financing that is needed for the reconstructioneffort. There is a general willingness on the part of the

443 44428 NOVEMBER 2013Typhoon Haiyan Typhoon Haiyan

Philippines Government to drive forward the work andon the part of the international community to supportthat effort over the coming months and years. Indeed, itis already projected that UN work will take place overthe next 12 months as a minimum.

The Government have always made it clear that wewant an international agreement on climate change—itis vital that that is tackled. The right hon. Gentlemanshould remember that it was the Conservative party inopposition that proposed a climate change Act and hisGovernment ultimately took the idea on board. I assurehim that we remain resolute in prioritising tacklingclimate change, as he will see over the coming months.

Jeremy Lefroy (Stafford) (Con): We are increasinglyseeing disasters occurring around the coast and in islandstates. We have also seen the enormous role that HMSIllustrious has played. Will my right hon. Friend considerwhether, when Illustrious retires, we might convert itinto Her Majesty’s relief ship, which could be basedsomewhere such as Gibraltar?

Justine Greening: That is an interesting suggestion. Itmight prove to be an expensive way of ensuring that wecan reach people quickly, but we are always open toideas. I should say that the medical team on Illustrioushas already treated two children with infected woundswho unfortunately needed to have limbs amputated.That saved their lives, so we can see how our RoyalNavy provides support to people who are in desperateneed, and we should be proud of the work that it isdoing.

John Healey (Wentworth and Dearne) (Lab): I amglad that my right hon. Friend the Member for EastRenfrewshire (Mr Murphy) will be going to the Philippinesthis weekend to see the situation for himself. Perhaps hewill find out how far the Secretary of State’s £5 millionwill stretch in helping those four cities to prepare todefend themselves in the future. The most shocking factin the Secretary of State’s statement was that, threeweeks on, three quarters of the people who need shelterdo not yet have it. Will she tell the House what she isdoing to overcome that disastrous situation?

Justine Greening: I mentioned that fact in my statementbecause it is shocking and sets out the scale of thechallenge facing us. The typhoon hit a country that hasa lot of disparate communities on outlying islands. Oneof the reasons why we sent out Daring and Illustriouswas to get to those western islands in the Philippinesthat would otherwise not be reached. Obviously, therehas been significant focus on Tacloban, but less focuson the area to the west of Tacloban. A lot of work isunder way. I flagged up the issue of shelter because it isone of the main things on which we are working withthe UN. We have sent significant numbers of shelter kitsand six flights will be going out to the region this week.The very generous response of the UK public to theDEC appeal will mean that our leading NGOs will alsohave the resources to provide the critical shelter aboutwhich the right hon. Gentleman talks.

Heather Wheeler (South Derbyshire) (Con): Icongratulate the Secretary of State on her announcementand the hard work that is being undertaken. On behalf

of the people of South Derbyshire who have written tome—this is reflected in what has been said by Governmentand Opposition Members—may I say that the greatcontributions made by the public have been astonishing?I put it on record that it is not just a matter of theGovernment doing something, because the people aredoing something, too.

Justine Greening: My hon. Friend is right. People’sgenerosity is staggering. Some £65 million—that amountis rising—has been delivered to the Philippines appeal.We can be really proud of the way in which our countryhas responded to the crisis. When I met the PhilippinesGovernment over the weekend, their thanks to us wereheartfelt. They were really staggered by the responsefrom our country, which they will remember for a longtime. In the meantime, we will continue to play our roleas one of the leading nations providing humanitariansupport in their time of need.

Diana Johnson (Kingston upon Hull North) (Lab):What discussions has the Secretary of State had withher colleagues in the Home Office about traffickedpeople, particularly women and children, who might tryto get entry into the UK? What measures are being putin place to deal with that?

Justine Greening: I am interested in working moreclosely with the Home Office on trafficking. It is a keyarea with an international aspect in which we can upour game as part of the solution. We were concerned bywhat we came across in the Philippines. One fact thathas been less discussed is the significant displacement ofpeople. Many of them turn up in Manila and althoughthey might perhaps get initial support for the first fewdays they are there, it is easy for them to become lostafter that. They are at serious risk, particularly women,girls and children, of becoming involved in all sorts ofsituations, including trafficking, over the coming weeksand months. That was why I issued my call to action acouple of weeks ago to raise international awareness ofthe issue, at an event attended by the former ForeignSecretary, David Miliband. On the practical side ofthings, I sent over two of our experts from DFID towork across the UN effort and ensure that we are doingall we can to co-ordinate and prioritise the protection ofwomen and girls through the crisis.

Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con): I thank my right hon.Friend for her statement. I am proud of the contributionwe are making both as a Government and as a people tothe Philippines. Will my right hon. Friend pay tribute tothe Harlow Filipino community, who held a specialfundraiser last Thursday night following the tragic deathof the Harlow Princess Alexandra hospital nurse, JeffreyDucusin, and his son Jairo? Will she express condolencesto the family and visit the Filipino community in Harlowsometime in the future to give them support at thisdifficult time?

Justine Greening: I express my deep condolences tothe family and to all those people who have lost lovedones in the crisis. I would be happy to meet the Filipinocommunity and I had the chance to meet some of thema couple of Fridays ago when we had a special mass atWestminster cathedral. I have been in close contact with


[Justine Greening]

the Philippine ambassador to London since the crisishit and I saw him this weekend in the Philippines. Iwould be happy to meet my hon. Friend’s local community.

Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent) (Lab): Others on bothsides of the House have emphasised how the UK andthe British people have shown great generosity to helpout in the Philippines, but what discussions has she hadwith her international counterparts to ensure that allnations pull their weight and help out?

Justine Greening: Those discussions are now wellunder way. I spoke yesterday with Baroness ValerieAmos, who leads the UN humanitarian effort. It is clearto me that although the UK can play and is playing aleading role in responding to the crisis, it is importantthat other countries continue to play their role. We haveseen massive generosity from across the internationalcommunity, but there will be a further UN flash appealin December. I encourage the whole internationalcommunity to respond to that flash appeal positively sothat we can ensure that we keep the humanitarian effortgoing.

Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD): Mountainsidemobile signal enabled my constituents Marcus and Ellento determine that a family of seven of their relationssurvived the storm on the island of Samar, but none ofthe homes in the community of Bakhaw withstood thestorm. They report that today still no aid workers orrepresentatives of the Philippine Government have beento the island to bring help and assistance. Is the Secretaryof State satisfied that there is no unnecessary delay inthe distribution of aid by the Philippine Government?

Justine Greening: The nature of the storm and thepart of the Philippines it hit—the middle third of thecountry—have made it incredibly challenging to get toall the communities people have wanted to reach. Iknow that when the UN first arrived at Tacloban airportimmediately after the storm had hit, it was initiallyimpossible even to get into Tacloban, just 10 km downthe road, because of the debris. Even on the mainland,reaching people was challenging. One reason we havesent our Royal Navy vessels is to reach such communitiesand the Illustrious significantly steps up the capacitybeyond that which the Daring was able to provide toreach more of those islands. As the hon. Gentlemansets out, it is a continued challenge to reach thosecommunities and to ensure that the supply lines thatwill support them over the coming weeks remain openand are established in the first place.

Susan Elan Jones (Clwyd South) (Lab): There hasbeen much rightful praise for the work of the Britishpublic in donating to the appeal, but it has involved ayounger generation of donors, some perhaps donatingfor the first time, most of whom will have donated bytext. Is the Secretary of State satisfied that we are doingenough to ensure that donations made by text receivegift aid so that more can go towards this importantappeal?

Justine Greening: I take the hon. Lady’s point onboard. There are established processes to ensure thatgift aid happens when it is meant to happen and that

people have the choice—and are pressed when they aregiven the option—to sign up for gift aid. In my formerrole in the Treasury, I did a lot of work to ensure that itbecame easier for people to get gift aid, whether in theworkplace or elsewhere, and I am very happy to followup her point with the Treasury.

Mary Macleod (Brentford and Isleworth) (Con): Aswe have heard, there has been a tremendous amount ofsupport from the British people for those affected bythe typhoon in the Philippines and the UK Governmenthave also given £50 million. How confident is the Secretaryof State that that money will reach the 800,000 peoplewho need it as quickly and effectively as possible?

Justine Greening: We launched the rapid responsefacility, which meant that over that weekend we wereable to start working with huge NGOs as well as smallerones to get aid out to the people who needed it. We areusing trusted NGOs, we have due diligence and I amsatisfied and confident that we will ensure that theinvestment that goes in, whether from the British publicor the Government, reaches the people it is intended toreach.

Gemma Doyle (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab/Co-op):Has the Secretary of State had the opportunity toreview our immediate response to the disaster to ensurethat the right sort of support was prioritised, given theunfortunate reports of aid sitting on the tarmac?

Justine Greening: Lessons can be learned from everysingle humanitarian or disaster response. For example,this was the first time we had used our NHS emergencytrauma list of NHS professionals, so we will absolutelyensure that we learn the lessons. One reason we sent theloaders and rubble and debris clearing equipment wasthat we found that planes could land in the nearbyairport, whether that was Cebu or Tacloban, but therewere then two problems. Either they could get suppliesoff the plane but not down roads as they were not clear,or the supplies were so huge that there was no equipmentto get them off the planes as that had been damaged bythe typhoon. My Department sourced from the Netherlandsa massive piece of equipment that could clear thebiggest loads off planes. We got it from the Netherlandsto Tacloban and Cebu airports to double the capacityof what we could offload from planes. The hon. Lady isabsolutely right: this was a big logistical effort and as weencountered various bottlenecks they had to be removed.

Paul Uppal (Wolverhampton South West) (Con): I,too, thank the Secretary of State for her statement. Shehighlighted that NHS personnel and staff are doingquite a lot of work in the Philippines. Will she elaborateon the expertise that they are bringing and the goodwork they are doing on the ground?

Justine Greening: I had the chance to meet some ofthose fantastic people and one was from my localhospital, St George’s in Tooting. There were surgeons,anaesthetists and doctors who were working alongsideother international medics, such as those from AusAID,to provide support. Some of the stories of what theyhave done are phenomenal, particularly those aboutdealing with the initial casualties who came in followingthe typhoon. They have latterly been dealing with some


of the broader issues, such as the fact that shelter islimited, which means that we are starting to see challengeswith pneumonia in children. The work those people aredoing is evolving over time. Our support is now principallybeing delivered through HMS Illustrious and healthcare is being provided by the NHS people on board.

Mrs Sharon Hodgson (Washington and SunderlandWest) (Lab): Following on from the answer to my hon.Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull North(Diana Johnson) about the measures being taken byDFID to protect vulnerable women and girls frombeing exploited and trafficked, can the Secretary ofState tell us which NGOs she is working with in thePhilippines so that the great British public, who havealready been so generous and who may want to donatedirectly to those NGOs or even offer time and expertiseto help those women, girls and families rebuild theirlives, can do so?

Justine Greening: We are working with so many thatit is difficult to give a complete list. Save the Children,Plan International, Christian Aid—a range of fantasticNGOs are now involved in the effort. One of the thingsthat we are rapidly setting up is women-friendly andchild-friendly spaces so that women and children at riskhave safe spaces to go to. I heard reports today when Ispoke with our DFID team on the ground of childrenbeing offered for sex trade sale to aid workers in Tacloban,which of course is absolutely disgusting and unacceptable.It is why we are right and working so hard to minimisethe risks to vulnerable people.

Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con): I thank theSecretary of State for co-ordinating so successfully thefast and wide-ranging response of our Government tothis enormous disaster, which is especially sad for thoseof us who have lived in the Philippines and travelled inthis part of the Visayas. I also share the feelings expressedby several hon. Members about the generosity of theBritish people to the tragedy. I highlight the response inmy constituency led by Raymond Padilla in theGloucestershire Filipino Association, the headmasterand staff of St Peter’s high school, including DanHudson, who has organised a 24-hour basketball sessionthis weekend, both the Anglican and Catholic Churches,Gloucester Rotary and many others, including thePhilippine Community Fund, which was founded bymy constituent Jane Walker. Does my right hon. Friendagree that, as the emphasis in due course moves fromsaving lives to rebuilding communities, there will be anopportunity for DFID to highlight specific needs forgoods or equipment to which our wide-ranging civicsociety organisations could respond?

Justine Greening: My hon. Friend makes an excellentpoint. Although the focus has initially been on providinglife-saving support, going forward that will graduallyevolve into the reconstruction effort, including people’slonger and medium-term needs. The Government ofthe Philippines are working on shaping what that responseneeds to be, and the UN is there to support them. I shallbe interested to hear from my hon. Friend what hethinks his local community could do. I pay tribute tothem for all the work they have already done. It is

outstanding, and it is a tribute to the generosity andselflessness of people in this country that they respondso generously.

Tom Greatrex (Rutherglen and Hamilton West) (Lab/Co-op): How much of the initial £30 million that sheannounced in response to the UN’s $300 million appealhas gone through the UN and how much has beenallocated through other routes, and which routes?

Justine Greening: About £23 million of the £30 millionwent to the UN flash appeal. A further £6 million or sowent to the Red Cross movement in one form or another.In addition, we had set aside £8 million for the initialresponse through the rapid response facility. We spent£2 million on getting equipment and supplies out there.So we are now at just over £50 million. A UN flashappeal will be coming out in the next couple of weeks,once the latest needs assessment has been done.

The Prime Minister made it clear to the president ofthe Philippines the weekend the storm hit that we wouldcontinue to look at what more we can do as a country tohelp his country respond to this crisis.

Stephen Lloyd (Eastbourne) (LD): I pay tribute to theSecretary of State and her Department. She has respondedoutstandingly to this crisis. Like many colleagues, I paytribute to the British public. In Eastbourne alone theresponse has literally bowled me over. More than £5,000has been raised on an Eastbourne typhoon appealJustGiving site. Ocklynge school raised £1,600. TheRotary raised £1,500. The list goes on. It is absolutelyfantastic.

I grew up in Africa and I know that after very heavyfloods, or in this case a typhoon, waterborne diseasesare a real threat. I would appreciate it if the Secretary ofState gave some detail about what vaccines have beenprovided. Is there a recognition that this could be a realissue?

Justine Greening: Picking up on my hon. Friend’sfirst point, I pay tribute to the officials in my Department,who have been working around the clock since the crisisbegan both in the Philippines—we had people whowent out there that very weekend—and the whole teamback in Whitehall, who have been co-ordinating withthe Philippine team. These are people who literally dropeverything and head over to a place to be part of thehumanitarian support at the drop of a hat. We shouldpay tribute to their creativity, their effort and theirrelentless good humour in dealing with a challengingsituation. They are flying the flag for our country andworking alongside our fantastic MOD and NHS colleaguesto deliver a cross-government response.

My hon. Friend is right to raise the generosity of theBritish public and I am delighted to hear that his owncommunity have been so generous.

Mark Lazarowicz (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab/Co-op): The hon. Member for Gloucester (RichardGraham) rightly raised the importance of the reconstructionphase. I know from previous disasters that, whereas theinternational community has responded generously andquickly to the immediate disaster, it is sometimes difficultto get a full response to international appeals such as


[Mark Lazarowicz]

that from the UN. What is the Secretary of State doingto focus attention within the UN and EU on preparingfor the fundraising for the reconstruction phase?

Justine Greening: It is one of the reasons why I metwith the World Bank and the Asian Development Bankwhen I was in Manila over the weekend. The effort onsetting out the infrastructure and longer-term reconstructionneed is rightly being led by the Government of thePhilippines. It will cover a number of areas, includinghousing, building and building standards, water anddrainage and community resilience. Over the comingdays and weeks we will have a clearer sense of thePhilippine Government’s assessment of future need.That will feed into a World Bank or Asian DevelopmentBank trust fund of some sort, and the UK stands readyto be supportive of that approach.

Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con): I congratulatemy right hon. Friend on her personal energy andcommitment in co-ordinating the UK aid effort, alongsideher excellent Minister of State. Does she recognise thewelcome but late response of the Chinese Governmentin increasing its aid and sending a hospital ship. Willshe put it on record that the Chinese Governmentshould not ruin that by politicising its aid and reliefeffort?

Justine Greening: I agree. I do not think that humanitarianeffort should be politicised. It is about helping thepeople who have been put in so much need by thetyphoon that hit, and getting support to them. Thatsurely has to be the most important thing. I hope thatall countries, including China, will respond positivelyand generously to the next UN flash appeal.

Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): People inKettering and across the country have been incrediblygenerous in contributing £65 million to the financial

appeal. It shows that this is the sort of international aidthat everyone can support. The United Kingdom wasalready one of the world’s most generous donor nations,and the contributions from the NHS, the Royal Navyand other parts of Her Majesty’s armed forces will nothave come cheap. How are those contributions countedagainst DFID’s aid target, and how are those costsreimbursed to both the Ministry of Defence and thenational health service?

Justine Greening: I hope that I can provide my hon.Friend with some assurance. Where InternationalDevelopment spend and effort takes place in otherDepartments, it is classified as official developmentassistance and is part of the UK’s 0.7% commitment,which this year for the first time this Government arereaching. Part of our just over £50 million response isthe money that we have spent sending HMS Daring andHMS Illustrious. We will fund the marginal costs thatthe MOD has incurred to get those vessels into the areaand do the work that they have done, which I think isquite right.

Richard Fuller (Bedford) (Con): My question buildson that asked by my hon. Friend the Member for TheWrekin (Mark Pritchard), while the British public havebeen responding generously to the appeals for the victimsof Typhoon Haiyan, China has been seeking to extendits air right, raising concerns in the Philippines about itsclaim over the Spratly Islands. As the Prime Minister isshortly to visit China, will my right hon. Friend theSecretary of State put a note in his bag outlining theUnited Kingdom’s outstanding and selfless response tothe tragedy as an example of how China should respondin future?

Justine Greening: My hon. Friend makes his pointclearly. I am sure that is something the Prime Ministerwill take on board when he visits China shortly.


Point of Order

Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough) (Lab): On a pointof order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I seek your guidanceand advice on an exchange that took place earlier todayon the spare room subsidy/bedroom tax. I mentionedthe need for clarification, given that the Prime Ministertold me yesterday:

“Obviously, what we have done is to exempt disabled peoplewho need an extra room.”—[Official Report, 27 November 2013;Vol. 571, c. 254.]

When I raised the matter with the Leader of the Houseearlier, he said, “The Prime Minister yesterday wasabsolutely right to say that those disabled people whoneed an additional room for overnight carers will nothave the spare room subsidy removed in respect to thatroom.” My concern is that additional words have beenattributed to the Prime Minister. Words have beenadded that he simply did not say. I am not suggestingthat the Leader of the House would deliberatelymisrepresent what was said or mislead the House in anyway, but I think that inadvertently that is the outcomeof the words he attributed to the Prime Minister. I seekyour advice on how that might be reconciled—

Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo): Order. Ithink that I have the gist of it. Every individual Memberis responsible for what they say in the House. If aMember feels that they need to correct the record in anyway whatsoever, there is a route open to them, but it isnot currently a matter for the Chair. If there are nofurther points of order, we will move on. [Interruption.]It would be handy if any private conversations aboutthe record took place outside the Chamber, not acrossthe Dispatch Box from a sedentary position.

Backbench Business

European Scrutiny Committee Report

1.2 pm

Mr William Cash (Stone) (Con): I beg to move,That this House has considered the publication of the Twenty-

fourth Report from the European Scrutiny Committee, on Reformingthe European Scrutiny System in the House of Commons, HC 109-I.

The European Scrutiny Committee’s unanimous reportis the most radical since the passing of the EuropeanCommunities Act 1972. It raises fundamental questionsabout the operation of the Act, which are of greatsignificance to the public and the electors, who have toobey the laws made under and by virtue of it, and thescrutiny of the European legislation that flows from it. Ipropose to make a short statement without interventionsin order to set out the basic issues. I will then give wayon specific questions as they arise.

Emphasising the supremacy of the WestminsterParliament on behalf of the electors, the Committeemakes proposals relating to a veto to be deployed atnational level and asks the Government to respond toour conclusion that parallel provision should be madeto enable the House of Commons to disapply existingEuropean legislation. We specifically state that“there should be a mechanism whereby the House of Commonscan decide that a particular EU legislative proposal should notapply to the United Kingdom”

and that“if such a Motion was passed the UK Government would beexpected to express opposition to the proposal in the strongestpossible terms, including voting against it.”

A further conclusion of the Committee is that parallelprovision should be made to enable a decision of theHouse of Commons to disapply parts of the existingacquis communautaire, the body of European law thatexists under the treaties.

The Committee proposes greater involvement inEuropean legislation by departmental Select Committees,as a whole and individually, including the appointmentof a Member of Parliament as a specialist reporter oneach and every Committee as a means of focusing theCommittees on the enormous body of law constantlyarising in relation to policy making and law makingwithin their individual purview. We state that thereshould be permanent chairs and members of newlycreated European document debate committees thatreplace the European Standing Committees. We alsopropose the reintroduction of EU oral questions on theFloor of the House.

We propose that there should be greater accountabilityof Ministers, specifically in relation to the problemsthat arise concerning the activities of United Kingdomrepresentatives in Brussels, including their interactionwith the Committee of Permanent Representatives whorepresent the European Union institutions as a whole,because we believe that there is a significant gap inaccountability in that context. We also propose measuresto improve debates on the Floor of the House.

There is another concern and it relates to the treatmentof European matters in the media, particularly televisionand broadcasting. We note the importance of providingbalanced and informed media coverage on the EU in

453 45428 NOVEMBER 2013

[Mr William Cash]

general, and the scrutiny process in particular, andcriticise the chairman of the BBC Trust for refusing togive oral evidence to the Committee. For example, thismorning the “Today” programme dealt with a wholerange of matters of enormous immediate interest, includingtobacco packaging and green levies. There is a stack ofstuff that comes up continuously, but there was nomention whatsoever of the EU basis on which thosematters are dealt with.

With regard to what is going on in the EuropeanUnion as a whole—the report refers to this—the bodyunder the treaties that represents the national Chairmenof each of the 28 member states with responsibility forEuropean scrutiny meets about once every eight weeks.There has been an increasing awareness over the pastyear, in the light of increasing European integration,demands for political union and so on, of the need fordemocratic legitimacy in national Parliaments. Whenthe Prime Minister said in his Bloomberg speech, inrelation to his fourth principle, that the national Parliamentsare the root of our democracy, I am sure that he spokefor the whole of this House. It is vital that our Parliamentgives effect to that principle.

Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con): My hon.Friend is making a powerful statement. Will he confirmthat this was a unanimous and cross-party report? Inote that the Leader of the House, the Deputy Leaderof the House, the Minister for Europe and the ChiefWhip are all here. Can we take that as an indication thatthey are keen to implement these recommendations atthe earliest moment?

Mr Cash: I would be extremely interested to knowwhy they would not be interested in supporting theCommittee’s proposals, particularly the basis on whichthey are derived, which is that we are putting ournational Parliament at the heart of the process, becausethat is the basis on which Members of this House areelected by the people we have the honour of representing.

Mr Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con):It is remarkable that this is a unanimous report. Indeed,it is supported by the hon. Member for Linlithgow andEast Falkirk (Michael Connarty), the previous Chairmanof the Committee. It comes up with a radical butsoundly based proposal“whereby the House of Commons can decide that a particularEU legislative proposal should not apply to the United Kingdom”

even it is voted through by the Council of Ministersunder qualified majority voting. It also suggests that“parallel provision…to disapply…the acquis”

communautaire should be made available to the Houseof Commons. That is based on Professor DamianChalmers’ analysis regarding the creation of a form ofunilateral red card of national Parliaments that is, inturn, based on the EU treaties themselves, which“shall respect the essential State functions”

of member states. I commend the report and congratulatemy hon. Friend on it. He highlights something of ascandal in this House in that we do not scrutiniseEuropean legislation in this way already.

Mr Cash: I am grateful for my hon. Friend’s contributionto this discussion. In our report we reject the proposalsfrom the Minister for Europe and the Foreign Secretaryregarding a collective red card with a threshold. Webelieve that if the principle of veto is to be accepted,because it does not apply in the national interest, thatshould be a unilateral decision taken by an individualParliament. The 1972 Act is based on the White Paperof 1971. That document, which created all the consequencesthat flowed from the Act, specifically stated that theveto must be retained in the national interest, not onlyfor the sake of the individual nation states—the UnitedKingdom, in particular—but because to do otherwisewould endanger the very fabric of the Community. Itrecognised that imposing a compression chamber onthe whole of the European Union would lead to thekinds of problems that have recently emerged with thecharter of fundamental rights, immigration questionsand the rest.

Mr John Baron (Basildon and Billericay) (Con): Icongratulate my hon. Friend on this report and on thework of his Committee. Apart from what was suggestedin the treaties in the early ’70s, we need better scrutinynot only because the organisation now called the EUhas fundamentally changed since we first joined it, orbecause there has been a salami-slicing of our sovereigntyunder Governments of all parties in the past, but becausethe British electorate expect us to be scrutinising EUlegislation in this place, as the proposals suggest?

Mr Cash: Indeed. These very radical proposals onchanging Standing Orders and the whole mechanismand process would greatly improve our scrutiny. I amgrateful to my hon. Friend for his contribution.

Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): The Britishpublic not only expect us to scrutinise EU legislation inthis place but want to see us doing it. Does my hon.Friend find it extraordinary that the chairman of theBBC Trust should refuse to appear before his Committee?Does that not send a very bad signal to all the otherSelect Committees of this House, and what can we, asthe House of Commons, do about it?

Mr Cash: This is all covered in the report—we makeextensive reference to it and include the correspondencethat was exchanged between the chairman of the BBCTrust and me, as Chairman of the Committee. I thinkthat most people would conclude that his not appearingvoluntarily before the Committee to give evidence wasreally quite disgraceful.

Martin Horwood (Cheltenham) (LD): I congratulatethe Committee on achieving such cross-party consensuson many of its proposals, including better scrutiny bydepartmental Select Committees. Does the hon. Gentlemanagree that improved media coverage of European politicsby all public service broadcasters, not just the BBC,would help to inform the European debate whicheverside one takes?

Mr Cash: I entirely agree—that is absolutely the case.It does not follow that anyone has a complete monopolyof wisdom in relation to these issues; what matters isthat we have a proper and informed debate based oncentral principles. The principle of the supremacy of

455 45628 NOVEMBER 2013European Scrutiny Committee Report European Scrutiny Committee Report

this Parliament is so fundamental that there cannot beany dispute about it. A central element of that principleand of our decision making is that the United Kingdomelectorate should not have imposed on them legislationthat is not in the national interest and that they do notwant.

Mr Tobias Ellwood (Bournemouth East) (Con): Icertainly welcome some of these findings. My hon.Friend is aware that I conducted my own study into thisand became very conscious of the fact that we do notscrutinise EU legislation as well as other Europeancountries. We are good at complaining about it but weare not engaging upstream in implementing this legislationor even preventing some of it. Will he expand on hisproposed so-called European document debate committees?I would be pleased if European Committees A, B and Cwere replaced, because they have not done a good job. Ialso agree that there should be more time for us toquestion the Minister for Europe on the Floor of theHouse.

Mr Cash: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. There wasa time when membership of these Committees waspermanent, which meant that they had people whoreally knew and understood the context in which thesematters were being debated. They were not just shovedon them by the Whips at short notice to sit there writingcorrespondence, or whatever; they took an enormouslycoherent interest in those matters. The idea of havingpermanent Chairs and permanent members of theCommittee, in parallel with the arrangements for specialistMP rapporteurs—or reporters, as we call them—toserve on the departmental Select Committees, is tocreate an integrated approach so that the whole Houseis properly informed at every policy level and can thereforeask the right questions of departmental Ministers onthe Floor of the House and in public Committee sittings.

Mr Jenkin: At the risk of testing the patience of theHouse, I note that, as my hon. Friend will be aware, myhon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Nigel Mills)has tabled a new clause to the Immigration Bill thattouches on these matters in relation to the lifting ofrestrictions on Romanian and Bulgarian immigrantscoming into this country under the EU free movementof people provisions. Is it appropriate on this occasionfor me to draw my hon. Friend the Member for Stone(Mr Cash) into any thoughts about how these principlesmight apply to a new clause to the Bill that would beeffective in upholding the sovereignty of this House?

Mr Cash rose—

Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo): Order.Given that the time limit on this debate is 20 minutes, ofwhich there is only about one minute to go, I am surethat the hon. Gentleman will not want to be drawn offhis subject and into the wider debate.

Mr Cash: I am certainly prepared to say that importantquestions of principle arise about the existence of Europeanlegislation, as it stands, and what changes would need

to be made in order to amend it. This is part of whatcould be a disapplication provision or a “notwithstanding”arrangement to ensure that legislation fitted in withwhat the British people wanted.

Kelvin Hopkins (Luton North) (Lab) rose—

Mr Cash: I give way to my hon. Friend.

Kelvin Hopkins: I think we are personal friends butperhaps not friends in the political sense.

I am most grateful for this opportunity to say a fewwords. I strongly support the report and endorse everythingthat the Chairman of the Committee has said. It is anexcellent report that goes a long way towards satisfyingwhat I think Members across the House have wantedfor a long time. Does he agree that one component ofour system that really does work is the European ScrutinyCommittee itself, with the Clerk, the legal advisers andthe Clerk advisers doing an absolutely first-class job?That kind of scrutiny, which we undertake every week,is a fundamental part of what we do.

Mr Cash: The hon. Gentleman—as he prefers to becalled in this context—is completely right that we areextremely well served by the Clerks of and advisers andlegal advisers to our Committee and, through thatservice, so is the House. I simply cannot believe that wecould have a better service.

Mr James Clappison (Hertsmere) (Con): Does myhon. Friend agree that in order for the Committee to doits job it needs to be told what is going on, and that theGovernment should pay heed to the distinguished academicopinion we received, which said that limité documentsshould be made available to the Committee—apparentlythat happens in other European Parliaments—so that itcan report on them to the House?

Mr Cash: As my hon. Friend knows, we deal withthat issue in the report. A limité document is one that isheavily restricted as a matter of confidentiality. Webelieve very strongly that, given that other memberstates appear to get these documents and can makethem public, so should we. It is monstrous that Committeesshould be gagged on matters of great public interestand importance by imposing a limité tag on them.

On the point made by my hon. Friend the Memberfor Bournemouth East (Mr Ellwood)—this is my verylast point—there is at the back of the report a completeanalysis of all the scrutiny systems of all 28 memberstates in comparison with ours, so that people can forma judgment about the effectiveness of European Unionscrutiny as a whole. Obviously, if the scrutiny system ofsome member states is wanting, one might have reasonablegrounds to worry, when it goes through the majorityvoting system, that not all the arguments have beentaken into account.

I am glad to have had this opportunity to speak and Iam deeply grateful to all the members of my Committeefor all the hard work they have put in. They agreedunanimously and I look forward to the Government’sresponse.

Question put and agreed to.

457 45828 NOVEMBER 2013European Scrutiny Committee Report European Scrutiny Committee Report

Small Businesses

Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo): Before Icall the mover of the motion, a large number of Memberswant to speak in this afternoon’s debates, so in this firstdebate there will be a six-minute limit on all contributionsafter the mover has spoken. I am sure that Anne MarieMorris will bear that in mind as she opens the debate.

1.22 pm

Anne Marie Morris (Newton Abbot) (Con): I beg tomove,

That this House encourages the Government to consider whatfurther measures can be taken to encourage small business toflourish and prosper, including reducing the burden of red tape,addressing the complex tax structure, improving access to financeand gaining support from local government.

May I open by thanking the Backbench BusinessCommittee for allowing this debate in the first place? Iam delighted to see here so many Members who want tocontribute on this very important issue.

Small businesses drive our economy. They are whatcreate growth. Two thirds of new employment this yearhas been driven by the small and medium-sized enterprisecommunity, not by the big boys. I believe we need astrategy across all Government Departments that supportsthat and recognises the importance of small businessesand vaunts them. We need a strategy and a culturechange. We need to show national pride—writ large—andto say that small businesses are key and matter and thatwe as a Government support them.

The Government have a good record, but their proposalsand measures tend to look at the SME community asa whole. Given that that can refer to businesses with250 employees and a turnover of £50 million, theGovernment would be advised to look at segmentingthe market and prioritising some of their support andfunding for some of our very smallest businesses.

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skillshas a great record. It introduced the micro moratoriumon new legislation for three years. It also introduced thered tape challenge. Indeed, 6,000 regulations are up forreview, with 3,000 of them to be cut or significantlyamended. The Department has changed employmentlegislation so that, when there is a problem and thereneeds to be a parting of the ways between employersand employee, the situation is now much easier andeffective for both sides. The Department has also sensiblychallenged health and safety. A non-high-risk businessnow has to be shown to have been negligent, rather thanface a strict liability test, before it can be taken to court.The burdensome reporting and assessment that used totake place have also been removed from those low-riskbusinesses.

On access to finance—something that so many ofour businesses call for—the Government have introducedthe funding for lending scheme, which has gone well.StartUp loans have also been extended and the enterprisefinance guarantee scheme has been very helpful.

We cannot, however, rest on our laurels. The Departmentneeds to address some key issues. First, on late payment,I know that the Government are reviewing the promptpayment code, but I think that something needs to beincluded in the accounts so that company auditors canreport on, and make clear, businesses’ record on them.

Jake Berry (Rossendale and Darwen) (Con): On theissue of late payment, my hon. Friend may be awarethat the court system can make judgments on smallbusiness interest rates whereby a punitive rate of interestis paid by a large business to a smaller one if it fails topay. Would she welcome the introduction of such aprovision to other small business contracts?

Anne Marie Morris: I would indeed. That is a verysensible suggestion and I am sure the current review willlook at it.

When people start up a small business, they areconcerned about mortgaging their house and having togive personal guarantees. Can we not separate the liabilityof the business from the home and secure it instead onthe business asset? We could do that if we introducedlimited liability for sole traders and reintroduced thepotential for banks to take a fixed charge over bookdebts.

The Government have welcomed the plethora of newso-called challenger banks and new alternative lenders,but let us be clear that they need more support. We needto look at the right sort of light-touch regulation inorder to make them safe funding institutions in thefabric of our society. More importantly, the Governmentneed to ensure better communication, because businessesdo not know what is out there or how to assess it.

We also need to address the issues of EuropeanUnion regulation, because the micro moratorium addressedonly domestic regulation. The EU red tape taskforcehas identified 30 areas to be addressed, which is welcome,but more needs to be done. I would ask the UK betterregulation taskforce to look not just at what we can doto encourage EU initiatives, but at how we make regulationsin this country. My understanding is that most of thereview looks at whether a piece of legislation will beburdensome for the SME community as a whole, withoutreally addressing the issue of very small start-up businesses.

The Treasury has been good. It has introduced smallbusiness rate relief and extended it, and I hope it will beextended further in the Budget. It has reduced corporationtax: we are ever closer to 20% all around. Perhaps mostvaluable is the national insurance employers’ allowance,meaning £2,000 off the employer’s contribution. That isgood news.

Again, however, more needs to be done. Businessrates are one of the biggest challenges. They need to beseen as fair and transparent. A firm with a business onthe high street that is not the main footfall area of thetown still pays high rates, and yet the rates for anout-of-town retailer covering the same amount of squarefeet seems disproportionately low.

Mr Robin Walker (Worcester) (Con): My hon. Friendis making an excellent and powerful speech. On businessrate reform, I am sure she has heard, as I have, fromlocal businesses that feel they would struggle withoutthe extension of the small business rate relief that theGovernment have already given them. My hon. Friendhas already said that she wants it to be extended, butdoes she agree that there needs to be more fundamentalreform of the business rate system to support our smallbusinesses?

Anne Marie Morris: I entirely agree with my hon.Friend that there needs to be root-and-branch reform.The whole way in which rateable value is calculated is a

459 46028 NOVEMBER 2013 Small Businesses

mystery. The rulebook has got a bit like the tax code.Why are some pubs assessed on turnover, while othersare assessed on freehold or rental value? That is arcaneand requires a thorough overall.

Mary Macleod (Brentford and Isleworth) (Con): Doesmy hon. Friend agree that in London, where myconstituency is, small businesses are penalised becausethe higher rateable values there mean that rates areextortionate?

Anne Marie Morris: My hon. Friend makes a valuablepoint.

The next area that should be addressed is the VATcliff: if a business’s turnover reaches £79,000, it is suddenlyhit by having to find VAT. It will hardly want to increaseprices to its customers by 20% overnight. We could havea ratchet mechanism or go to the EU, which would beperfectly possible. I urge the Government to do so,because we need a derogation.

The Government, but particularly the Treasury, shouldconsider the removal of class 2 national insurancecontributions. The self-employed have to pay two classesof contributions, and they find that incredibly confusing.We have a great record on corporation tax, but could wenot do more, including by looking at a new, simplifiedflat tax for the smallest businesses?

We should talk not only about BIS and the Treasury,but the Department for Education, because educationis critical to our having a true and sustainable supply ofnew small businesses. The Government’s introductionof financial education is a fantastic first step, but that isonly one piece of the enterprise skill set that an entrepreneurneeds.

It is great that apprenticeship schemes have grownunder this Government, with 858,000 individualsparticipating in those schemes this year, but we needmore. We need enterprise education for six to 60-year-olds.The World Economic Forum has recommended thatthere should be enterprise education in every countrythroughout the period of education. I suggest that weask Ofsted, which looks at community engagement tomeasure what schools do, to consider not only thatpoint but business engagement as well.

In relation to funding in the tertiary sector, we shouldalso look at whether institutions are offering enterpriseeducation, which I believe should be available whateverdiscipline students are reading. Although I applaudLord Young’s comments about business schools takinga lead, we should remember that they are not the onlysuch place. There is a role for universities to work muchmore closely with local enterprise partnerships, a pointto which I shall return.

John Stevenson (Carlisle) (Con): Does my hon. Friendagree that in many cases it would be beneficial foruniversities to be represented on LEP boards?

Anne Marie Morris: That is an excellent idea.The Department for Work and Pensions also has a

role to play. It has done some good things—it hasdelayed auto-enrolment for pensions, and we heard thismorning that there may be a cap on pension charges—butthe Work programme needs to offer the potential forproper self-employment. Research undertaken by the

all-party group on micro-businesses has found thatalmost half of the businesses offering the Work programmedid not have an adequate skill base to enable people togo back into work as self-employed individuals. TheDWP could consider what it might do to help latereturners. Organisations such as PRIME—the Prince’sInitiative for Mature Enterprise—help them to returnto work, but there is very little else, although that matteris important.

Let us not forget the Department for Culture, Mediaand Sport. It has done some great things for businesses.High-speed broadband is absolutely critical, and thefact that there are now broadband connection vouchersfor small businesses in 22 cities is very welcome. However,more is needed, because rural areas are really suffering.

Mark Pawsey (Rugby) (Con): My hon. Friend issetting out measures that will enable small businesses togrow. Let us not forget that every big business was oncea small business, and, taken together, such measuresshould provide an incentive for businesses to get bigger.

Anne Marie Morris: That is absolutely right.We need to spread the broadband initiative and encourage

Ministers—sooner rather than later—to look at the 4Gmarket. One of biggest concerns of small businesses isthat they cannot get mobile reception, which is criticalto them.

I ask the Department for Communities and LocalGovernment to work with the LEPs and get them toengage better with the smallest of businesses. Pleasecould it also look at procurement? Although centralGovernment have done a good job in trying to meettheir obligation of giving 25% of contracts to SMEs,the picture in local government is rather less rosy.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change alsohas a part to play. The £90 million scheme for clean-techentrepreneurs is a very good step. There is a green dealspecifically for small businesses, with a pay-as-you-savescheme. However, more needs to be done, includinghelp with switching suppliers. Businesses currently findthemselves moved automatically on to new contracts ondisadvantageous terms.

What more could UK Trade & Investment and theForeign Office do? UKTI has done a really good job,but it needs to do more to help the smallest businesses,and there is a call for greater support at embassy level.

Let us not forget the Department for Environment,Food and Rural Affairs, which after all represents afifth of our economy in the form of rural businesses.

Mr Simon Burns (Chelmsford) (Con): Does my hon.Friend agree that, with the emphasis that the Government,driven by the Treasury, have placed on our embassies inthe past three and a half years, UKTI is doing afantastic job around the world through taking delegations,aided by Ministers, to push British exports? It is meetingwith considerable success, because it has beefed up thequality and quantity of the people representing Britishindustry and the Government around the world.

Anne Marie Morris: I agree entirely.To return to DEFRA’s key role, a grant of £60 million

has been set aside for the rural economy to enablebusinesses to look at opportunities in tourism and

461 46228 NOVEMBER 2013Small Businesses Small Businesses

[Anne Marie Morris]

micro-enterprise. However, the Commission for RuralCommunities has said that the Government need toconsider future-proofing such businesses, particularlyin relation to their peculiar needs for access to finance.

Finally, because I am conscious that many hon. Memberswant to speak, I call on the Cabinet Office to come upwith a good definition of a small business. There hasbeen a review in Europe, in relation to the Small BusinessAct for Europe, on how businesses are defined. It seemsto me that European definitions have not been adoptedacross the UK. I am far from convinced that thosedefinitions are right, but the term “SME” means verylittle to the average householder. Let us get a definitionthat is meaningful and relevant to the UK economy.

David Simpson (Upper Bann) (DUP): The hon. Ladyis certainly giving a very fiery and passionate speech,which is very welcome in this House. She mentionedpersonal guarantees. We have seen reports in the pressof the antics of banks in forcing companies into liquidationso that they can avail themselves of their assets. Whensomeone gives personal guarantees and then goes out ofbusiness through no fault of their own, a stigma isattached to them in this country, though not in othercountries, and we need to get round that stigma. Itwould be an excellent idea for the banks to look at that.

Anne Marie Morris: The hon. Gentleman makes agood point, which we should certainly consider.

The Cabinet Office and BIS can lead the charge tocelebrate small businesses and to get behind a joined-upstrategy across all Departments, including by beingclear what we mean by small businesses. In particular,let us all get behind small business Saturday on 7 December,to say, “We in this House support small businesses. Weare there for you.”

1.38 pm

Mr William Bain (Glasgow North East) (Lab) rose—

Chris Heaton-Harris (Daventry) (Con): Follow that!

Mr Bain: Indeed; it is a great pleasure to follow thetremendous speech by the hon. Member for NewtonAbbot (Anne Marie Morris). I thank her and theBackbench Business Committee for scheduling the debate.

I represent a constituency that has one of the largestproblems of family poverty and long-term unemploymentin this country, but it also has some rapidly expandingSMEs. I have been in contact this week with Gaia-Wind,which is the fastest growing private company in Scotlandand the eighth fastest growing SME anywhere in theUK, to hear its exciting plans for expansion. It also,however, shows us some of the particular needs ofparticipants in the green economy and the problemsthat they face.

There is a lack of investment in our economy. Wediscovered yesterday that investment by businesses hasbeen largely flat over the past year. In fact, businessinvestment contributed only 0.1 percentage points tothe 0.8% of GDP growth in the third quarter. We alsoknow that access to finance is a huge problem for theSME sector. Although the small regional banks in

Germany, the Sparkassen, were able to keep lending tosupport SMEs during the recession, lending by institutionsin this country, such as the Royal Bank of Scotland,shamefully fell to spectacularly low levels, which had ahuge and disproportionate impact on the SME sector.

In the coming weeks, we will celebrate the contributionthat small business makes to our local economies andthe national economy. We will celebrate the fact thatthere are 4.9 million businesses in this country employing24.3 million people. However, we must be aware of theneed to take firm action on business rates, the need toexpand the range of financial institutions that are ableto lend to SMEs, and the need to do much more onskills, and research and development.

Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con): Will thehon. Gentleman also celebrate the excellent, detailed,cross-departmental work that the Government havedone to support British businesses—big, small andmedium—and to get the economy in a position to turna corner and move into accelerated growth?

Mr Bain: I certainly will not celebrate the three yearsin which we have had very little growth, which had ahuge impact on SMEs. With respect to the hon. Gentleman,I want to speak about the positive issues on which wemight find more cross-party agreement in this debate.

I refer hon. Members to the excellent report thatSantander and Dods published recently in the House. Itcontains key recommendations that the Governmentshould attend to quickly. It shows that 285 separateschemes are available to SMEs which, in the view of thereport’s writers, is far too many. It sets out the goodrecommendation, which the Government could implementstraight away, of developing a single portal throughwhich SMEs can have contact with central Government.The report found that only 29% of SMEs were aware ofthe existence of the funding for lending scheme and that28% of businesses thought that access to finance wouldbe the biggest impediment to growth in the next fewyears.

Shockingly, the report revealed that only 12% ofstudents in our colleges and universities would makeworking for an SME their first choice on graduation.That is a real concern, given that the vast majority ofjob creation in the coming years is likely to come fromthe SME sector, and it shows that there is much morethat the Government, SMEs, colleges, universities andschools need to do to promote founding and working insmall businesses as good career paths.

As a country, we need to do far more work on skills.Only yesterday, the Minister illustrated in a writtenanswer to me the growing gap in early rates of paybetween those who have level 4 skills and those withoutany qualifications at all. That hourly pay gap of £8.84 haswidened by a tenth in the past six years alone. SMEs,the Government and local authorities need to do a hugeamount to improve in-work training so that people cansee wage progression in a job, and so that a job in asmall or medium-sized enterprise can become a careerwith long-term prospects.

We need to improve the shockingly low rates ofresearch and development in this country. In public andprivate sector research and development, we lag waybehind our main competitors in the EU and many ofthe emerging markets. The Government must do much


more to boost the innovation that comes from the manymillions of small businesses throughout the country,such as Gaia-Wind in my constituency.

As a matter of urgency, we need to improve access tocapital. When I speak to SMEs in my constituency, theymake it clear that they are willing and able to take onmore staff, and that they want to create more demandacross our country. However, the banking system issimply not working for SMEs. We need new players tocome into the banking system and regional banks thatfocus on the needs of the economies in Scotland, Wales,Northern Ireland and the different regions of England.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore) (Lab): Does my hon.Friend agree that if that is to work, the regional banksin all parts of the UK, including Wales, need to bedriven by entrepreneurial zeal, rather than a civil serviceethos?

Mr Bain: My hon. Friend raises the important pointthat we need a culture of long-term investment, as hashappened over the past few decades in Germany, wherethere has been strong support for SMEs from theGovernment and the financial institutions. We need tosee more of that in this country and it would be bestdelivered through a system of regional banks that providesupport to business on a dedicated, local basis.

Finally, in this most significant of weeks for Scotland,I must say that it is critical that the SME communityspeaks out on the question of Scotland’s continuedmembership of the United Kingdom. It would be disastrousfor Scotland’s trade with the rest of the UK and disastrousfor exporters if Scotland were forced out of the UnitedKingdom. It is important that all of us in the Houseencourage business to speak out on the need to keep theUnion together.

I am incredibly supportive of small businesses in myconstituency, and I look forward to hearing a positivedebate among Members on both sides of the House.

1.46 pm

Chloe Smith (Norwich North) (Con): I think that thisis my first opportunity to congratulate you on takingthe Chair, Madam Deputy Speaker. I also congratulatemy hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot (AnneMarie Morris) on securing the debate and all those whosupported her at the Backbench Business Committee.To pick up on just one of the points that she made, Iagree about the difficulties that are presented by theVAT threshold, which I saw recently in the case of ameals on wheels business that serves my constituents. Itis just about to hit the threshold, but its customers areill-equipped to deal with a hike in prices.

Like my hon. Friend, I look forward to celebratingsmall business Saturday in my constituency. I also lookforward to a discussion that will take place shortly atNorwich business school, whose advisory board I siton, about how such business schools can be anchorinstitutions for the small firms in their surroundingarea.

In the report, “Growing Your Business”, Lord Youngof Graffham drew out just how much more there is todo to open up public procurement to small and medium-sized firms. My hon. Friend the Member for NewtonAbbot mentioned the Cabinet Office at the end of her

comprehensive list, and I am sure that she would joinme in congratulating the Minister for the Cabinet Officeand Paymaster General on his work to give 25% ofGovernment business to small and medium-sizedenterprises. Surprisingly, it is often forgotten that theGovernment buy large quantities of goods and serviceson behalf of taxpayers, and there is no reason whysmall and medium-sized businesses should not takepride of place in that marketplace.

Andrew Bingham (High Peak) (Con): Does my hon.Friend agree that small businesses find it difficult todeal with Government agencies because they are presentedwith a bewildering array of things such as pre-qualificationquestionnaires? Small and micro-businesses do not havea huge army of staff to deal with such nonsense, whichincreases costs not only for business, but for theGovernment, because they could have bought whatthey needed cheaper from a small business in the firstplace.

Chloe Smith: My hon. Friend could not have made abetter intervention because I was pleased to be able tocontribute to solving that exact problem when I was aCabinet Office Minister.

Given a few tools, we can all do much more in ourconstituencies, and Lord Young is continuing to workon that issue in association with my hon. Friend theMinister for Skills and Enterprise. We must encouragesmall and medium-sized firms to use Contracts Finder,on which they will find a clear record of all availableGovernment contracts. We should urge local authoritiesand others to put their contracts on that portal to allowthe operation of a comprehensive marketplace.

We should also encourage constituency businesses touse the mystery shopper scheme that the Cabinet Officehas introduced, which will help to solve the problemraised by my hon. Friend the Member for NewtonAbbot. When small businesses that seek simply to geton and do business encounter poor practice orcommunication from the public sector, they need a wayto solve the problem. The mystery shopper scheme doesexactly that, and also gives us a chance to do more toencourage public authorities—whether local government,health, police or fire services, or any similar service—todo more to make their procurement SME-friendly.

Small firms can encounter many problems such asthe prevalence of pre-qualification questionnaires andlate payment. A care company in my constituency dealswith customers who are particularly vulnerable, andtragic havoc can be wrought if a health body makes alate payment to such a company. The motion rightlycalls on local government to do its part, and I suggestthat better procurement forms an important part ofthat.

Mark Pawsey: My hon. Friend mentioned pre-qualification questionnaires. Once a small business hasmanaged to jump through the hoops demanded by oneauthority, should not that be good enough for anotherauthority? Perhaps we should have some form ofqualification certificate.

Chloe Smith: That is my view. To the best of myknowledge, the Government are bringing forward proposalsto put in place exactly that, which I support wholeheartedly,having started that work some months ago.


[Chloe Smith]

The motion refers to red tape, but again there is noway to solve that problem except through a methodicalapproach. I applaud the opening provided by the mysteryshopper service to which I referred as it allows us to bemethodical by making a list of things that have gonewrong and solving them one by one. That is the onlyapproach that will work for regulatory problems. Wemust hear from small firms that regulations have servedill, and then we can go about solving the problems. Ialways say as a constituency MP that I cannot attemptto help a constituent to solve something if I do notknow the detail of what the problem is.

Like many others, I am sure, I encourage firms to usethe red tape challenge that the Government have rightlyset up, and I welcome the results of the initiative so far.To date, more than 3,500 regulations have been identifiedfor reform, saving businesses more than £215 millionper year. That is worth doing, and I am sure that theMinister will update the House about how we canextend that approach to European regulatory burdens.On behalf of my constituency businesses, I care verymuch about that issue.

In the remaining two minutes available, I will concludeby talking about recruitment, which is crucial for smalland medium-sized firms. Of course we all want suchbusinesses to become larger firms, if that is their ambition,but to do so they need great people to become theiremployees. I run a large campaign in my constituencycalled Norwich for Jobs, which does what it says on thetin. It seeks to create more jobs in Norwich, especiallyfor those aged 18 to 24, and we aim to halve youthunemployment in Norwich in two years. I am pleasedthat local firms have responded to the call and thatmore than 800 jobs and apprenticeships have beenpledged to the campaign. Although the campaign hasbeen going for only 10 months, 400 young people havebeen helped into work so far. I want to ensure that smallfirms have pride of place in that campaign. I will soonrun an event with the Federation of Small Businessesand a sister campaign called Swarm. We will considerhow to encourage small businesses into such operations,and help them to find the talent they need among localyoung people. That not only helps the community andyoung people, but places small businesses in control oftheir recruitment.

I hail the £2,000 reduction in national insurance thatis coming forward in the shape of the enterprise allowance,which will be important for cutting small firms’ jobs taxfrom Easter next year. I also note the success of start-uploans. So far there have been about 30 of them inNorwich, and 10,000 nationally, which is to be welcomedas it is all to the good of small businesses.

1.55 pmDebbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth)

(Lab): It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member forNorwich North (Chloe Smith) and to co-sponsor thisdebate, and I congratulate the hon. Member for NewtonAbbot (Anne Marie Morris) on securing it. I am pleasedto speak in this debate, which considers how we canovercome the issues facing small businesses. Smallbusinesses, which in my definition are those with fewerthan 50 employees, are the powerhouse of the economy.They contribute 46% of the UK’s income in the privatesector—a massive £l,558 billion—and constitute more

than 99% of all businesses. Ultimately, a sustained recoverywill be built on their backs, as has been said, and thatmust be recognised.

A whole range of different factors affect the successand even the viability of small businesses, includingaccess to finance, the high costs of business rates andenergy bills, but I will focus my remarks specifically onlate payments. Hon. Members may know that for thepast two and a half years I have run a campaign on latepayments. It started as a small, local issue after ahaulier came to one of my surgeries and said that hewas going to go out of business because of late payments.The average term he was being given was 30 days, but hewas often not being paid for 90 days. That is a commonstory that I wanted to look into in more detail.

I tried to discover the scale of the problem and it wasstriking that so few businesses would come forward anddescribe what they were experiencing. That was untilone brave local couple, who started a plumbing business35 years ago, came to me and said that their businesswas going under—as indeed it did with debts of morethan £150,000 due specifically to late payment.

Mark Pawsey: Is the hon. Lady confusing late paymentswith customers who refuse or do not have the means topay? Those are totally separate issues and if a businesswants to avoid the problem of late payment, it canrefuse to supply goods to the customer until the accounthas been paid.

Debbie Abrahams: I thank the hon. Gentleman forhis intervention, if slightly patronising. I have gone intothe issue in quite a bit of detail, and it was a specificpoint about late payments.

Let me give a bit of background to this case. As Isaid, the story of Ann and Harry Long is far fromunique and is a particular problem for small and micro-businesses that do not have the cash-flow buffers oflarger companies. I have a particularly a high level ofmicro-companies in my constituency—more than 85%of companies have fewer than 10 employees—and anumber have gone into administration, primarily asa result of late payments.

Nationally, we know from Bacs that more than£31 billion is owed to small businesses, and more thanhalf—58%—of the country’s 1.7 million SMEs say thatlarge companies choose when they pay. In 2011, only£24 billion was owed, so the problem is increasing. If wecompare what is owed in late payments to the amountsbeing lent by high street banks, which last year was£56 billion, we sense the scale of the problem.

According to Bacs data, the average SME is owed£31,000 at any one time and waits an average of eightworking weeks for payment, which is nearly double thecontract terms. I am particularly concerned about thegaping north-south divide. Small businesses in the northsay that they are owed an average of £39,000, which isalmost double the £23,000 owed to the average southernbusiness.

The 2012 small business survey reported that 55% ofSMEs, 53% of small businesses and 46% of micro-businesses say that large companies are not paying theirbills on time. The most recent Federation of SmallBusinesses survey suggests an even worse picture. Seventy-three per cent. of businesses say that they were paid late


in the past 12 months, and one in five say that half of allinvoices are paid late. Interestingly, 70% say that theproblem has got worse in the past 12 months and thatthe private sector is the biggest culprit.

Research by the Forum of Private Business last yearindicated that late payment is having a significant impacton businesses development, productivity and growth.Access to, and the cost of, finance, and credit tradeinsurance, were cited as problems linked to late payment.Late payments have a knock-on effect, leaving manysmall businesses in a vicious cycle of late payment. TheFPB’s economy watch panel indicates that 42% of SMEsbelieve that late payments were not seen as important.

As we have heard, the impact of late payment can bedisastrous. It is estimated that, during the 2008 recession,4,000 businesses failed as a direct result of late payments.No official data have been collected, but the situationneeds to be monitored. There is growing evidence thatlate payments to SMEs are hurting our economic recovery.Office for National Statistics data show that SMEsmake up to 98% of the total number of organisations,providing 59% of all private sector jobs and 45% of allemployment, and generating 46% of the UK’s income.

What is being done to tackle the problem of latepayments? The previous Government introduced theLate Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998,but it was not used, because companies feared beingblacklisted. The prompt payment code, a tool introducedby the Institute of Credit Management, committedsignatories to pay suppliers on time under the termsagreed without attempting to change payment termsretrospectively, enabling every level of the supply chainto meet the terms. However, the code has had mixedeffects. First, there is a very poor take-up by FTSE 100companies.

Mr Bain: My hon. Friend makes a powerful argument.What does she make of the National Audit Officerecommendation that Government Departments needto work more closely together, and that the Departmentfor Business, Innovation and Skills and the Treasuryneed to work harder to support small businesses in theway she indicates?

Debbie Abrahams: My hon. Friend makes a goodpoint. We need to encourage that.

People are abusing the prompt payment code. Theyare either signing up and changing their terms, orchanging their terms prior to signing. Most recently, theEU late payment directive stipulated that public authority-to-business invoices must be paid in 30 days, and thatbusiness-to-business invoices should be paid in 60 days.However, there have been problems with the transpositioninto UK law. Section 7 of the directive has not beentaken up and independent organisations will be unableto use it to help small businesses.

Another development last year was the introductionof the small chain finance scheme. That is anotherdifficult problem.

2.4 pm

Mary Macleod (Brentford and Isleworth) (Con): Icongratulate my hon. Friend the Member for NewtonAbbot (Anne Marie Morris) on introducing this extremelyimportant debate on small businesses. Some of the factsand ideas that have been discussed are important. Those

ideas could make a difference. We heard the numbersfrom the hon. Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth(Debbie Abrahams)—of the 4.9 million private sectorbusinesses in the UK, 99% are SMEs, which employmore than 14.4 million people. The debate matters to allhon. Members’ constituencies and every sector.

We should recognise that, in the past three years,400,000 more businesses were created. I congratulatethe Government and the Minister on the work he hasdone in enabling that to happen. In my constituency inthe past two years, 825 new businesses were set up. It isone of the top 10 places in the UK to set up a newbusiness. The Government’s initiatives to help smallbusinesses have made a difference.

Locally in my constituency, whether in Chiswick,Brentford, Isleworth, Osterley or Hounslow, I meet mybusinesses, large and small, regularly, because I believeit is important to hear of their success and of thechallenges they face. I have worked with them and thelocal council to enable 30-minute free parking in the localtown centres across my borough—the businesses haveasked for it.

Andrew Percy (Brigg and Goole) (Con): May I offermy hon. Friend a practical example from NorthLincolnshire council of the success of exactly that freeparking policy? When we scrapped Labour’s parkingcharges and introduced two hours’ free parking forbusinesses, local businesses reported a big increase intrade in our town centres, even at a time of difficulteconomic circumstances. We are extending that supportfurther by providing free wi-fi in our town centres,which she might want to consider.

Mary Macleod: That is an absolutely brilliant example—that is something I would like to do to support my localbusinesses in west London.

I meet my Chiswick traders regularly. Last time, wemet in Club Workspace, which I recommend to hon.Members. It is a much more creative and innovative wayof allowing entrepreneurs to have the space to work. Itis not as rigid and long-term as things used to be, butmore flexible and modern. It is very effective.

I have also done apprenticeships seminars to encouragesmall businesses to take on apprentices. I met Mumpreneur,Athena and other groups that support small businesses.

Naturally, we are supporting small business Saturday.We will be doing lots of things during the day for it. Ithas galvanised my local businesses to work together.Between them, they came up with all sorts of things todo, which was brilliant to see. I have also run workshopson women and enterprise, because I believe we do nothave enough female entrepreneurs, which I will addressin a moment.

I wanted to mention to the Minister some of theissues that have been raised with me locally, includingbusiness rates, to which I will return, access to funding,legislation, red tape and parking. Where do businessesgo to find help? More clarity and simplicity on helpingsmall businesses would be useful.

I have a role in helping the Minister as a smallbusiness ambassador for London. Only yesterday, Iwent to the meeting of the London enterprise panel’sSME working group. It had four key priorities—financeand equity; the availability of work space; trade and


[Mary Macleod]

exports; and business support—but added another atthe meeting: the skills shortage. The suggestions thathon. Members have made to do more in schools, collegesand universities are important. Strangely enough, inPrime Minister’s questions this week, I asked him howwe can create enterprise and business champions ineach of our secondary schools—we could arguably doso before that, but perhaps we should start with secondaryschools—to foster and inspire the next generation ofentrepreneurs. We want young people to think ofentrepreneurship as an option when they finish school,college or university. There are special financial packagesfor them.

Last week, I asked the Prime Minister about businessrates—I was fortunate enough to have questions atPrime Minister’s questions two weeks in a row. I amglad to say that he has agreed to meet me next week todiscuss reform of business rates.

Simon Danczuk (Rochdale) (Lab): I support the hon.Lady in her concerns about business rates. Does shesupport the Labour leader’s proposals to freeze andthen reduce business rates for smaller businesses?

Mary Macleod: I want reform of business rates andfor them to be looked at very differently. In London,businesses are treated unfairly and we want fair taxation.The turnover of many small independent shops in myconstituency is not as high as one might expect inLondon, so they are penalised by the high business ratesin London. They also question what they get in returnfor business rates. That could be clearer—police, fire orother services. All they know is that the £27 billionraised from business rates is spread across the country.I favour a localised approach, so that we are able toreinvest in our local areas.

The Government have done a lot for local businesses.One of the big measures, which was mentioned by myhon. Friend the Member for Norwich North (ChloeSmith), was to remove £2,000 from national insurancebills. Other measures include: business mentors, £50 million-worth of £10,000 start-up loans and cutting red tape.The Prime Minister visited my constituency three yearsago to meet Octink, another great local business in mypatch, to consider how we can simplify employmentlegislation—another important issue for small businesses.

There are three key points in particular that I would likethe Minister to consider. First, there should be enterpriseeducation in schools. Businesses and entrepreneurs shouldbe encouraged to allow students and pupils to do workexperience in their businesses, and perhaps all hon.Members can help to facilitate that with their localschools. Secondly, we have already discussed businessrates and I will be talking to the Prime Minister aboutthat next week. Thirdly, returning to women and enterprise,if women were setting up businesses at the same rate aswomen in the US, we would have 600,000 more businesses.That would add £42 billion to the economy—a hugeamount. I run workshops in my constituency, with thesupport of StartUp Britain and the chamber of commerce,to encourage women to think about setting up businesses.We have fabulous businesses, such as Shavata and MyPlumber from Chiswick, and inspiring women whohave done it for themselves and are successful.

The Government have done much and there is probablymore that all of us as hon. Members can do to supportthe small business community. I look forward toencouraging more and more businesses in the monthsand years to come.

2.12 pm

Simon Danczuk (Rochdale) (Lab): It is a pleasure tofollow the hon. Member for Brentford and Isleworth(Mary Macleod). I share many of her concerns aboutbusiness rates and agree with some of the solutions sheproposes. I thank the hon. Member for Newton Abbot(Anne Marie Morris), who has done an excellent job insecuring the debate. It is important that it is takingplace before the autumn statement, so I thank theBackbench Business Committee for helping to makethat happen. Before I begin my comments proper, let medeclare an interest. On small business Saturday, my wifeand I will be opening a small business of our own:Danczuk’s Delicatessen in Rochdale. I encourage allhon. Members to visit and spend their hard-earnedmoney.

Huw Irranca-Davies: I am aware of the opening ofthis fantastic new deli. I am sure my hon. Friend will bestocking exotic produce, but will he be making an effortto stock local produce—the food that makes his areaspecial?

Simon Danczuk: We will stock a variety of localproduce. There will be some continental produce, butthere will be traditional Lancashire produce too. It willbe well worth a visit and opens a week on Saturday.

The first thing to say in a debate about small businessesis what a great contribution they make not just to oureconomy, but to our culture, our communities and theway we live our lives. As the hon. Member for NewtonAbbot said, we need to spend more time celebrating thework of smaller businesses and the people who runthem. It is these business people who are the backboneof our economy. They create the vast majority of jobs,and export their goods and products across the world.They are at the heart of innovation, which is oftencopied by larger businesses, and drive growth throughoutthe United Kingdom. They also carry the burden of worryand stress of managing risk every day of the week. Weneed to do more to celebrate what they do.

Small businesses are vital to our economy, but theyare also vital to our society: they are one of the mostpowerful forces for social mobility. Academics andpoliticians often talk about the importance of educationwith regard to social mobility. That is important, but bystarting and growing businesses people can thrive andprosper. They are vital in encouraging and establishingsocial mobility.

Mark Pawsey: Was the hon. Gentleman as struck as Iwas by the assertion at a recent breakfast meeting thatthe top entrepreneurs were those people who had notbeen to university, did not have degrees and had had towork from the bottom up?

Simon Danczuk: I thank the hon. Gentleman for thatcomment, because that is exactly the point I am makingabout social mobility and supporting entrepreneurialismand the growth of small businesses.


Let me tell hon. Members about one of my constituents.Ian lives on the Falinge estate in Rochdale, which hasachieved notoriety for having the highest number ofbenefit claimants in the country. Like others there, Ianwas unemployed. He was determined to get out of thatsituation, so he decided to start his own business. Hecashed in his pension and set up his own fish and chipshop. He learned the ropes by working for free inanother nearby chippy and then set up his own shop inthe town centre. I used to pop in and have a chat withhim every now and again. He was making a good fist ofit and there were always plenty of customers comingthrough the door. In his first year, he won an award atthe town’s annual business awards. Despite all thatsuccess, Ian was forced recently to close his shop simply—I do not exaggerate—because of business rates. He waspaying double in business rates what he was paying inrent, and that was not sustainable.

Ian’s case is a tragedy for him and for social mobility.It demonstrates that unrealistic business rates are damagingour economy and our society. The Government need todo more on business rates and should have gone aheadwith the revaluation. Hon. Members will not be surprisedto hear that I support the Labour leader’s proposals tofreeze and then reduce business rates for smaller businessesin particular. Business rates are not the only issue,however. Let me provide another example: banking.

Hanson Springs, a very successful family business inmy constituency, was in 2009 dragged by RBS into whatwe now know to be the Global Restructuring Groupscandal. Let me briefly explain. RBS in my opiniondeliberately undervalued a property it had a loan againstand used that as an opportunity to push Hanson Springsinto its Global Restructuring Group. At the first meetingwith GRG, Hanson Springs was introduced to a solicitorwho had been brought along to discuss taking an equitystake in this family business. GRG then forced a businessreview with Zolfo Cooper on to it at a cost of £20,000. ItsGRG manager had previously worked for Zolfo Cooper—Iam sure that was a coincidence. Hanson Springs wasthen given three options, none of which was acceptable.As the family pointed out to me, if the business had notbeen cash-flow rich and if they had not had the personalresolve, the company would have been forced to close.

Hanson Springs is now 50 years old—we have movedon four years. It turns over £20 million each year, employs180 people, exports 85% of what it produces, and sincethe problems with RBS, has paid in excess of £l millionin corporation tax. If RBS had had its way, we wouldhave lost hundreds of jobs and the money from taxation,and we would have had people claiming benefits and yetmore manufacturing moving abroad. Hanson Springs isa perfect example of business at its best. It is a greatexample of a family pulling together to create somethinggreat and is probably a perfect example of social mobility,but look how it nearly all went badly wrong because ofRBS’s behaviour. Ultimately, it is down to us politiciansto intervene and set up the right regulatory process toensure that banks treat our businesses better.

Smaller businesses are exceptionally fragile entities. Itis our responsibility not to take them for granted andour duty to remember that these businesses are thelifeblood of our country.

2.21 pmSir Bob Russell (Colchester) (LD): The motion is

entitled, “Issues facing small businesses”, and talks about

“addressing the complex tax structure”.I will follow the last two speakers and confine mycontribution to business rates. Indeed, what I am aboutto say could easily have been said in the WestminsterHall debate under way at this very moment on retailand the high street.

I note the pledge from the hon. Member for Rochdale(Simon Danczuk) that Labour would freeze and thenreduce business rates, but for 13 years it went nowherenear it. In fact, it went in the opposite direction, as I willmake clear in a minute. We now know, however, thatRochdale is the home not only of the Co-op, but ofDanczuk’s Delicatessen. We await the growth of thatorganisation in the same way as the co-op movementhas grown over the past 160 years or so.

I want to suggest something that I first proposed longbefore I became a Member of this House: the abolitionof business rates for neighbourhood community andvillage shops, post offices, community stores, pubs andthings like that. The way to make that fiscally neutral,which the Treasury would require, would be to put acharge on out-of-town car parks. That is exactly whatthe Labour Government proposed in 1997-98, beforethey were clobbered by the Tescos of this world, whichin those days had the sort of power over the LabourGovernment that the trade unions today have over HerMajesty’s Opposition.

Generally speaking, business rates are assessed undertwo headings: the net internal area or the gross internalarea. The NIA is used for small and medium-sizedshops and businesses in town centres and neighbourhoodcommunities, while the GIA is used for industrial properties,such as warehouses, factories and distribution centres,but now also supermarkets and large stores, mostly outof town. In that respect, the same principle shouldapply to the treatment of supermarkets as applies toneighbourhood stores.

What makes it even worse, as I am advised, is that thevaluation office instructs surveyors when evaluatingrates not to make an addition for customer car parking.The average rateable value for small and medium-sizedshops in Colchester town centre is about £225 persquare metre, whereas the average rateable value forsupermarkets and other large out-of-town store premisesis about £40 per square metre, so we are nowhere near alevel playing field. The NIA system is assessed, in part,on benefits—shop windows, for example. To make itfair, supermarkets should be assessed on their benefits,which include free customer car parking and the otherbits and pieces that go with it.

The two systems are obviously extremely unfair andbiased against shopkeepers in town centres, neighbourhoodcommunities and villages. I am grateful to Mr Ian Berry,a retired gentleman with an interest in the unfairness ofrating values for small businesses. On behalf of him andjust about every small shopkeeper in the country, I wishto put the following questions to the Government. Is itfair that shops in Colchester and other town centreshave a rateable value five and a half times that of theout-of-town giants? Is it fair that shops with parkingspaces in Colchester town centre are assessed at £500per parking space, when those out of town are not? I amadvised that one shop on Colchester high street is ratedat £213 per square metre, whereas Amazon, which is indirect competition and which, incidentally, pays verylittle corporation tax, is rated at only £39 per squaremetre on its premises in Peterborough.


[Sir Bob Russell]

Let us have a level playing field. The last Governmentrightly referred to sustainable communities, and thecoalition Government have rightly referred to localism,so let us have some fairness. One way of having fairnesswould be to put a levy on out-of-town car parks andabolish business rates for small shops, community storesand public houses.

2.26 pmHuw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore) (Lab): I welcome this

debate and compliment the hon. Member for NewtonAbbot (Anne Marie Morris) and the other Memberswho secured it through the Backbench Business Committee.

I want to begin by putting a human face on thisdebate. Several people have talked about the definitionof small businesses. For me, that definition could includeWorgan’s in Llanharry, a small, family-run enterprisethat started as a small gift shop selling various thingsfor the local community, but which extended by openinga café in the next-door premises and then a mobile chipshop. The definition could also include the former Sonysite in Bridgend. Sony went through a difficult timewhen the market for cathode ray tube televisions completelyfell apart—when flat-screen televisions came in, thosejobs quickly went abroad—but the management retainedthe skilled work force and rebuilt the business on thebasis of high-end engineering and their massive expertisein design, engineering and manufacturing. Workingalongside other companies, it has built itself back upand now has 500 employees onsite, 150 of whom workin 28 incubation companies—small companies, built upwith the assistance of Sony expertise, working in digitalmedia, graphics, television and many areas, and supportedas they grow from micro-businesses into small businessesand, we hope, into the giants of tomorrow.

The definition of small business could also includeFerrier’s, a local estate agent on Commercial street, inMaesteg, where my office is based. It was established in1918—by coincidence, that was the same year Labour firstwon the seat of Ogmore, so I hope we will both shortlybe celebrating our 100th anniversary—and it has extendedto open other outlets in Kenfig Hill and elsewhere. Thereis a wide range of businesses. I think of Cwm TawelYurts, a tourism enterprise in a beautiful little valleyaround Betws, and of the Food Box. Then there are twobrothers on the Maesteg industrial estate who left mystate comprehensive school, one going on to study appliedsciences, the other, following a different path, management.They came back together and established a 3D engineeringcompanythatdidall thethingsexpectedfrom3Dengineering,but which has also now extended into life sciences. Itapplies 3D engineering to the life sciences, uses 3Dmodelling in the development of things such as heartvalves that grow organically within the body and itsupplies tiny parts that help the space station run.

In talking about the 99% of small and medium-sizedbusinesses, we recognise that they are diverse, whichgives them some resilience; that they are fragile, as myhon. Friend the Member for Rochdale (Simon Danczuk)said; and that they need the right support structures inplace to assist them to thrive and grow.

Mr Bain: We have a burgeoning life sciences sectorin Glasgow, too. Does my hon. Friend agree that theNational Audit Office made a powerful point when it

said that there is a potential funding gap of some£22 billion in the finance available to small businessesbetween now and 2017. Would it not help small businessesin his constituency and mine if the Government didsomething with the banks to help plug that gap?

Huw Irranca-Davies: My hon. Friend makes a validpoint. There has to be cross-party agreement to takethis forward and to ensure that finance is available.

Let me mention one stark figure. Even though thereare signs of optimism in some parts and some sectors ofthe Welsh economy, a recent survey of members of theFederation of Small Businesses in Wales showed 55% ofthem reporting that credit was unaffordable, while 65%said it was not only unaffordable but completely inaccessible.The idea that these businesses can grow by gettingaffordable and accessible lending is simply not happening,which is a tragedy.

Simon Danczuk: Is my hon. Friend aware that somesmall businesses are afraid of approaching their banksabout credit or getting an extension of their overdraftbecause they fear that the banks will rein things in andmake it even more difficult for them?

Huw Irranca-Davies: Yes, indeed. There is a big argumentnot only for more localisation of the traditional banks,but for the regional bank model that Labour Memberssupport. When I made the point earlier that that modelshould not be bureaucratic and civil service-driven, Iwas speaking from experience based not only withinthis country but in other European countries. Thatmodel works best where it is very locally focused andentrepreneurial, with managers of the account streamsfully understanding the businesses with which they deal.Access to finance is indeed a big issue.

I will not go over business rates again, as others havedone so, but it is a real issue. I believe that the proposalfrom Opposition Front Benchers to freeze and thenreduce them is a good one. As to Ministers saying wenever did it, I simply say that the proposal is there onthe table for them to support if they want to support it.

I turn my attention to one area about which I haveparticular knowledge and concerns. I refer to supportingsmall businesses where the potential for employmentgrowth is the biggest—namely, through the applicationof green technologies, such as solar power or insulationfor greater energy efficiency in homes, and so forth. Iwas intimately involved in the incubation phase of theEnergy Bill that the Government brought forward, andI pointed out some of its potential pitfalls. If it hadsucceeded, however, particularly the green deal with theassociated energy company obligation, it could haveprovided massive incentives for tens of thousands ofsmall businesses. I am talking about all those peoplewho have been installing loft insulation for years andthose who have switched to installing solar panels withthe feed-in tariffs. They could have had a new opportunityto take on apprentices, perhaps young people in myarea who cannot find jobs. The green deal work couldhave produced a massive expansion of the sector.

We had to highlight the problems, however. We notedthat the finances did not seem to work and that it mightnot be possible to sell the green deal to people. Consumersare pretty intelligent people who, as they look at it, willrun a mile. We said, too, that there were rogues out there


who would blacken the reputation of the green dealbefore it even took off and, with deep regret, I have tosay that that has now come true. The Minister putforward an aspirational target of 10,000 installationslinked to the green deal. That would have provided oneof the biggest employment boosts in the small businesssector right across the country and in every singlecommunity—rural, urban or whatever. Out of that10,000, we now know that there have been just over200 installations. It does not matter how many installationswere in the plans; they have not taken place.

We are looking to find agreement on areas thatrequire better support—through access to finance, forexample. We might have different solutions—how bestto enhance access to finance, to reform business ratesand so forth—but a proposal that would make a materialdifference tomorrow, if we got it right, is dealing withcold homes and businesses that have runaway energycosts. That means getting energy-efficiency right andgetting the energy installations right. We are failing—miserably—and companies are shutting their doors onthe scheme. It is a tragedy. I am sure that the Governmenthave all the best will in the world to turn this around,but we see no sign of them putting measures in place toachieve that.

There has been considerable agreement in today’sdebate about the importance of small businesses. Somewill choose to stay small, but many will grow and grow,and they will thrive. Tata Steel and Ford in south Waleshave a huge impact on the local economy, but they aredwarfed by the impact of all the small and medium-sizedbusinesses that need our support.

2.35 pmJake Berry (Rossendale and Darwen) (Con): I

congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for NewtonAbbot (Anne Marie Morris) on securing this importantdebate. Before I go on to talk about the challenges thatbusinesses face—I am sure we would all recognise themfrom our constituencies—I would like to celebrate someof the successes of small businesses, particularly thosein east Lancashire.

Moving from having a salary paid by someone else togoing into a business where individuals are responsiblefor paying their own salary every month is a huge risk.I pay tribute to all the people throughout the countrywho have set up new businesses, often risking theirhome, their savings and everything they own to realisethe dream of owning their own small business.

I would like to celebrate the success of some businessesin my own constituency. Riley’s the Butchers is one ofthem. We often say that butchers cannot succeed in thecurrent environment when they have to compete againstsupermarkets. This is a small, family-run butchers thatis beating the supermarkets at their own game with afantastic product and a personal bespoke service toeveryone who shops there. We also have businesses suchas Parrock Lumb Cottages, which develops local tourism,but not at the expense of our environment. Environmentalconcern lies at the heart of this firm’s economic growth,showing that economic growth and environmental concerndo not necessarily have to come at the expense of eachother. Each of these firms is a small business; each isunique; and each is succeeding in the Rossendale valley,the home of enterprise. If anyone is tempted to visiteither of those businesses, I would recommend it, butnot without stopping at Love Umbrellas, which makes

bespoke, hand-made, high-fashion umbrellas, showinghow small businesses can succeed by using social mediato market their enterprises.

If it rains all the time in Wales, it does in Darwen,too, where there is business called Minerva Craft, whichhas moved from Blackburn market into a large industrialunit, with both retail and internet sales based in thesame site. DHJ Weisters is a weaving firm in my constituencymaking ties and bridal fabrics, showing that small businessesthat invest in their work force, their machinery and theirpremises can keep manufacturing onshore, rather thanhaving to send it offshore.

The business community in my area has grown duringthe last three years, and this has been the real driverof the transformative change that we have seen inunemployment. Rossendale and Darwen has the lowestunemployment rate since 2010. It is half the nationalaverage, despite it arguably being in a deprived part ofeast Lancashire. Our unemployment rate has comedown by 20% in the last year alone, showing that smallbusinesses growing and succeeding can transform thelocal labour market.

Small businesses continue to face challenges. InRossendale and Darwen, the biggest one relates to theskills gap. Since 2010, we have seen over 4,000 peoplestart apprenticeships in my constituency, while we haverun two “100 in 100” campaigns this year. Workingwith local business, we recruited 200 new apprentices in100 days. We are an area predominately concerned withmanufacturing, so many of these apprenticeships werehighly technical and skilled engineering apprenticeships.Many were also in the high-level service sector, withapprentices taken on in accountancy and hairdressing.One apprenticeship was even based in my office with atraining caseworker. That shows how important smallbusinesses are to our economy. Small accountancy firmssuch as Hindle and Jepson have opened to support thenew, expanded business community.

Business rates remain a threat to the future prosperityof businesses, but it important to say how much Iwelcome what the Government have already done. Theautomatic exemption of small firms from business rateshas helped 330,000 businesses, which not only pay norates, but no longer have to engage in the time-consumingtask of filling in highly complex forms. I welcome all thathas been done to support small businesses throughbusiness rate relief, but I urge my hon. Friend the Ministerto think about what more could be done in that regard.

I should like the Government to consider introducinga fractional payment option, enabling businesses to paytheir rates weekly or monthly. I should also like theMinister to tell us what information he has about theuse by local authorities of the business rate flexibilitythat enables them to give businesses in their areas a 25%discount. If he had still been in the Chamber, I wouldhave asked the hon. Member for Rochdale (SimonDanczuk) whether his local council had offered thatdiscount to the business that he mentioned. In April,there will be a further big boost for businesses when theemployment allowance is introduced. We are reducingevery business’s jobs tax by £2,000, which means that athird of employers will pay no jobs tax at all.

Small business Saturday is hugely important, and it isgreat to see the television advertisements supporting it.I shall be working at Gilly’s sandwich stall in Darwenmarket, so if any Members want to come and do theirChristmas shopping early, I should like to see them.


2.41 pm

Mark Lazarowicz (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab/Co-op): I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak. Icongratulate the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (AnneMarie Morris) and her colleagues on persuading theBackbench Business Committee to grant the debate.

Small businesses play a major role in all our constituencies—mine is certainly no exception. They are important tothe economy not just in their own right, but becausethey provide vital underpinning for many larger businessesin other economic sectors. They also play a vital role inmaintaining healthy local communities through, forinstance, their presence in shopping centres.

It is understandable that Members want to be positivein such a debate. Most of what I say will certainly bepositive, and Government Members will obviouslywant to highlight what they see as the Government’sachievements. However, we should not forget the mixedexperience that many small businesses have had over thepast few years. Many have survived, and are survivingnow, only with great difficulty. According to the Forumof Private Business—we will all have received its briefingyesterday—94% of small businesses are reporting increasesin cost pressures, and many small business proprietorshave managed to survive only by cutting their ownwages and those of their staff. Small businesses are notin any way exempt from the cost of living crisis that isaffecting so many of our communities and constituents.

As I have said, however, I want to be positive and tofocus on what can be done to strengthen and supportsmall businesses, which I have discussed with representativesof various small businesses in my area. Several hon.Members have talked about the need for more sympathetictreatment by the banks. I do not have time to repeat thehorror stories that we have all heard, but some of myconstituents have reported awful experiences with RBS’sglobal restructuring group. I hope that the Minister willbe able to update the House on what his Department isdoing in response to the allegations about that organisation.Even if we leave aside some of the more dramaticexamples, it is clear that businesses need more sympathetictreatment by banks. The banks should recognise thedifficulties that have been caused by branch closures,and, of course, there needs to be more competition andchoice in banking. Labour has made some importantproposals in that context.

Other organisations, and indeed areas of government,can also provide funds and other support for smallbusiness, and Edinburgh city council has taken a numberof important steps in that regard. It has provided theCreative Exchange, an incubator space that openedrecently in Leith to provide affordable work space forup to 80 staff. A further example is the council’s procurementpolicy, which covers a £20 million information technologytender. The council wants at least 25% of the work to goto small businesses; the present contract is held by asingle large company.

Small business lending is also important. I was pleasedto learn about discussions between the council andCapital Credit Union about the possibility of the unioncontributing an extra £1.3 million to the East of ScotlandInvestment Fund, which could provide loans for smallbusinesses. The credit union is able to do that because ofchanges to corporate lending rules that allow community-based mutuals to offer loans to businesses. As someone

who has a very small investment in Capital Credit Union,I am glad that it is at the forefront of that project. It isimportant to point out that the European regionaldevelopment fund is also providing support, given therather negative comments about Europe that we hearfrom certain Members in the House.

Mr Bain: In Edinburgh, as in Glasgow, there aremany small exporting companies. Does my hon. Friendagree that the Government should be doing much moreto establish a more proactive relationship with suchcompanies through UK Trade & Investment? I had todraw the attention of a company I visited recently to theservices provided by UKTI. Would not such action bythe Government benefit small exporters in Edinburghas well as those in my constituency?

Mark Lazarowicz: It would obviously benefit businessesin constituencies throughout the United Kingdom.

Another initiative undertaken by the city council isthe Edinburgh guarantee, which brings together localgovernment, businesses, colleges, the voluntary sectorand national programmes at Scottish, UK and Europeanlevels to create opportunities for our young people.Since its establishment just over two years ago, it hasgenerated more than 1,000 job, apprenticeship andinternship opportunities for school leavers. Many smallbusinesses have been closely involved in the project, andI congratulate the council on what it has achieved.

However, if councils are to provide all the support forsmall businesses that they ought to be able to provide,they need to have the powers that would enable them todo that to the full. Local government powers in Scotlandare obviously the responsibility of the Scottish ratherthan the United Kingdom Government, but the factremains that local authorities can perform an importanttask in supporting small business. Those that are alreadydoing a good job should be congratulated, while thosethat are not should learn from them.

Although I want to be positive, I should add that wemust not ignore the real pressures on small businesses.Cost pressure is an important factor that needs to beaddressed. During Energy and Climate Change questions,the Government once again refused to accept the meritsof Labour’s proposal for an energy price freeze, whichwould be of real benefit to small businesses as well ashouseholders. It is disappointing that the Governmentstill refuse to accept the strength of our argument, butin a world of Government U-turns, who knows whattheir policy may be next week?

2.48 pm

Justin Tomlinson (North Swindon) (Con): It is a realpleasure to have the opportunity to speak now, which isin no small part because I am due in Westminster Hallat 3 o’clock to lead a debate on retail and the highstreet. I shall therefore be relatively brief. I pay tributeto my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot(Anne Marie Morris) not only for securing this debate,but for delivering a speech in which she was characteristicallypassionate about business. It is a credit to her campaignthat so many Members on both sides of the House havecome to support today’s important debate.

I am passionate about this subject. At school, I wasfor ever wheeling and dealing. If anyone needed anything,I was the man to speak to. Shortly after graduating, Iset up my own printing and marketing company, which


employed local people in my constituency. I sold it assoon as I got elected, however; it is a busy lark being anMP. I was incredibly proud to be given the opportunityto be a small business ambassador and, obviously, towork with the fantastic Minister for Skills and Enterprise,as well as the inspirational Karren Brady, which certainlyimpressed my wife, who very much liked her book.

I want to talk about some of the positive things theGovernment have done. We can all celebrate the factthat there are more than 400,000 new businesses, whichhave helped to create 1.4 million new jobs. The newemployment allowance, which comes in on 1 January, isa welcome measure from the Government that will helpto push that even further forward. We can celebrate thefact that we now have an extra 500,000 apprenticeships.The start-up loans scheme has celebrated its 10,000thloan, with its loans totalling £50 million. Crucially, thatscheme has allowed those 10,000 firms to take on afurther 10,000 people, so for each new firm, an additionaljob has been created, which is fantastic. The red tapechallenge is also brilliant, not least because we haveasked businesses to suggest which pieces of red tapeneed to be removed.

Neil Parish (Tiverton and Honiton) (Con): My hon.Friend is making very good points, and I would alsolike to congratulate my hon. Friend the Member forNewton Abbot (Anne Marie Morris) on securing thedebate. Many small businesses and micro-businessesbelieve that they get by despite the actions of theGovernment, rather than because of them, so all the thingsthat we are doing to roll back red tape are absolutelyright. Small businesses are creating jobs, but they wantto be loved, especially by the Government. Over theyears they have not felt loved, and that is what I amlooking to the Minister and the Government to deliver.

Justin Tomlinson: I very much love businesses, soI will send some love to my hon. Friend’s constituency.

It is great that businesses are suggesting the areas ofred tape that need to be looked at, because they are verymuch at the coal face. Removing two regulations forevery one introduced is a real challenge, but the initiativehas certainly been welcomed by businesses in myconstituency.

Several Members have talked about opening up localauthority procurement, which is worth about £4.4 billiona year, and the Government have the commendable aimof getting SME participation in that to about 25%. Myhon. Friend the Member for High Peak (Andrew Bingham),who has had to leave the Chamber, has got hold ofsome of the forms that small businesses have to fill inwhen bidding for such contracts. I know that, whenI ran a business, it simply was not worth the hassle.

I also very much welcome the increase in the annualinvestment allowance from £25,000 to £250,000. Oneproblem that we identified was the fact that, for the firsttime in living memory, businesses had more money intheir current accounts than they were choosing to borrow,because they were worried about uncertainty in themarket. Increasing the allowance is a brilliant way toencourage businesses to start unlocking some of thatmoney, which will drive forward growth.

Cutting corporation tax always brings a cheer fromMembers on this side of the House. Although Laboursays that it supports business, it is telling that that

support seems to vanish as soon as a business makes aprofit. I also welcome the extension of small businessrate relief.

Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab): The hon. Gentlemantalks about corporation tax. Will he tell the House therate of corporation tax when Labour came to power in1997, and what it was when we left office in 2010?

Justin Tomlinson: I can tell the hon. Gentleman that,by 2015, we will have the lowest corporation tax marketin the G8. That is what businesses are talking about,and I very much hope that the hon. Gentleman will joinus in supporting that aim.

Many Members have highlighted the need to look atbusiness rates. Greater minds than mine will solve thedilemma, but it is important to recognise that the worldis changing. My hon. Friend the Member for Colchester(Sir Bob Russell) mentioned Amazon’s advantages overa traditional high street retailer because of the businessrates that it pays. We must recognise that the world ischanging and take that into account if we are to achievea fair business rates system. The 27,000 business mentorsare also crucial—I will come back to that subject in amoment—and the enterprise zones and the regionalgrowth fund are kick-starting growth in key areas,which is most welcome.

Staying with the good things, I know that the Ministeris particularly excited about the request that I am aboutto make—it is one that I make repeatedly—and that heis absolutely going to deliver on it. We as a Governmentare doing many good things, but business people are bytheir nature extremely busy and, all too often, thesegood schemes simply pass them by. However, the onething that they cannot avoid is their bills, and every yearthey are sent a business rates bill. Even if they havenothing to pay, they are sent a bill telling them howmuch they would have had to pay but for the fact thatthe Government are allowing them not to do so. Weshould be communicating all the Government’s schemesthrough that mailer. The taxpayer has already paid forthe mail, so let us include with it information on all thethings that we are encouraging businesses to sign up for,and particularly on the advantages of taking on apprenticesand of working with UKTI to develop exports.

I want briefly to focus on championing youngentrepreneurs. I was the only one of the 350 students onmy business degree course who went on to set up theirown business. We all arrived at university keen to dojust that, but we had entrepreneurial flair and risk-takingtalked out of us. I obviously was not paying enoughattention, because I ended up running my own business.The Government help to fund an organisation calledthe National Association of College and UniversityEntrepreneurs, which encourages young people to takeup practical, real-life opportunities for running a business.I have met a number of the young people who havetaken advantage of those opportunities and who arenow going on to be part of the next generation ofwealth generators.

We need to look at what happens in business degrees.Along with all my fellow students, I was given a placementjob in the corporate environment, rather than havingthe opportunity to test running my own business. Wecould use spare space at a university to run a retailbusiness—that is very apt, given my forthcomingWestminster Hall debate. We could also consider whether


[Justin Tomlinson]

part of a placement year could be spent running abusiness, as that might allow us to encourage a fewmore of those potential young entrepreneurs to take thestep towards that.

We can also do a lot more for people before they goto university. For people who want to go to university,the UCAS system is in place—the conveyor belt is there.People choose their course and, if they get their grades,they head off to university. If people want to be anapprentice, they can look at the fantastic websites available,see what type of thing they would like to be an apprenticein, and go forward to the interviews. However, if someonewants to start their own business, it is pretty much upto them to work out how to do that, so we need to do alot more to get those 20,000 business mentors to youngpeople.

We have to celebrate schemes such as the YoungEnterprise challenge, but we need to ensure that theyare not just a one-off opportunity for enjoyment. I tookpart when I was at school—we worked for a week, madequite a bit of money and really enjoyed it. I recently didsomething with Swindon college students whereby wegot stalls in the local market—a tough trading environment.Seven teams were each given £10 of seed money, and allthe money raised on the day went to charity. We raisedabout £800 for the Prospect hospice, but the crucial bitwas that we did not have mentors just at the beginning;we had them at the end.

One lady called Jessica ran a cake stall. Millions ofpeople think about running such a stall, but she realisedthat the market had an older customer base, so she setup a 1950s-themed cake stall. She made more than£100 on the day. She realised that she had the customerservice ability, the skills and the innovation to set up herown business, and now that she has finished at college,she has set up the Little Lemon & Poppy Bakery. Wemade sure that mentors were in place to help to guideher after she used her initial burst of enthusiasm andwent on to do that. I ask the Minister to do all that hecan to encourage young people. They have the energyand the enthusiasm, so let us make sure they are a keypart of that next generation of wealth generators.


Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo): Order. Ihave to inform the House that we have another debatethis afternoon and we are running out of time. TheMinister and the shadow Minister need to be on theirfeet by 25 past 3. I am going to set a time limit of fiveminutes and I ask the remaining Members to make surethey share that fairly among themselves. If they do notdo so, somebody will not get to speak. In other words, ifthere are lots of interventions, somebody will fall offthe end of today’s speaking list.

2.57 pm

Alok Sharma (Reading West) (Con): I, too, congratulatemy hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot (AnneMarie Morris) on securing this debate. She is a hugechampion of small and micro-businesses, and morepower to her elbow.

Before the last election many of us were going aroundmeeting small businesses in our constituencies, andbusinesses in Reading were telling me three things. The

first was that they were drowning in red tape andregulation. The second was that they had to deal withan excessive burden of taxation. The third was that theyfaced issues relating to access to finance. Many GovernmentMembers have already pointed out areas where theGovernment have made a real effort to address all threeissues: the red tape challenge; the one-in, two-out policy;cutting back on the regulations that micro-businesseshave to deal with; the upcoming deregulation Bill—perhapsthe Minister will give us an update on that; the reductionin the headline corporation tax rate; extended smallbusiness rate relief; the funding for lending scheme; theenterprise finance guarantee scheme; and a plethora ofschemes to get debt and equity provision for start-upsand growing businesses, which are on the Departmentfor Business, Innovation and Skills website and are nowstarting to be delivered through the British BusinessBank. Of course the one scheme that the Governmenthave not been responsible for, which perhaps the shadowMinister could tell us about, is the Co-op bank softloans scheme, which has been available to only a restrictednumber of people.

A friend of mine who works in business and is notparticularly partisan politically has acknowledged thatthe Government have made a huge effort in cutting redtape. However, as he says, perhaps the time has comenot just to take an axe to red tape, but to take achainsaw to unnecessary red tape and regulation. I ampleased that we have gone from one-in, one-out toone-in, two-out, but why not one-in, three-out or none-in,four-out? One reason for not doing that is that theGovernment are constrained by EU regulation. I welcomewhat the Prime Minister said following the proposalsmade by his business taskforce on cutting back EUregulation. I understand that yesterday the Leader ofthe Opposition referred to a tweet containing “#greencrap”.I have just started tweeting, and am thinking abouttweeting after this debate with #EUredtapecrap, becauseof the enormous amount of EU regulation that is holdingback our businesses. The issue of increasing competitivenessis felt not just in the UK but by Governments in Berlin,Stockholm, Amsterdam and perhaps even Paris.

If Opposition Members really care about business,they should back the European Union (Referendum)Bill. I hope they will turn up tomorrow to support it,because that is the best way of delivering change inthe EU and ensuring that we get rid of some of thisregulation.

In the remaining two minutes, I have two quickpoints. One relates to simplifying the tax system overallthrough the merger or the simplification of income taxand national insurance, and the second is about closingthe equity funding gap.

In the 2011 Budget, the Chancellor talked aboutmerging national insurance and income tax. A consultationwas held, and the decision was made not to take theidea forward. None the less, the idea is totemic. I knowthat it is difficult and that there are anomalies, but weshould consider merging those two taxes. The reality isthat national insurance is just another tax. People shouldunderstand that the tax they are paying is not 20% as abasic rate taxpayer but 32%. If they saw that on theirpay slips and in their annual tax statements, they wouldrealise that we are all paying a bit too much tax. Theywould end up preferring parties that propose cuttingtaxes rather than raising them. Perhaps we will hearsomething on that from the Minister.


My final point is to do with equity finance. Thestart-up loan scheme is brilliant. It is a flagship schemethat has worked really well; it is simple and is ableto get lending out very quickly. It would be great to seea British equity funding scheme, which would alsohelp to deploy capital quickly across many areas ofbusiness.

I am running out of time, so I shall stop at that point.I acknowledge that the Government do a huge amount,but there is still some way for them to go. I am sure thatthe Minister will tell us of his plans.

3.2 pm

John Stevenson (Carlisle) (Con): I congratulate myhon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot (AnneMarie Morris) on securing this debate. She was absolutelyright to highlight the importance of small businesses tothe success not just of our national economy but oflocal economies up and down the country. Clearly, weall support small businesses and we all want to see themsucceed. Indeed all large businesses were once smallones, and the big businesses of tomorrow are the start-upsand small businesses of today.

However, it is all very well to talk about support, butthere needs to be practical advice and policies in placethat give start-ups, sole traders and small businesses thefull support that they need to prosper and succeed.Most businesses in this country are small. The vastmajority of those people employed in the private sectorwork for small businesses. In many respects it is theowners and workers in those enterprises who are theunsung heroes of our economy.

Let me take, for example, a small business in myconstituency of Carlisle, with, say, five employees. Thatbusiness pays business rates, which helps the local andnational economy, employer’s national insurance andcorporation tax. It will collect VAT, and it may well payVAT itself. It makes a huge contribution to the nationaleconomy. It also conducts business with other localenterprises, helping to create a more economically activelocal economy. In addition, it provides employment tofive families, providing them with a standard of livingand supporting their lifestyles. There is also often awider benefit to the community. The business ownermay well live in the area, contributing socially to thecommunity through membership of other organisations.They are often on school boards, local charities andsports clubs.

My principal contribution to this debate relates tothe role that local government should play in supportingsmall businesses. We should remember that the vastmajority of business people will have absolutely nothingto do with central Government or GovernmentDepartments such as BIS and, with the greatest respectto the Minister, will probably never come in contactwith a Minister. The most important people in governmentwith whom business people are likely to come intocontact will probably be from the local council, a localcouncillor or perhaps an MP.

I accept that much is made of the contribution,involvement and policy decisions of central Government.Central Government clearly have a significant if notcentral role to play. They set the general environmentin which business can or should flourish and createa framework within which business will function.Nevertheless, we should not and must not underestimate

the role that local government must play in supportingand encouraging small businesses to flourish and succeedin their area.

Local councils, local councillors and officers canmake a substantial difference in a number of key areas.The obvious one is planning, where the local plan canbe made as business-friendly as possible. The administrationprocess should be as efficient as it can be and issues forsmall businesses should be highlighted early so thatthey do not incur unnecessary costs. The second sucharea is property ownership. Local councils are oftenproperty owners; for example Carlisle city council, believeit or not, has about £100 million worth of commercialproperty. It can make a difference by using that to goodeffect. The third area, as has been highlighted, isprocurement. It is not necessarily the big contracts thatmatter; the small ones can make a real difference tosmall businesses. Local enterprise partnerships are alsoimportant. Councils have a role and are often on theboards, and LEPs need to be pro-business and to helpdevelop policies that support small businesses in flourishing.

There are two other key points. We need small businesssupport and engagement with those local professionalswho can help businesses: surveyors, accountants, bankersand lawyers. Indeed, we should encourage relationshipswith the local chamber of commerce or the Federationof Small Businesses, with encouragement on businessplans, finance, employment and other such matters thatwill help businesses to succeed.

Most importantly, local government can provideleadership. It can give local small businesses a sense thatthe council supports and will support them and thatthere is a vision and a sense of direction for the area ofwhich the businesses are a part.

I want to highlight that the responsibility to engagewith and support small business from a governmentpoint of view does not lie merely with central Government;it is important that local government plays its part.

3.7 pm

Mark Pawsey (Rugby) (Con): I, too, congratulate myhon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot (AnneMarie Morris) on introducing the debate. I particularlyappreciate her work on the definition of “small business”.The Government’s definition of small business is onethat employs 250 employees or turns over £50 million.That is a pretty substantial business and I applaud howshe has raised the profile of what we would probablycall micro-businesses. I suspect that most of the debatehas been about micro-businesses rather than smallbusinesses.

I ran a micro-business, a business I started fromscratch in 1982, so I know about the pressure of ensuringthat there is enough money in the bank account to meetthe monthly salary bill. I am therefore delighted that theGovernment have recognised the importance of smallbusinesses and the number of such businesses that havebeen created. Along with other Members, I championthe small businesses in my constituency that are raisingtheir profile through small business Saturday. I shallvisit four new businesses that have been formed in thepast year and opened in the past four months. I amlooking forward to seeing what they are doing.

I made the point in an intervention that every bigbusiness started out as a small business. Big businessesare often large employers, but if we want to provide


[Mark Pawsey]

employment for all our citizens, we need to considerhow to encourage small businesses to grow. In myconstituency, there are more small businesses than peoplelooking for work and I suspect that that applies acrossthe country. If every small business was encouragedto take on one additional member of staff, there wouldbe no one looking for work. That hit me quite hardwhen I met a successful one-man band who was tellingme how busy he was and that he was running aroundlike a nutcase trying to keep all his customers happy.I said, “That’s great isn’t it? No doubt you’ll beexpanding and taking on somebody else in thebusiness.” He said, “No, I don’t want any of thattrouble headache and hassle. I would much rather stickas I am.” We need to change that perception, so it isimportant for us to consider some of the obstacles thathold people back.

One of that small business man’s biggest concernswas employment legislation. I understand the concernsof Opposition Members that there should be a fairrelationship between employer and employee, but in amicro-business the employer and employee get to knoweach other pretty well. They often work side by side inmanufacturing the goods or delivering the service. Iwould argue that many smaller businesses may not needthe employment protection measures that larger companiesin need of more formal arrangements require.

The move from one year to two before an employeecan bring a case in an employment tribunal is a step inthe right direction, but we could look at one or twoother areas such as parental leave rules. Transferableparental leave disproportionately disadvantages smallbusinesses, which may lose a key member of staff, oftenat pretty short notice. We could consider making someexemptions for micro-businesses or those with a turnoverof less than £5 million or fewer than 25 staff.

I am also concerned about access to suitable businesspremises as we move out of the recession. Jones LangLaSalle reported in March that there was little speculativeindustrial property development taking place. I amworried that accommodation will not be available. Mybusiness started in very low-cost old buildings. Suchbuildings have now in many cases been demolished toavoid vacant business rates. I am bothered that access tothe internet has encouraged lots of fledgling smallbusinesses to start, often in niche markets, operatingfrom home, perhaps in a residential area, and as theygrow they will need small units, which we do not have.Developers have not been providing small units. It ismuch easier for a developer to provide one unit of50,000 square feet than 10 units of 5,000 square feet,and we need to address that problem.

Lastly, I would like to deal with an issue that is notfor Government but is about a culture change. As asalesmen in my business, I would like to see moreappreciation for salesmen. They are the people who endthe manufacturing process; the services would not getdelivered were it not for the salesman persuading thecustomer to buy them. Salesmen have an unfortunatereputation, and I would like to see some credit given tothe profession, with proper recognition and status. Theirskills are invaluable, especially in export markets wherenot only our small businesses but the country as a wholeprosper if the salesmen do well.

3.12 pm

Chris Heaton-Harris (Daventry) (Con): I congratulatemy hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbot (AnneMarie Morris) and other hon. Members on securing thedebate.

Before I came into politics, I used to wholesale fruitand veg. It was a family firm, which my father startedand grew to a decent size. Then I had all the disputesthat every son taking over a family firm has with theirfather, when they tell their sons that they are not doingit right, but we managed to sneak up the turnover ofthis fruit and veg business, working nights in NewCovent Garden, to £7 million a year employing 17 people.We did it in spite of rather than because of the Government.Some of my points will be based on those old experiences,which small businesses in my constituency tell me theystill face.

One of the best parts of our jobs as Members ofParliament is going to see small businesses and peopletaking risks to do good things and start employment inour constituencies. My constituency, like that of everyother Member who has spoken, is full of amazing andsurprising small businesses. I have a company calledBambino Mio, one of the largest companies dealing inreusable nappies. It started 15 years ago and now exportsto almost 70 countries across the world. Another companyis Daisy Roots. Many Members with children andgrandchildren will have bought a pair of Daisy Rootsshoes without knowing about it. EllaPure is a companydirect selling all-natural skincare products. It was startedby an 18-year-old lad two or three years ago, whom theshadow Minister met at a lunch with me not so longago. He is a very impressive individual. Those threebusinesses all come from one small village, Brixworth.

I know that the Government have done lots of goodstuff. I am delighted to be behind a Government whohave created 1.4 million new private sector jobs since2010, who are cutting national insurance, benefitingevery firm by £2,000 next year, and who have allowedpeople to start 400,000 new British businesses. One ofthe things we do really well in this country is enablecompanies to set up quickly. It is a very simple process,which takes away a lot of the confusion. We have a verygood scheme for enterprise zones. Neighbouring myconstituency is Northampton, where the NorthamptonWaterside enterprise zone’s plans to change the face ofthe town for the better can already been seen.

However, there are many issues that affect micro andsmall businesses. My hon. Friend the Member for Rugby(Mark Pawsey) talked about employing people. Businessestake a massive risk when they start employing people.Perhaps some Members had never done that beforetaking people on in their offices here. Any Member whohas had a dispute with an employee will understandhow difficult it must be for a small business, whichmight have only one or two employees, when a relationshipwith an employee does not work and the risk that suchemployment involves.

Many small businesses complain about bureaucracy.I think we are doing reasonably well on that. Perhapswe could do more, but the thing that I think we coulddo better is to open up procurement in the public sector.I am sure that the Minister will tell me that we have gotrid of a whole tranche of things and that businesses nolonger need to provide three years’ worth of audited


accounts before being able to bid for Government work.That might have been the policy change and what weare trying to implement, but a small business in myconstituency called Mapcite, based in my village, wastold that only a couple of weeks ago by the Departmentwith which it was trying to deal. Then there are issuesrelating to rural broadband, which we are sorting outbut which we need to get right. Rural broadband isultra-important.

Richard Fuller (Bedford) (Con): I am grateful to myhon. Friend for giving way, not least because it allowsme to wish him all the best of luck for his special day.He said that he started working in his family business.Will he also herald the value that family businessesprovide in our economy and, in particular, the work ofthe Institute for Family Business?

Chris Heaton-Harris: Yes is the simple answer to myhon. Friend. I have noted the time, Madam DeputySpeaker, and promise to finish on time.

We need to be positive about entrepreneurship inthis country. We have a very good reputation acrossthe globe. Amway, one of the biggest direct sellers inthe United Kingdom, has 40,000 small businessesworking for it. It did a big survey of people’s attitudesto becoming entrepreneurs, and we did not have a badrate, because 77% of people thought that we have apositive atmosphere in which to build entrepreneurship.However, factors that worked against coming into businessincluded fear of failure, which is a big deal. It is apsychological barrier that a person has to get over whenthey start a small business. Public funding and start-uploans are pretty indispensible in helping to get over thefear of failure, because people know they have somethingbehind them when they start in addition to their brilliantidea.

I will be celebrating small business Saturday at theiCon centre in Daventry, where there will be a hugenetworking event for small businesses in my constituency.I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for NewtonAbbot once again on securing the debate.

3.17 pm

Sir Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove) (LD): Thank you,Madam Deputy Speaker, for finding time to fit me in. Icongratulate the hon. Member for Newton Abbot (AnneMarie Morris) on securing the debate. We have heardsome very good contributions indeed. In the short timeavailable, I want to focus on the part of the motion thatrefers to encouraging the Government to improve accessto finance. The Government have certainly done somevery good things in the past three years. They haveworked nationally and locally, and I refer in particularto the work UK Trade & Investment has done in myconstituency, the work of GrowthAccelerator and thesuccess of the apprenticeship scheme.

I will focus briefly on access to finance from banksfor my local businesses. Twelve months ago I secured anAdjournment debate on that topic, bringing to theHouse the cases of four businesses in my constituencyand the difficulty they have had in gaining access tofinance from four different banks. As a consequence, Itook a deputation of local businesses to see the bankingMinister. We met the British Bankers Association andhad a representative of the Federation of Small Businesseswith us. That discussion produced an assurance from

the BBA that it would increase its publicity on access tothe appeals system, because if a business is refused aloan there is an appeals system.

The BBA announced with some pride that in the firsttwo years of the appeals process run by the banks, asatisfactory lending agreement was found in 40% ofcases where the decline of a loan to a business wasappealed against. This was said to be a cause forcongratulations. Let me point out that in any appealssystem, an approval rating of 40% suggests that there isa problem with that system. Will Treasury Ministersinform me of the distribution of that 40% appeal ratebetween different banks? Which banks succeeded ingetting it right and which failed to do so? Will theChancellor of the Exchequer consider requiring banksto notify in writing all small businesses whose loanapplication is declined that they have a right of appeal,because this was not known to many of the businessesin my constituency that had had such a refusal?

I have to say to the Minister that the answer I receivedon 30 October was rather bland and unhelpful. It was,in essence, a reprint of the BBA’s press release, and itadded no further information. I want to see whether hecan improve on that, either in what he says today or byreference to his Treasury colleagues as to what theymight supply to the House subsequently. The answerdid not explain or offer any view on whether a 40%overturning rate for the appeals system was a sign ofsuccess or failure. It was also entirely silent about whetherthere was to be any requirement on banks to followthrough refusals of loans with better information forcompanies on how to appeal.

In the past three years, we have done excellent workthat has paid real dividends, but local businesses in myconstituency still have a fundamental problem in gettingthe access to finance to which they are entitled. One ofthe ironies is that one of those companies, which wasrefused a loan of £12,000 for business development, wassubsequently offered—by the same bank—an unsecuredloan of £16,000 to purchase a car. That emphasises theproblems that the system still faces.

3.22 pm

Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab): It is a tremendouspleasure to speak in what has been an excellent debate.I congratulate the hon. Member for Newton Abbot(Anne Marie Morris) on securing it. She speaks aboutsmall businesses with passion, dedication, enthusiasmand considerable vim, which I can inform the House,having been at the National Association of CommercialFinance Brokers dinner with her on Tuesday, is also theway she dances.

We have heard a tremendous amount about theimportance of small businesses. As the challengers oftired orthodoxies and the drivers of social mobility,small businesses share one nation Labour’s valuescompletely. It is a path that several of us have followed,as reflected in the debate. I worked in the private sectorfor my entire life and was running a small business whenI became a Member of Parliament. From my perspectiveand, clearly, that of hon. Members across the House,there are few more important questions for us to considerthan how we support small firms, which we all know arethe engines of growth, the biggest employers of thelong-term unemployed, and key drivers of economicrecovery.


[Toby Perkins]

It is important that we listen to what the voices ofbusiness are saying. On Monday, I was in Harlow inEssex with the local chamber of commerce, meetingsmall businesses there and listening to their priorities.Another organisation right at the forefront of the fightto support small firms is the Federation of Small Businesses,which does a tremendous job. A report in the LeicesterMercury this week highlighted how a delegation fromthe east midlands, led by David Nicholls, chairman ofthe Leicestershire branch of the FSB, got the chance tolobby the Chancellor on the issues that he should addressin his forthcoming autumn statement. What did thedelegation choose to highlight? Interestingly, the LeicesterMercury tells us that they demanded action on energyprices, a reduction in businesses rates, and the Governmenttaking responsibility for setting up a business bank—verywise indeed.

I pay tribute to the hon. Lady for securing the debate,but think she may have done so with a slightly heavyheart, because when it comes to the main issues beingraised by small businesses, it is Labour that is leadingthe way. I want to reflect on some of the contributionsto this balanced debate that have demonstrated that.

In her excellent speech, the hon. Lady talked aboutthe need for a culture change that recognises the importanceof small business across Government. We could notagree more. My right hon. Friend the Member forDoncaster North (Edward Miliband) made makingLabour the party of small business a priority in his firstconference speech and he has talked about it manytimes since. There are some good Government schemesout there but, as the hon. Lady said, many businessesdo not know about them. The signposting is weak, andshe was right to say that.

My hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North East(Mr Bain) discussed the lessons we can learn from theSparkassen in Germany. He was right to say that, underthe German system and at the height of the bankingcrisis, they lent more to small businesses, not fewer,as happened here. He was also right to focus on theimportant issue of the number of businesses claimingthat access to finance is still their No. 1 priority, a themethat the right hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Sir AndrewStunell) returned to a few moments ago.

The hon. Members for Norwich North (Chloe Smith)and for High Peak (Andrew Bingham) were right tofocus on the difficulty faced by small and medium-sizedenterprises in getting on to Government procurementlists. It has been an issue for many years and clearlythere is a long way to go.

My hon. Friend the Member for Oldham East andSaddleworth (Debbie Abrahams) also spoke.

Debbie Abrahams: My hon. Friend is making a powerfulspeech. He will be aware that earlier this year I chairedan all-party inquiry into late payments. The key findingwas that late payment is a cultural issue that needs to beseen as just as toxic as tax evasion. Does he agree thatwe need to push the Government to make progresstowards ensuring there is a cultural change so that latepayment is unacceptable?

Toby Perkins: I certainly do. I was in the process ofpaying tribute to the work my hon. Friend has done onthat issue. She is absolutely right.

The hon. Member for Rugby (Mark Pawsey), whom Iusually regard as a sound voice on the issue of smallbusiness, said that if someone is paid late they shouldrefuse to supply the company, but that does not recognisethe difference in the relationship between a powerfulcustomer and a struggling supplier. Every year, 2,000businesses go under simply because they are not paidmoney that is owed to them, so I think he was wrongabout that. My hon. Friend is right to say that we needthe Government to be at the forefront of not justencouraging people to pay on time, but ensuring thatthat culture change passes right down the public sectorprocurement chain to second and third-tier suppliers.

My hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale (SimonDanczuk) made a lengthy advertisement—I sense it wassomewhat to his embarrassment—for Danczuk’s deli.Numerous Members wanted to know about the excellentwares he will be providing. He has been in businessbefore and it is great that he and his wife are opening adelicatessen in the centre of Rochdale and that he isputting his money where his mouth is.

The hon. Member for Brentford and Isleworth (MaryMacleod), my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdaleand the hon. Member for Colchester (Sir Bob Russell)spoke, among many others, about the tremendousdifficulties caused by the increase in business rates,which I shall return to.

My hon. Friend the Member for Ogmore (Huw Irranca-Davies) promoted the value of local innovative firmsand also focused on access to finance. The hon. Memberfor Rossendale and Darwen (Jake Berry) is not in hisplace. [Interruption.] I see that he has moved—I do notknow how I managed to miss that moustache. Heencapsulated the bravery and pioneering spirit requiredto set up a business and he was right to say that itdoesn’t half set the pulses racing. At such moments,people realise what colour adrenaline is.

My hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh Northand Leith (Mark Lazarowicz) was entirely right to saythat small businesses are undergoing a cost of livingcrisis, which I will reflect on in a moment.

The hon. Member for North Swindon (Justin Tomlinson)said that Labour always liked to increase corporationtax. If he was still here, he would be surprised todiscover that corporation tax was actually 3% less after13 years of Labour Government. Perhaps he shouldtalk to the former Prime Minister about that.

TheMinister forSkillsandEnterprise (MatthewHancock):Will the hon. Gentleman confirm whether it is stillLabour’s policy to increase corporation tax?

Madam Deputy Speaker (Dawn Primarolo): Order.Before the shadow Minister answers the Minister, willthey please remember that I will stop the debate at3.45 pm? If the Minister is still on his feet at that point,he will lose the time, because we will have to start thenext debate.

Toby Perkins: Our policy is well known, but I will gothrough it at length in a moment.

The hon. Member for Reading West (Alok Sharma)spoke for only five minutes, but he was wrong about justabout everything he said. I will give two examples. Hesaid that businesses want an EU referendum, but very


few businesses are telling me that. He extolled thevirtues of the arbitrary one-in, two-out red tape challengeand seemed to think that the Government have a goodrecord on red tape, but he was unable to name any oftheir innovations that have made a difference.

The hon. Member for Rugby made an incrediblysignificant point about the importance of sales skills. Iam sure he will be delighted to know that the Labourparty is undertaking a large programme—headedby Kate Walsh, formerly of “The Apprentice”—on theimportance of sales skills, and we will report on its workshortly.

The hon. Member for Carlisle (John Stevenson) focusedbroadly on the importance of small firms. The hon.Member for Daventry (Chris Heaton-Harris) was absolutelycorrect to say that the UK is right at the forefront ofthose places where it is easiest to set up a small business.The World Bank said that Britain was the fourth easiestplace to set up a business in 2010.

I do not want to focus on the Government’s failures,but on the successful moves that a future LabourGovernment will make. We are considering the futureof vital small firms, and Labour has the answers to theirquestions. The cost of living crisis for small firms istaking many of them to the brink, but Labour’s pledgeto freeze energy prices until 2017 would save the averageBritish small business £5,000. Hon. Members will beshocked to learn that business rates have risen by £1,500a year on average under this Government, and that theyface a further hike in April 2014.

To answer the Minister’s question, Labour proposesnot to take forward the Government’s planned 1%corporation tax cut for 80,000 large firms, but insteadto use all the money to cut the business rate bills of1.5 million small firms. In a week of U-turns, it wouldbe incredibly—

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. I am sorry, but thehon. Gentleman has now had 10 minutes. This is aBack-Bench debate, and it will be followed by anotherBack-Bench debate. I want him to conclude in hiscurrent sentence, so that I can call the Minister, whowill also have 10 minutes.

Toby Perkins: I will, Madam Deputy Speaker. On arange of issues from micro-business support to the needfor Government to provide the necessary skills, smallbusinesses are saying that the Government have morework to do. Labour is responding to that call from smallbusinesses, and our message to them is, “We know howvital you are, and we are right behind you.”

3.32 pm

TheMinister forSkillsandEnterprise (MatthewHancock):This Government are passionate, as am I, about supportingsmall business. I grew up in one, and I hope that I notonly listen to and speak for small business acrossGovernment, but understand what life is like in one, asdo so many hon. Members who have spoken. Thedebate has reflected the strength of feeling across theHouse in support of small businesses, which we shoulddo more to encourage and for which we should do moreto make life easier. Why are we so passionate? Because,at root, small businesses are the ultimate fount of prosperityand jobs in our country.

Mr Adrian Bailey (West Bromwich West) (Lab/Co-op):Does the Minister agree that one great virtue of smallbusinesses is that they are embedded in their localcommunities and are often loyal to them, unlike npowerin my constituency, which has just offshored 400 jobs?Will he use the power of his Department to work withlocal authorities, the LEP and the chamber of commerceto do its best to mitigate that loss?

Matthew Hancock: The Department is of coursedoing what it can to mitigate the impact of that decision.The hon. Gentleman is quite right, as is my hon. Friendthe Member for Carlisle (John Stevenson), who spokepassionately about the impact of small businesses, whichare embedded in their local communities through jobsand their contributions to local and national life, as wellas the role of local authorities in planning, propertyand procurement.

There have been some fantastic contributions to thedebate. My hon. Friend the Member for Brentford andIsleworth (Mary Macleod), as well as recounting thevarious questions that she has asked at Prime Minister’squestions in the recent past, spoke about drilling enterprisethrough our education system, which I strongly support.My hon. Friend the Member for North Swindon (JustinTomlinson) also made that argument. Every time Ispeak to him, he seems to have another idea about howwe can get more content about enterprise into theeducation system.

Many Members raised the issue of red tape, not leastmy hon. Friend the Member for Reading West (AlokSharma), who spoke about the impact of EU red tape.Members across this House must recognise that problem.It is wrongly dismissed by some, but it is an importantissue that we need to address. We are doing so throughthe Prime Minister’s challenge to the EU. The taskforceof six business leaders who are looking at reforming EUregulations is putting the voice of business at the heartof the debate. It has made 30 recommendations on howto remove or improve the most burdensome EU rules.We are working with business to encourage the EU totake up those recommendations over the next year.

My hon. Friends the Members for Rugby (MarkPawsey) and for Daventry (Chris Heaton-Harris) raisedthe issue of regulations on employers, especially withregard to micro-businesses. We have made progress byensuring that employees cannot go to a tribunal untilthey have been employed for two years and by introducingfees for tribunals. We need to keep this area underconstant review because, fundamentally, what we mustdo is make it easier to employ people and create jobs.That is what growing small businesses is all about.

It is a great pleasure to see you take the Chair,Madam Deputy Speaker. This is the first time thatI have been in a debate that you have chaired.

My hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North(Chloe Smith) was here earlier, but apologised that shehad an engagement with some small businesses. I paytribute to the work that she did to open up procurementto small businesses. However, as my hon. Friend theMember for Daventry said, what we are doing in thatarea is not complete. There is much more to do toimprove the formal rules and to ensure that they areseen, exercised and stuck to not only across centralGovernment, but throughout the public sector, includingin local authorities. The Department for Business,


[Matthew Hancock]

Innovation and Skills has just reached the target ofsending 25% of its invoices to small businesses. Thattarget applies to the whole of central Government andall other Departments are working towards it.

Many hon. Members raised the issues of access tofinance and late payment, not least the hon. Memberfor Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams).The Government pay more than 85% of undisputedinvoices within five days. That is a big change and animpressive feat.

Debbie Abrahams: Will the Minister confirm whetherthat includes suppliers in all tiers? I think that he isreferring just to tier 1 suppliers.

Matthew Hancock: I was coming on to exactly thatpoint. That figure refers to tier 1 and there is muchmore to do to drill prompt payments through the supplychain. We must spread that culture across the privatesector as well. I will reflect on the hon. Lady’s point thatwe should make late payment just as culturally negativeas tax avoidance and evasion. We will be launching aconsultation on late payment shortly.

The right hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Sir AndrewStunell) raised the issue of the banking appeals system.I do not want to pre-empt what my right hon. Friendthe Chancellor will say in the autumn statement in aweek’s time, so I recommend that the right hon. Gentlemanattends the House on that day.

Opposition Members raised various issues and spokefrom different perspectives. The important issue of GRGand the treatment of small companies that have got intodifficulties with the banks was raised. The FinancialConduct Authority is looking into the report that waspublished this week and RBS has appointed CliffordChance to go through the cases that were raised in detail.

The hon. Member for Glasgow North East (Mr Bain),in typically ebullient fashion, called for firm action andbetter communication of what we are doing. I certainlyagree with him about firm action. That is what I hope toachieve.

On better communication, we have launched the Businessis Great campaign, which Members may see on billboardsand social media across the country, and the GreatBusiness website brings together in one place the differentthings the Government and private sector are doingto support small businesses. It is a single portal—greatbusiness.gov.uk—and worth exploring.

The hon. Member for Ogmore (Huw Irranca-Davies)mentioned access to finance, and particularly greenmeasures. Although the Government have reduced thesubsidy from energy bill payers and taxpayers to sponsorsolar, by ensuring that the scheme was proportionatebut still affordable, more than 1 million people are nowliving with solar panels on their roofs. The hon. Memberfor Rochdale (Simon Danczuk) spoke passionately aboutstarting his own business with his wife. I hope he getsthe chance to have a word with the Leader of theOpposition, who says he wants to ban Members fromengaging in any outside employment, including a smallbusiness. I strongly hope that the idea that someone can

run a small business and be an MP at the same time willcontinue because of the wealth of insight it brings topeople in this place.

There were good speeches from Opposition Members,and it was a pity there were so few of them, given thatsupport from the Government Benches was very powerful.The hon. Member for Colchester (Sir Bob Russell) andmy hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale and Darwen(Jake Berry) raised the important issue of businessrates. I am glad that one of the first things this Governmentdid was stop the extension of business rates proposedby the previous Government because that would havebeen a great mistake. In fact, we have extended businessrate relief every year, but I have no doubt that had theprevious Government remained in office, they wouldhave put up and extended business rates because that iswhat they were planning.

Julian Sturdy (York Outer) (Con): Does the Ministeragree that one of the key things for helping smallbusinesses is encouraging them to reinvest? The Governmenthave done a lot in extending the capital allowancescheme, but will he consider extending it beyond1 January 2015?

Matthew Hancock: Yes, I will, and I conclude bysaying that Members across the House—especiallyGovernment Members—argued passionately in favourof small businesses, the values they bring, the hardwork but the payback, and the benefits in terms of jobsand prosperity for their communities. None more sothan my hon. Friend the Member for Newton Abbotwho initiated the debate, and I pay tribute to all herwork. If I have not addressed any point on the long listof issues she raised, I will write to her with a detailedresponse on each and every one. She is a great credit toherself and to small businesses that need such passionatesupport, and I know they are thrilled to have her at theirside.

3.42 pm

Anne Marie Morris: This has been an incredible,energetic debate and I pay tribute to and thank myfellow sponsors and all those who have contributedwith great knowledge, passion and understanding. Letthe nation be in no doubt: this House supports smallbusinesses in all their different guises, and they are keyto growth and social mobility. I hope the Ministerrealises that more than 100 ideas have been raisedtoday, so if he takes them all up it will be quite a longletter. I hope that the Minister and the Chancellor willdemonstrate that they are listening in the autumn statementand indeed the Budget, but let us conclude this debateby celebrating small businesses and telling them, “Welove you, and we will show that on small businessSaturday on 7 December.”

Question put and agreed to.Resolved,That this House encourages the Government to consider what

further measures can be taken to encourage small business toflourish and prosper, including reducing the burden of red tape,addressing the complex tax structure, improving access to financeand gaining support from local government.


G8 Summit on Dementia

3.43 pm

Tracey Crouch (Chatham and Aylesford) (Con): I begto move,

That this House has considered the G8 summit on dementia.

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, MadamDeputy Speaker; this is the first opportunity I have hadto give you my warm congratulations on your election.

I am incredibly grateful for the support of the righthon. Members for Salford and Eccles (Hazel Blears)and for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Burstow), and others,for helping to secure this debate. I thank the BackbenchBusiness Committee for allowing Members time tocontribute—albeit briefly—to a debate on what manybelieve is one of the most important issues facing ourhealth and social care system in the future. I shall keepmy opening comments as brief as possible, as I knowthat others wish to speak, but it is important to congratulatethe Prime Minister on using the opportunity of hostingthe G8 summit on 11 December to focus on internationalefforts to prevent, delay and effectively treat dementia.The debate will allow parliamentarians an opportunityto shape discussions at the summit, following on fromwider and commendable consultation with the public.Collaboration, which is at the heart of the conference, isthe basis of my contribution to the debate.

Before addressing the specifics, it is important to setout the global perspective. Dementia affects more than35 million people worldwide and is now considered tobe one of the greatest global health challenges of ourtime. It is estimated that, by 2050, more than 150 millionpeople will suffer from dementia.

Hon. Members will have seen the devastating humancost of dementia if not in their families, then in theirconstituencies. We know of the suffering of those withthe condition and those who become carers for theirloved ones. However, we perhaps do not so obviouslysee the huge economic effects of dementia, the worldwidecost of which is estimated to be about £400 billion,which is the equivalent of 1% of world gross domesticproduct. Without urgent action, that figure will increasein line with the number of people who are anticipatedto get dementia, which is why global collaboration isessential. The more we can do together globally, thebetter the outcomes we can secure nationally.

Mr Simon Burns (Chelmsford) (Con): My hon. Friendmakes an extremely important point. Does she accept,however, that it is equally important to do more onseeking diagnoses? About 350,000 people in this countryare undiagnosed and go without the help and supportthat those who have been diagnosed receive.

Tracey Crouch: I agree entirely with my hon. Friend.The all-party group on dementia recently produced areport on diagnosis. Shockingly, only about 42% ofpeople get diagnosed, which leaves a massive diagnosisgap. The earlier people are diagnosed, the better theirtreatment and pathways.

Andrew Miller (Ellesmere Port and Neston) (Lab): Icongratulate the hon. Lady on introducing the debate.I hope she will hear later some of the evidence that theScience and Technology Committee has taken on variant

Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, and of the important workof the Medical Research Council prion unit, whichcould lead to exciting new possibilities for the treatmentand diagnosis of people with all sorts of dementia.Does she agree that it is important to maintain suchresearch programmes?

Tracey Crouch: I agree entirely with the hon. Gentleman,and I will hear more later of the initiatives his Committeeis examining. The importance of research is very muchthe basis of my speech.

Hon. Members may talk about many aspects ofdementia, but I shall address four, the first of which isinvestment. The statistics are gloomy, but there is agood-news story underlying the negative numbers: peopleare living longer and people can live well with dementia.We need to capitalise on best practice and ensure thatwe maximise people’s ability to maintain long-termwell-being, despite their debilitating condition. Althoughwe do not have a cure for dementia, we have come onleaps and bounds in recent years. A cure is hopefully nolonger a lifetime away, but to ensure that we make thatcure happen, we need to take action.

Dementia costs the UK economy £23 billion a year,which is more than cancer, stroke or heart disease,but the annual research spend on dementia is about£51 million. The research spend on cancer is £521 million—10 times more—yet dementia costs society muchmore than cancer annually. I therefore welcome theincrease in investment in dementia research through theGovernment’s themed initiatives, which has resulted inGovernment investment more than doubling over fouryears. However, the investment comes from a low baseand represents less than 1% of the overall science budget.

Zac Goldsmith (Richmond Park) (Con): I congratulatemy hon. Friend on securing this important debate. It iswidely believed—it has recently been widely reported inscientific journals, including by scientists who will takepart in the G8 meeting—that up to half of all Alzheimer’scases can be attributed to modifiable and thereforepreventable risk factors. If that is the case, and thereseems to a general consensus along those lines, does sheshare my disappointment that, as far as I can see, noneof the additional £22 million allocated for dementiaresearch has been spent on prevention research?

Tracey Crouch: I am sure that the Minister will haveheard the good point that my hon. Friend makes. Iwould like to concentrate on the fact that there has beenan increase in investment for research. There are variousreasons why we need research, and I am sure the Ministerwill address my hon. Friend’s comments in his response.

Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore) (Lab): The hon. Ladyrightly talks about the low investment base from whichwe are starting on dementia research and prevention.One way to make limited resources go further is toco-ordinate properly and better across the regions andnations of the UK. There is good work going on inWales, but that is also from a low base.

Tracey Crouch: I agree entirely with the hon. Gentleman.We need greater co-operation and collaboration acrossthe world, and if that is needed across the world, wecertainly need it at home.

497 49828 NOVEMBER 2013 G8 Summit on Dementia

[Tracey Crouch]

We should recognise that the USA is committed tospending $550 million on dementia research, which is areflection of the importance of the condition to itssociety. To be frank, however, the combined investmentby the USA and the UK is small fry compared with theinvestment in research by the pharmaceutical industry.Any collaboration needs to include the global pharmaleaders to ensure that they are financing research, bringingtogether their world-leading scientists and helping toachieve the breakthrough in the prevention and treatmentof dementia that we all want. One of the most importantoutcomes I would like from the G8 summit is a long-termcommitment to double investment in research to providestable and predictable funding so that we can get closerto finding a cure and improved care.

Mrs Madeleine Moon (Bridgend) (Lab): Does thehon. Lady agree that part of the problem is the fact thatwe use the term “dementia” as if it is just one thing?There are many dementias and we must not focus juston Alzheimer’s. We must be aware of frontotemporaldementias, which affect younger people in particular,and ensure there is funding for research into that.

Tracey Crouch: I agree entirely. This is something thatblights many conditions, including cancer. We talk aboutcancer investment, but there is little or no researchfunding for some cancers. Mesothelioma is a classicexample, about which there is a debate on Monday.

It is essential that research focuses on investment ininfrastructure. Training and development for researchersis also crucial if we are to see swifter progress towardstreatments and cures for dementia. However, it remainshard for an academic with a good idea to spin that offto a company, especially compared with the situation inAmerica. The Government must do more to promotethe commercialisation of research as these companiesbecome a vital part of the ecosystem. Large companiesand academia can then be partnered in the innovativecollaborations that the Government seek.

Research on the provision of care is equally important.Four out of five people with dementia live at home. Wewant to keep it that way and to ensure that they can livethere safely for as long as possible. Research comes inmany different forms, including the identification ofwhat works. We know that dementia costs the UK£23 billion, but arguably that money is not being spentproperly or efficiently. Prevention is key. Avoidingunnecessary hospital admissions is vital to ensuringthat funding is used effectively and, more importantly,makes a huge improvement in quality of life. Researchingbest practice in care is essential. An economic casedeveloped by the Alzheimer’s Society estimated that ifjust 5% of admissions to residential care were delayedfor one year as a result of dementia-friendly communities,there would be a net saving of £55 million a year acrossEngland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

There needs to be a change in the language we usewhen we talk about care. If we talk about weekly artlessons that are provided to help to improve cognitivefunction as therapy, rather than an activity, we couldhope to see a change in attitude towards research andinvestment in this area. Many good ideas are having apositive impact in local communities. For example,Medway council, which covers part of my constituency,

is promoting telecare as a means of supporting peoplewith dementia, and there are lots of non-clinical treatmentsthat could be further researched, such as the benefits ofpets and petting animals for people with dementia,memory rooms and memory boxes. I have even heard ofamazing innovative products such as wristbands thatmonitor someone’s usual actions so that they will detectif they have a fall. We need to consider all those thingsin the whole pod of research.

We should not forget to consider support for carers.Family carers of people with dementia save the economy£7 billion a year, but evidence shows that they struggleto do that, which can lead to avoidable crises in care,hospital admissions or early entry into care homes, allof which are very costly. The Dementia Action Alliance’s“Carers Call to Action” campaign, which I support, iscalling for timely and tailored support for carers, whomI am sure we all agree are an important cog in the wheelof treating and providing for those with dementia.

On best practice, it is important that internationalcollaboration includes the beneficial sharing of successesand failures. In utilising our resources, it is importantthat we do not duplicate unsuccessful investments andthat we champion successful and effective progress. Thesummit should therefore ensure that all publicly fundeddementia research data and results are made available,thereby allowing common factors in national researchresponses to be shared.

Sir Roger Gale (North Thanet) (Con): Before myhon. Friend moves deeply into the main subject of thedebate, which is the G8 summit, does she agree that weneed much greater public understanding of, and supportfor, those who are caring for people with dementia andthose with the condition, which can strike not justelderly people, but younger people? Some of us remembera former and much-loved Member of this House who,while still an MP, suffered from the disease. This issomething that we have to ram home to people.

Tracey Crouch: I agree entirely with my hon. Friend.It is important to note that society has made muchprogress in the past 20 years and that dementia is notthe taboo subject it perhaps used to be. We have changedhow we think about it and now treat people withdementia much better, but we still need to get away fromthe idea of saying, “Nan’s gone a bit dotty.” We have tounderstand that something can be done about dementiaand that proper care pathways exist to ensure thatpeople can live well with it, and we have to supportcarers as best we can.

On the G8 summit, I turn to my final but no lessimportant point: long-term strategies. The Prime Minister’schallenge on dementia for England has provided awelcome focus on the treatment and care of peopleliving with dementia and the search for a cure, but thereis a danger that the focus will be lost, especially as theinitiative is not UK-wide but covers only England.Many countries have dementia strategies or brain bankinitiatives, and the UK needs a new long-term strategy,because the current one is due to expire in 2014. I wouldbe grateful if—not today but soon—the Minister couldoutline his plans to evaluate the national dementiastrategy for England and tell the House when he willcommit to a new strategy following the current strategy’sexpiration next year. Notably, the US has a dementiastrategy in place until 2025, which means that we could

499 50028 NOVEMBER 2013G8 Summit on Dementia G8 Summit on Dementia

be left in the embarrassing situation of the UK Governmentleading the G8 in a discussion on dementia without anational long-term commitment comparable with thatof many of their international partners.

In conclusion, it is fantastic that the UK Government,under the Prime Minister’s personal commitment, areusing the G8 summit to champion a more collaborativeapproach to preventing, treating and curing dementia,but it is essential that the legacy of this summit goesfurther than the G8 and that the declaration andcommuniqué of the summit makes firm long-termcommitments to the doubling of research funding, tosharing best practice, and to delivering an internationalongoing collaboration on defeating this devastating disease,which affects so many people and their families.

Madam Deputy Speaker (Mrs Eleanor Laing): Order.Several hon. Members have indicated that they wish tospeak, but we have only one hour remaining, so I shallimpose a limit of six minutes on Back-Bench speeches.

3.59 pm

Hazel Blears (Salford and Eccles) (Lab): It is a greatpleasure to follow the hon. Member for Chatham andAylesford (Tracey Crouch), my colleague on the all-partygroup. It is also a great pleasure to see you in the Chair,Madam Deputy Speaker. This is my first opportunityto contribute to a debate under your chairmanship, andI would like to congratulate you on your election.

While I am handing out congratulations, I would liketo congratulate the Prime Minister, too, on the personalcommitment he has shown on dementia. [Interruption.]Credit where it is due. Those who have the presidency ofthe G8 have an opportunity to name a subject aroundwhich they would like to mobilise the internationalcommunity. In playing his card at the G8, the PrimeMinister has chosen dementia. I commend him fortaking that action. I believe that international collaborationwill be the way to achieve the next big leap forward,particularly on the research agenda. I support what thePrime Minister said at Prime Minister’s questionsyesterday—that this issue is not a matter only for worldleaders, important though they are; it is a matter forevery single person in the community, whether they be aworld leader, a health Minister or an ordinary citizen.Everybody has a role to play.

I shall start with the people who have dementia,along with their families and their carers. When wepromote policy, do collaboration or talk about internationalresearch, we must constantly remind ourselves that thepeople with the disease and their carers and families areusually the most expert people in the system. Therefore,the services that we provide, the quality of care and theinnovations we develop have to be shaped and guidedby those people. We must empower them to make theirvoices heard in this debate. When we bring together ourcreativity, our imagination and the huge brain power inthe research community, we must always bring to thisissue, too, our own humanity. We must remember thatpeople with dementia are valuable and loved humanbeings. If we can keep that at the forefront of ourminds, we will make progress and be doing absolutelythe right thing.

During Question Time yesterday I mentioned a ladycalled Joy Watson. I met her a little while ago. She isonly 55, but she has early-onset dementia. Her family

was devastated. When she went into shops, she might bea little confused over her change or what she needed toorder, and the shops—and sometimes the customers—would be irritated with her, tutting and asking her tohurry up. She took to wearing a badge, which shedesigned herself, saying “I have got Alzheimer’s; pleasebe patient with me”. She should not need to do that.Nowadays there is a scheme—I think it is called thepurple angel scheme, and Joy is promoting it—so thatpeople can wear a purple angel on their T-shirts as ameans of raising awareness in every single part of ourcommunity.

In Salford, we have worked on this agenda for anumber of years. We have just formed our dementiaaction alliance, with 30 organisations now committedto action plans to make us, I hope, the first dementia-friendlycommunity in Greater Manchester. As well as health,education and housing bodies, we have the Lowry artscentre and our shopping centres included in the scheme.I think we have the first private-hire taxi firm in thecountry to be involved in this, Mainline Sevens taxis. Ithas trained 400 drivers and has an account system sothat people with dementia do not have to fiddle withtheir money when they get in a taxi. All those groupsare now dementia aware. That shows the really practicalthings that can be done.

On the research side, I am delighted to say thattomorrow, Salford university will launch the SalfordInstitute for Dementia, bringing together the faculty ofhealth and social care with departments dealing withthe built environment, computers, IT, arts and media—showing the multidisciplinary approach that will apply.That group will draw together and disseminate researchon living well with dementia. I think this is a fabulousacademic development.

Mrs Moon: I cannot say how much I admire my righthon. Friend’s championing of this cause. When it comesto universities, there are examples of research that havefocused on ideas for prevention. We heard yesterdayfrom Professor A. David Smith from Oxford about thevitamin B6 and B12 levels as a means of achieving this.Currently, it is not possible within the health service tohave a test of homocysteine levels that would help toidentify the problem. Could we not put that preventionin place; should we not be doing that now?

Hazel Blears: My hon. Friend is absolutely right.I was horrified to learn yesterday that only 0.1% ofresearch on dementia is spent on prevention. In everyother area of public policy, such as education and socialmobility, we are aware of the importance of investing inprevention, but in this area there is virtually no grantsupport, and that must change. I understand that inNorway and Sweden, tests for dementia are the norm.They are cheap once the investment has been made inthe equipment, and the vitamin B12 research looksextremely promising. I hope that when the Ministerresponds he will say that that is something that our ownnational health service should take up.

Oliver Colvile (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport)(Con): Is the right hon. Lady aware of the excellentwork that is being done in Plymouth, not just at theuniversity but, much more important, by the local authorityand the Royal Navy at Devonport? They are taking a


[Oliver Colvile]

lead by ensuring that all their employees are aware ofthe dementia issue, and that, if they need time off, theycan have it in order to look after their relatives.

Hazel Blears: I am delighted that the hon. Gentlemanhas mentioned Plymouth, because it is one of thepioneers in this area. Plymouth, Torquay, Bradford andother towns all over the country want to ensure thatdementia is not something shocking that we do notknow how to deal with, and that everyone is dementia-friendly and aware. They are tackling the stigma, whichis a huge issue. People do not like to talk about the factthat their families and friends are afflicted with thisdisease.

The search for a cure is essential. No one wants tohave dementia, and everyone wants to be able to cure it.However, at the G8 I want just as much importanceto be ascribed to research on the quality of care. TheEvington initiative, which is backed by a number ofbusiness leaders including Terry Leahy—who used tochair Tesco—and Sir Marc Bolland are putting theirweight behind that initiative. They are asking two questions.First, how can we change the system so that it is drivenby users and carers rather than simply by cliniciansand producers? Secondly, how can we establish agood, rigorous evidence base in relation to therapeuticinterventions, quality and consistency of care and tacklingstigma, so that clinical commissioning groups can beconfident that the services they are commissioning actuallywork?

I think that the research is very exciting, but we arenot likely to find a cure for 10, 15 or 20 years, and in themeantime 800,000 people are living with dementia. Atpresent, there is virtually no evidence base relating tothe quality of care. “Singing for the brain” is fantastic,but does it work, and if so, why does it work? Thenthere are the arts, the drama, and all the memory workthat goes on. We need that rigorous evidence base, sothat the commissioners can take the right packages offthe shelf.

Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth)(Lab): Will my hon. Friend give way?

Hazel Blears: I am afraid that I do not have enoughtime.

We also need research on prevention. The Alzheimer’sSociety is working on a system that helps care homestaff to reduce the use of anti-psychotic drugs by interveningin other ways to deal with people’s behaviour. Thatsystem is being rolled out in 150 care homes, and hasreduced the use of anti-psychotic drugs by 50%. It issaving money, and it is making a huge difference. TheG8 presents us with a fabulous opportunity to press forfurther research. I do not want it to be a one-off: I hopethat there will be another summit of this kind next year.I also hope that work will continue between now andthe next summit. This issue is not going away—it will bewith us for a long, long time—and it would be fabulousif we could secure that international collaboration.

I invite the Minister to visit our university instituteafter we have launched it tomorrow, so that he canobserve the fabulous work that is being done there and,

perhaps, meet some of the people in Salford who aretaking a whole systems approach that I think will provehelpful.

Let me end by saying that we owe a duty to everysingle one of the people who have dementia or arecaring for people with the condition. It is the worstthing in the world to lose the person with whom youonce had a connection. We have an absolute duty to dowhatever we can, here in the House and in our communities,to give those people support and help.

3.59 pm

Richard Graham (Gloucester) (Con): It is a pleasureto follow the right hon. Member for Salford and Eccles(Hazel Blears), who has spoken so well and done somuch work on this subject along with her colleagues,my hon. Friend the Member for Chatham and Aylesford(Tracey Crouch) and the right hon. Member for Suttonand Cheam (Paul Burstow). All three major parties nowhave at least one significant dementia champion to raisethis important issue. I know that the Minister will enjoyresponding to the debate, because he has covered anumber of debates on the subject before. Much hasbeen said on dementia, and much action has beentaken. The right hon. Lady was right to mention thePrime Minister’s initiative and his championing of thisissue. Many people are suffering as a result of dementia,not only those suffering directly from the disease, andthere is still no cure, so it remains a significant challengefor science and society.

I have just a few points to add to what has alreadybeen said. The Minister will recall that I led a debaterecently in Westminster Hall on what was being doneabout dementia in Gloucestershire and on the ways inwhich I believed we had adopted best practice. However,a critical question is: do we really know what bestpractice is? How do we measure the quality of what isbeing done in our local hospitals and care services?How do we measure the contribution of organisationssuch as the Barnwood Trust, a mental health charityspecialising in these conditions which we are luckyenough to have in our area?

As the right hon. Lady said, it would be useful if theMinister could share his thoughts on a guide to bestpractice, not only for commissioners—although I agreethat that is important—but for MPs. Representatives ofthe Gloucestershire family of NHS services recentlytold me in a meeting that they had received an award forthe care and services they provided for old people ingeneral and for dementia sufferers in particular. Thatwas terrific news—I am always delighted when peoplewin an award—but it would be useful to know what weare doing best, and what is being done better in differentareas, so that we can have a nice, easy frame of reference.People could then see whether their area offered afour-star or a five-star dementia service, for example,and we could assess how we might attain a higherstandard if we did certain things differently.

Debbie Abrahams: Is the hon. Gentleman suggestingthat, in addition to building up the evidence base throughrandomised controlled trials that establish a causalrelationship between therapies and outcomes, some kindof action-based research would be appropriate? Suchresearch could be carried out and interventions couldbe offered and evaluated while providing the service at


the same time. It would be a case of learning as we wentalong. Does he agree that we need different approachesbecause of the scale of the issue that we are facing?

Richard Graham: I think I agree with the hon. Lady.Different things need to be tried. Singing and musicwere mentioned earlier. In my mother’s case, they werethe last things she was able to relate to and enjoy beforeAlzheimer’s closed over her. So I agree that differentthings are always worth trying, and that is where thecharities can play a role as well.

My first question to the Minister is: could we havestar ratings for dementia services and, if so, how wouldwe identify and measure best practice? My second pointrelates to how we are using the Prime Minister’s initiativeto get dementia on to the G8 summit agenda for thefirst time. We should work with other countries on this.A number of us have received briefings suggestingthat the United States and France, among others, arealso doing great things in dementia research. Should wenot all be able to share our findings? Perhaps we couldhave what is known as a global inter-operative datasharing base, so that all the work being done byorganisations such as Alzheimer’s Research UK couldbe shared, rather than being duplicated. Effort couldthen be spent on taking research forward, rather thanreplicating it.

The aim of trying to join up what organisationsaround the world are doing is a key reason for the PrimeMinister getting this topic on to the G8 summit agenda,and I hope that the result will be an international planinvolving more pooling of thinking, research and ideas.I sense that science is beginning to feel more confidentabout finding solutions to this ghastly disease, and ifthe G8 summit can give an enormous turbo-boost topooling research and getting closer to finding solutions,the actions of the Prime Minister and the Governmentwill have been worth while, not only for the 800,000 peoplein this country who have dementia today but for themany millions who will suffer in the future.

4.14 pm

Steve Rotheram (Liverpool, Walton) (Lab): In myfirst speech in this House this year—I believe it was on10 January when we debated dementia and mentalhealth—I discussed my mother’s case. The debate wasfilled with passionate contributions from Members acrossthe House, although I was particularly moved by thepersonal accounts from my hon. Friends the Membersfor Bridgend (Mrs Moon) and for Oldham East andSaddleworth (Debbie Abrahams).

I also spoke of my pride that a decade after mymother’s passing the city of Liverpool earmarked 2013as the year in which it would focus efforts on dementiaawareness and promote innovative approaches initiatedby organisations in our city. Our work complements thefindings of the report from the G8 summit on dementia.Right across the Liverpool city region, our health careproviders, arts organisations and academic institutionshave embraced a collaborative approach to increaseawareness of dementia, early diagnosis and patient-friendlytreatment, with the mission being to make dementiaeverybody’s business. I stand in this House proud andconfident that Liverpool is well on its way towardscreating dementia-friendly environments in workplaces,public areas and communities.

One of the most high-profile projects—the PrimeMinister might like to bring it to the attention of G8colleagues—is the National Museums Liverpool Houseof Memories project, which now has a staggering1,000 participants. Since I spoke on the issue earlier inthe year, the team, led by David Fleming, has developedits innovative approach even further, branching out intothe housing sector, in partnership with local registeredsocial landlords. In total, four north-west housing providershave joined together to fund a re-modelled initiativewhich has taken the House of Memories project—usingart, dance, music and creativity—to 600 homes. That isset to be further expanded next year. I am pleased toreport that the ambition of the House of Memoriesteam knows no bounds. Despite our year of dementiafinishing in just a few short weeks, the team alreadyhas an even more ambitious plan for 2014 to helpdementia patients.

I made it clear in January that I did not see anyreason why the project running in Liverpool could notbe extended across every region of the UK, so it isparticularly pleasing to be informed that the Minister’sDepartment has confirmed that £135,000 will be awardedto take the House of Memories project to the midlandsregion in March next year, and I thank him for that. Asif that were not enough, the team are even developingan app for iPhones and iPads on behalf of, and workingwith, dementia sufferers, which will also be launchednext spring.

The House of Memories is by no means the onlysuccessful project operational in Liverpool, so I makeno apologies for bringing a number of other localinitiatives to the attention of the House. The uniqueSedgemoor specialist dementia support centre was openedin Norris Green, on the border of my constituency, inMay, at a cost of £1.2 million. The centre features ahigh-tech, interactive 4D theatre, where people canimmerse themselves in the sights, sounds and even thesmells of the past, through old videos, cinema footage,photographs, music and even relevant scents, whichtrigger reaction and stimulate conversation.

There have been more highlights of Liverpool’s yearof dementia. Everton in the Community, the communityarm of Everton football club, is performing reminiscencework with Mersey Care. My right hon. Friend theMember for Salford and Eccles (Hazel Blears) mentioneduniversities, and Liverpool Hope university is providinga dementia centre of excellence, which is a physicallocation where members of the public, clinical services,charities, businesses and third sector organisations getthe chance to meet and share expertise.

I pay particular tribute to the React service in Liverpool,the personal care services, community support serviceand external day services. I also praise Age UK Liverpool,Telecare, Livability and CEDAS for the work they do.Discussions are at an advanced stage to refresh thecity’s joint strategy for dementia and ensure that thedementia alliance is developed and fully operationalfor 2014.

I urge the Minister to spend time with me, if he isgoing to Salford, to see first hand the differences thatwe are making on Merseyside. The G8 summit ondementia gives us the opportunity to push for moreresearch into a whole host of dementias, and highlightsthe innovative approaches to tackle the condition—andin that Liverpool leads the way.


4.20 pm

Paul Burstow (Sutton and Cheam) (LD): It is a greatprivilege to take part in this debate and to be presidedover by you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the first time.I congratulate the hon. Member for Chatham and Aylesford(Tracey Crouch) and the right hon. Member for Salfordand Eccles (Hazel Blears) on their tenacious pursuit ofthese issues and on ensuring that we have had twoBack-Bench business debates on the subject in less thana year. That gives notice of the fact that this is an issueabout which the House and its Members feel passionatelyand to which they want more attention paid.

Last Thursday, I took part in a local dementia forumin my constituency, which was organised by the SuttonAlzheimer’s Society. It brought together a range oforganisations to listen to and engage with people whoare experiencing dementia—either as carers or as suffererswho have the diagnosis and are living with its consequences.That was an incredibly powerful experience. At theheart of this issue is how we ensure that people have agood life and maintain good relationships, becausedementia can rob them of that. We need to think abouthow we can ensure that people, whether they be aprofessional, a carer or someone who is working inanother part of the public or private services, understandand are aware of the issues about dementia. We need tobuild a community that is more friendly towards thosewho suffer from dementia. Good communication is atthe heart of that. The one message that all of us whowere speakers at the event got from both the carers andthe people with dementia was to slow down. We weregabbling and talking at great pace, because we weretrying to get across too much in too little time. With justover three minutes left, I will not manage to achieve thatrequirement now.

I want to take a slightly different tack from thecontributions we have heard so far and argue that theG8 summit on dementia needs to address the impactdementia will have on the development of low andmiddle-income nations across the planet. As Dr MargaretChan, the director-general of the World HealthOrganisation, says:

“The need for long-term care for people with dementia strainshealth and social care systems, and budgets. The catastrophic costof care drives millions of households below the poverty line. Theoverwhelming number of people whose lives are altered by dementia,combined with the staggering economic burden on families andnations, makes dementia a public health priority.”

That is why having a G8 summit on it is correct.We are living through an extraordinary time in human

history. A revolution is taking place on this planet,which is remaking societies, the state and so much thatwe have taken for granted. It is really a revolution interms of human survival. We are living longer, which issomething that we should celebrate. It is a triumph ofhuman ingenuity that is all too often portrayed as somesort of disaster. It is not a disaster, but something thatwe should celebrate.

Let me put some numbers into my argument. In 2010it was estimated that, across the world, 35.6 millionpeople had Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias.That number will increase to 66 million by 2015 and to115 million by 2050. The majority of that increase willnot fall in the developed world; it will be in low andmiddle-income countries where more than 70% of peoplewith dementia will be living by 2050.

As I have said, the number of people with dementiain 2050 will rise to 115 million, but the number ofpeople who will develop dementia worldwide betweennow and then is estimated to be 600 million, which isroughly one new case every four seconds. In the UK, thenational dementia strategy, which, as we have heard,runs out next year, and the Prime Minister’s dementiachallenge, on which I had the privilege of working whenI was care Minister, recognise the challenge posed bydementia, that dementia is not a normal part of ageingand that concerted action is required.

The G8 summit requires a focus that is not justabout the developed world’s research spend; it mustalso understand the impact of dementia elsewhere inthe world.

Oliver Colvile: Is my right hon. Friend aware of thestigma of dementia in black and ethnic minoritycommunities? I recently took part in an inquiry in whichit became apparent that that is an issue.

Paul Burstow: The hon. Gentleman’s point is spot onand leads me on to my next point about an example ofresearch in India. It is estimated that in 2010 there were3.7 million people with dementia in India, which willrise to more than 14 million by 2050. Approximatelyhalf those people will be over 75 and almost 2 millionwill be over 90. There is a serious lack of awarenessabout the issues in low and middle-income countries,especially those in Africa. Almost three quarters ofpeople with dementia will live in those countries andthat is why I want to ensure that the Minister, as hefeeds back into the process of preparing for the summit,will make sure that such issues are on the table.

Hazel Blears: The hon. Gentleman is bringing a newperspective to the debate and he has made me thinkabout the commitments made on AIDS and HIV. Weneed only think how ambitious the world was in tacklingHIV at a time when many of us thought that it was anirresolvable problem. The promises on retroviral drugswere hugely ambitious and the progress we have madehas been tremendous. Will he join me in urging theMinister and Prime Minister to be just as ambition onthis agenda as we were on HIV/AIDS?

Paul Burstow: As a number of us have made clear, theglobal scale of the challenge is such that it requiresthe galvanisation of a global response. The summit is aunique opportunity to do that, but it must have thereach and ambition that the right hon. Lady is talkingabout. It could take as its model the successful workthat has been done so far on HIV.

Although epidemiologists often say that the figuresI am citing are undercounted, the disease is none theless regarded as the second-most burdensome chronicdisease and, among all those with chronic non-communicable diseases, accounts for almost 12% ofyears lived with disability.

In most developing countries, the problem with dementiais hidden. I have mentioned India, and the “DementiaIndia Report 2010” was published by the Alzheimer’sand Related Disorders Society of India, helped partlyby funding from the UK Alzheimer’s Society. It has


provided invaluable insight into the prevalence of thedisease and ways in which India can respond to thechallenge.

Let me ask the Minister a couple of questions. Thefirst is about the research spend. The hon. Member forChatham and Aylesford asked about the ambition ofdoubling that spend every five years, but it is not goodenough for just our Government to do that. We needother Governments to agree to the same thing at the G8summit. We need to know how much is being spent inthe G8 on such things. There is no published figure—thatis extraordinary—and when I tried to find a figure forthe debate, I could not. We need a baseline to knowwhether we are making progress.

This country’s leadership on such issues will be indoubt if we do not hear soon that the Governmentintend to have a new dementia strategy. I hope that theMinister will be able to give us some indication of whenthat will take place. Finally, in having such an ambitionon research, we need to learn from the journey thatcancer has gone on. Cancer research has for many yearshad ambition, reach and strategy. We have an Instituteof Cancer Research and it is time this country had thesame for dementia. That could deliver such a big prizefor all our citizens.

4.29 pm

Huw Irranca-Davies (Ogmore) (Lab): I am delightedto speak in this debate on behalf of many of myconstituents from all areas who have asked me to attend,listen and contribute. I will focus in particular on Walesand Wales and the G8, as well as on the importance ofcollaboration, but I want to thank the hon. Member forChatham and Aylesford (Tracey Crouch), my right hon.Friend the Member for Salford and Eccles (Hazel Blears),the right hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (PaulBurstow) and others, including my hon. Friend theMember for Liverpool, Walton (Steve Rotheram), notonly for securing the debate but for championing thecause continually over a number of years. I also jointhem in praising the Prime Minister for putting thisfront and centre of the G8 summit. It is a worthyambition, but as the right hon. Member for Sutton andCheam set out, doing so has raised aspirations overwhat will be delivered. I sometimes feel for the Ministerbecause he repeatedly faces people saying that we mustdo more on treatment, care, prevention and research onmany conditions, but putting dementia four square atthe head of the Government’s ambitions for the G8summit shows that there is a level of desire for some realoutcomes, not least of which should be long-term strategyand the co-ordination of spending internationally tomake the most of it and see what more can be put intothe pot. It is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

Right hon. and hon. Members have mentioned theambition. My right hon. Friend the Member for Salfordand Eccles spoke about turning the spotlight on toAIDS and HIV in the 1980s and 1990s, which really didmake an unprecedented step change because there wasan international focus on treatment and care. Massiveinterventions were made in previous decades on cancertreatment, and they had the same effect. There is adesire across the international community, especiallygiven the opportunity provided by the G8, to have thatsame impetus. It is not simply an issue of spending; it isan issue of real focus and relentless drive on everythingfrom prevention to treatment, care and research.

In Wales more than 45,000 people now have dementia,and that figure is forecast to increase to almost 60,000by 2021. Hon. Members may be interested to know thatin Wales only 38.5% have received formal diagnosis oftheir condition. That is lower than in other parts of theUK, which is interesting. There is good work going onwithin Wales. The Welsh Government published backin 2011 the national dementia vision for Wales, settingout their commitment to supporting research. The WelshGovernment have also pledged to support research indementia cause, cure and care. They offer fundingopportunities to researchers who want to undertakeresearch into dementia.

In the light of my intervention on the Minister’sspeech, what is he doing to ensure that knowledge isdisseminated well not only internationally but in Walesand England and other regions of the UK, that bestpractice is shared, and that research collaboration isstreamlined properly? What is being done to co-ordinateat a government level in different parts of the UK workon dementia priorities? It would be a tragedy in timesof stretched spending if there was duplication and awaste of effort all the way from social care through toresearch and so on. Let us make sure that it is all linedup in the right way. That is what the G8 summit can doon the international agenda as well.

Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con): I understandthat around the world some $40 billion has been spenton dementia research, but all the drug trials have failed.The emphasis surely should be far more on prevention.Professor Smith, who was mentioned earlier, maintainsthat Alzheimer’s could be cut by a quarter. If he is righton that subject, that would mean massive savings onhealth care costs in Wales and across the rest of thecountry.

Huw Irranca-Davies: The hon. Gentleman makes agood point, which was also touched on by my righthon. Friend the Member for Salford and Eccles. It is astartling fact that 0.1% of funding goes into prevention.Surely there has to be greater emphasis on that, becausethe outcomes of prevention are so beneficial.

I am sure that the Minister is aware of what is goingon in Wales. The Welsh Government’s National Institutefor Social Care and Health Research funds and managesthe research activity in Wales. The total spend last yearwas £75.7 million, of which £3.54 million was spent onbiomedical research project funding. Just over 15% ofthe budget was awarded to researchers working onprojects directly relevant to neurology research, includingmental health. The same organisation awarded the Walesdementias and neurodegenerative diseases research network£743,000 over five years for its research. It is aboutknowing what is going on not only in Wales and differentparts of the UK, but internationally so that we canco-ordinate and make the optimum use of regional,national and international spend on prevention, care,treatment and research.

My final point—it is probably one for another debate—isthat we cannot divorce the strategic matters from theoperational ones, and that means looking at the hugestretch in social care. There are real and intense pressureson social care, and not just on resourcing, but onstaffing, staffing expertise and the necessary reform oflong-term social care funding. That is probably a subject


[Huw Irranca-Davies]

for another day, but the reality is that there are pressureson the ground affecting many people with differenttypes of dementia and their families. There is real anxiety.

Hazel Blears: I appreciate that the debate is about theG8, but does my hon. Friend share my concern that theintegrated transformation fund, the £3.8 billion that issupposed to relieve some of those pressures, bringstogether resources that are already being spent by localgovernment and the NHS, so it is not actually newfunding? Perhaps the Minister will address that when heresponds to the debate.

Huw Irranca-Davies: I share that concern and hopethat the Minister will turn his attention to it briefly. It isa major concern for the organisations and individualsout there.

In conclusion, I commend the Prime Minister fortaking this initiative forward with the G8. It is a goldenopportunity. Let us not miss it. Let us reach our ambitionand our aspiration.

4.37 pm

Sarah Newton (Truro and Falmouth) (Con): I, too,congratulate the hon. Members who secured the debateon their relentless tenacity, because they always provideus with opportunities to talk about this incredibly importantissue. I do not think that it is an exaggeration to say thatit is one of the largest public health challenges facingthe world in the 21st century.

Although I would love to take a few minutes tocelebrate the work I have seen in my constituency, withconstituents responding so positively to the Prime Minister’schallenge to come together as a community of healthprofessionals, voluntary sector organisations and businessesto make it a very friendly place to live in, and tocelebrate many of the improvements in the local NHSand care sector, I want to draw us back, because I willprobably be the last Back-Bench Member to speak, tothe particular challenges and opportunities that the G8summit presents. I will recap on the aims of the summit,because it is very much about the research. They are toidentify and agree new international approaches todementia research; to help break down barriers withinand between companies, researchers and clinicians; andto secure the type of collaboration and co-operationthat he been mentioned so far.

I will focus on what more we can do on the science.The Government have committed to spending a lotmore money, and we have heard about other countriescommitting considerable sums of money to research,but, as in so many other areas, it is about more than justthe money. It will be vital at the summit to listen to theexpert evidence that will be considered from clinicians,the pharmaceutical industry and researchers and tolook at what the barriers are to better and more effectiveuse of the funds available for the prevention, diagnosisand treatment of dementia.

Steve Rotheram: The hon. Lady is of course absolutelyright that the science is the most important part of this,but, as I mentioned, there are also non-pharmaceuticalinterventions that are equally important to people whoare suffering until, I hope, we can find the cure that wewould all like to see.

Sarah Newton rose—

Madam Deputy Speaker (Mrs Eleanor Laing): Order.Hon. Members ought to note that if they wish to hearwhat the Minister and the Opposition Front-Benchspokesman have to say about the debate, they shouldnot take any further interventions.

Sarah Newton: I am a member of the Science andTechnology Committee, and I am delighted that myChairman, the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port andNeston (Andrew Miller), is here and has intervened. Iwould like to draw the Minister’s attention to someexcellent work that our Committee has been doing thisyear. I think that some of the reports we have publishedwill help him to prepare for the summit. We undertooka very good investigation into clinical trials and alsoproduced a report called “Bridging the valley of death”.Both reports highlighted a very significant issue facingresearch, not only in the UK but globally.

As Members will know, we have an absolutely world-classscience base in our country. The main challenge facingit is to overcome regulatory environments, many ofwhich are international, to enable it to take its first-classresearch across the valley of death and into the developmentof ways of diagnosing dementia and therapies for treatingit. It is very important to learn the lessons from our veryextensive inquiries to enable more of this research to becommercially developed in order to find its way into themarketplace.

Andrew Miller: Does the hon. Lady agree that itwould be helpful if the Minister could revisit theGovernment’s response to our inquiry on clinical trials,because we could then be a world leader and show realleadership at the summit?

Sarah Newton: Only yesterday, we took evidence fromProfessor Collinge from University College Londonand Professor Ironside from Edinburgh, who are leadersin the field of degenerative brain disease. They providedus with even more compelling evidence of the increasingdifficulties of getting from the research stage to beingable to secure enough commitment from the pharmaceuticalindustry and other bodies that fund research into developingthe science into diagnostic and therapeutic techniques.They reported that the pharmaceutical industry, whichis a massive investor in research and its outcomes, isgetting far more risk-averse and, as a result, is puttingmany more burdens on to the research of scientists inuniversities—burdens that they are not really capable oftaking on board. The G8’s focus on getting the companiesand clinicians, as well as researchers, around the table tolook at the pathways from the science into scaleable,commercialised solutions is vitally important.

It is important that we do this not only in our owncountry but internationally, because most of the regulationsare international. Where there is not internationalagreement, that in itself becomes a barrier to researchand its commercialisation. The work done at the G8will enable there to be much larger markets, meaningthat very many more people will be helped and thatmoney will flow into the research and make it morewidely available.

The transcripts from our findings yesterday will beavailable in a couple of days’ time. That should give theMinister a good opportunity to look at the evidence we


were given by those very eminent researchers, who areundertaking research into prions, as well as lookinginto developments on variant CJD, which is a form ofdementia, and how that links to other types of dementiasuch as Alzheimer’s. We need that sort of joining upacross the process to enable diagnostic and preventiveprocedures, and therapies, to be developed. All thevarious scientists—

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. The hon. Lady heardme say that if Members wished to hear the Minister andthe Opposition Front-Bench spokesman there shouldbe no further interventions. She took a further interventionand she will have to conclude very quickly.

Sarah Newton: My last point is to urge the Ministerto look to ensure at the G8 that the various scientistsand the various disciplines work together.

4.44 pm

Liz Kendall (Leicester West) (Lab): I welcome you tothe Chair, Madam Deputy Speaker, as this is the firsttime I have spoken since you were elected. I also warmlycongratulate the hon. Member for Chatham and Aylesford(Tracey Crouch), my right hon. Friend the Member forSalford and Eccles (Hazel Blears) and the right hon.Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Burstow) onsecuring this really important debate. I am sorry thatsome Members have not had more of a chance tospeak, because I know that they feel passionately aboutthe subject.

Like other hon. Members, I welcome the G8 summiton dementia. It is important to be hosting the firstsummit dedicated to dementia when countries are facingso many other issues. It is also right because the ageingpopulation, which includes an increasing number ofpeople with dementia, is one of the biggest immediateand long-term challenges facing both this countryand the world. Dementia already affects more than800,000 people in the UK and that figure is set to riseto 2 million by 2050. It is estimated that more than115 million people worldwide will be living with dementiain 40 years’ time.

Anyone whose family has experience of dementia willknow how devastating the condition can be. It is thereforeright that the G8 summit and the Prime Minister’sdementia challenge seek to boost national and internationalefforts on clinical research. Developing effective drugsand treatments is essential if we are to offer hope topeople that something can be done about this terribledisease.

If we are going to address the challenge of dementia,we must face up to the equally important challenge ofimproving the quality of dementia care. We need toensure that we do not neglect research into the supportand services that aim to prevent the onset of dementiain the first place, which was something that many hon.Members spoke about. Although there is no certainway to prevent dementia, we know that a healthy lifestylecan lower people’s risk of getting not only dementia,but lots of other diseases, when they get older. Eatingwell, exercising regularly and stopping smoking maynot grab the headlines in the same way as discovering anew job, nor attract research funding from institutionsand companies, but ultimately they will be key to meetingthe dementia challenge in the future. I hope that we willone day have a G8 summit on precisely those issues.

I want to focus my brief comments on the crucialmatter of the quality of dementia care because, for myconstituents and for people in my family and my friends’families, the quality of care they receive, and the problemsthey have with it, represent the biggest challenge. Peoplewith dementia and their family carers are clear aboutwhat makes good dementia care. They want joined-upservices and support so that they do not have to battledifferent parts of the system. They want care that ispersonalised to their individual needs. The vast majorityof people with dementia want to stay living independentlyin their own homes for as long as possible, and familieswant to help to look after their loved ones as long asthey get the right help and support.

Like many hon. Members, I have seen lots of inspiringexamples of people working to improve care for peoplewith dementia: day centres that provide stimulatingactivities such as gardening, cooking, singing and music;care homes that understand that they have to ask thefamilies of people with severe dementia what kind ofcare and support they need, because those people’smemory has been taken from them; hospitals that involvefamilies by asking them what food and activities theirrelative wants and needs; and, crucially, higher educationinstitutions such as the university of Worcester, which Irecently visited and is transforming staff training bygetting patients to interview people who want to bestudent nurses, and then to develop and actually givethe course, because how can NHS and social care staffknow what dementia patients really need if they havenot been trained in the first place?

Our loved ones will not get the quality of care we allwant for them within a malnourished and depletedsocial care system. In fact, I think that the growingcrisis in social care is the biggest threat to peoplesuffering from dementia and the largest challenge weface. Council budgets have been under pressure formany years, but almost £2 billion has been cut fromlocal authority budgets for older people’s social caresince the Government came to power. Fewer people aregetting the up-front care that they need to stay living athome. Home care visits have been shortened to barely15 minutes, which is not enough time to get a vulnerableperson with dementia up, washed, dressed and fed.

Care workers do an incredibly important job, butthey are struggling. They are not paid even the minimumwage, let alone the living wage, and they are employedon zero-hours contracts. That is bad not just for peoplewith dementia, but for taxpayers, because if those withdementia do not get the help and care they need so thatthey can live at home, they end up in residential orhospital care, which costs taxpayers more.

I want to ask about the Government’s plans becauseit is important that we are clear about them. I am surethat the Minister will talk about their plan to integrateservices, but I want to echo a point made by my righthon. Friend the Member for Salford and Eccles. Theintegration transformation fund is not new money, butexisting resources of £1.9 billion from clinical commissiongroups, with the rest coming from existing local councilbudgets. I think that £3.8 billion is a really unambitiousamount of funding in the context of a total NHS andsocial care budget of £120 billion. We need the farbigger and bolder response of the full integration ofNHS and social care budgets if we are to meet thechallenge of our ageing population and dementia.


[Liz Kendall]

The G8 summit and the Prime Minister’s dementiachallenge are welcome—they build on the previousGovernment’s approach—but the challenge needs tofocus on improving the quality of care and research intoprevention. I echo the important point made by hon.Members about the need for a commitment to renewthe previous Government’s national dementia challenge,which expires at the end of next year, and the PrimeMinister’s dementia challenge, which ends in 2015. Ihope that the Minister will give such a commitment sothat we can have the long-term strategy across all areasthat we desperately need.

4.52 pmThe Minister of State, Department of Health (Norman

Lamb): It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, MadamDeputy Speaker, and I offer you my congratulations onyour election, as other hon. Members have.

I find myself in a bit of an invidious situation,because it will be impossible for me to do justice to thisvery impressive debate in which hon. Members on bothsides of the House made impassioned and effectivespeeches. However, I undertake to write to them toensure that I pick up all their points. I congratulate thehon. Member for Chatham and Aylesford (Tracey Crouch)on her excellent introduction to the debate, as well as onsecuring it in the first place.

I have a few scatter-gun points. I would be absolutelydelighted to go to Salford. I think that I am alreadycommitted to going to see the fantastic House of Memoriesin Liverpool, so it would be good to spend time inSalford with the right hon. Member for Salford andEccles (Hazel Blears) and in Liverpool with the hon.Member for Liverpool, Walton (Steve Rotheram). I wasinterested to hear about the Science and TechnologyCommittee’s impressive work and conclusions, which Iclearly need to look at in more detail.

It is good to have real consensus in the House aboutthe challenge that we face and what we need to do.There has rightly been praise from both sides for thePrime Minister’s identification of dementia as somethingthat deserves his particular attention and as a matterfor a summit this December during our presidency ofthe G8. The summit will elevate the whole issue to theglobal stage in just the right way.

The right hon. Member for Salford and Eccles wasabsolutely right to say that, in everything we do, peoplewith dementia and their families ought to be absolutelyfirst and foremost in our minds. It is critical to listen tothem and to ensure that we act on their needs.

Someone around the world is diagnosed with dementiaevery four seconds. More than 35 million people have it,and as people live longer than ever, that number is set todouble every 20 years. Some 58% of those people live inlow and middle-income countries, and the proportion isprojected to rise to 71% by 2050. My right hon. Friendthe Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Burstow) wasabsolutely right to identify the challenge in the developingworld. The right hon. Member for Salford and Eccleswas right that dementia needs to be seen as somethingthat requires real ambition on the same scale as that onHIV/AIDS.

Especially during the later stages of dementia, whenpeople’s behaviour can be challenging and extraordinarilydistressing for their loved ones, families face a huge

emotional and practical burden. We cannot ignore thepressure on our health and care system. Incidentally,the £3.8 billion fund that has been mentioned comesfrom both the health system and care systems. Theintention is to consolidate resources as effectively aspossible. Our approach represents a clear shift fromrepair to prevention, and all hon. Members who spokerecognised the importance of focusing on prevention.

The shadow Minister says that she wants more ambition.When I met adult social care directors, I was struck byhow many were considering pooling the whole of theirbudgets—[Interruption.] I do not know whether theshadow Minister can hear what I am saying with thehon. Member for Scunthorpe (Nic Dakin) sitting byher side, but my point is that there is a great deal ofambition out there.

Dementia is a major priority for the Government.The Prime Minister launched his challenge last yearand he is now getting the G8 to focus on the condition.As part of our G8 presidency, the UK is hosting asummit on 11 December that will bring together healthand science Ministers, the OECD, the World HealthOrganisation, expert researchers, pharmaceutical leadersand representatives of civil society.

There are short, medium and long-term priorities fordealing with dementia, and the first priority is to preventit, as hon. Members have said. The hon. Member forRichmond Park (Zac Goldsmith) intervened to make apoint about the importance of understanding risk factors.There is much more that we can do to prevent dementiain the first place, so gaining that understanding iscritical.

The second priority is to delay the onset of symptomsand to maintain cognitive function. The third is toimprove care and support for people who are affectedby dementia and their carers. The hon. Member forChatham and Aylesford made that point strongly andspoke about the value of telecare in helping people toremain independent. With first-class care and medicaltreatment, someone with dementia can still find purposeand pleasure in life, as can their loved ones, which isvery important.

Research and innovation are critical, so I am pleasedthat biopharmaceuticals and other industries will berepresented at the G8 summit. We need to explore howwe can align our research priorities and stimulate innovationin all sectors. By the end of the summit, I hope that wewill have reached two agreements: a declaration thatdemonstrates the extent of our shared commitment anda communiqué that outlines a plan for global action.We want to ensure that there is a legacy and that workcontinues beyond the summit. This must be the start,not the end. We are working with the WHO, the OECDand other partners to develop the plan.

The summit is an enormous opportunity to pool globalresources and bring them to bear on the extraordinarychallenge that we face. Together, I think that we canmake a real difference.

4.58 pm

Tracey Crouch: We have had a fantastic debate, butI would expect nothing less, given that this is the seconddebate that we have had on dementia in the Chamber.Members’contributions on the subject, which is importantto our constituents, are always incredibly passionateand varied.


The right hon. Member for Salford and Eccles (HazelBlears) put it much better than I could by saying that wemust always remember that there is a person at thecentre of the debate. When we talk about global economicfigures, we are talking about how we can best helpsomebody who is suffering from this debilitating, devastatingdisease and their family who are there to support them.

The Minister has heard the passion of the Memberswho spoke today. They have demonstrated how importantthis issue is to our constituents, communities and society.They have also set out the economic factors. He shouldgo back to his Department and think carefully abouthow the UK should take forward its dementia strategy,which is still not forthcoming beyond 2014. We must beclear that being a global leader on this issue is about notonly holding a G8 summit, but practising what we aresaying back at home. The Prime Minister has the supportof the House in taking this matter to the G8 summitand we all wish him well as he does so.

Question put and agreed to.Resolved,That this House has considered the G8 summit on dementia.

Mix 96 (Digital Radio Switchover)Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House

do now adjourn.—(Claire Perry.)

5 pm

Mrs Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham) (Con):I am grateful, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to raisethe subject of what is in fact our local radio station,Mix 96, and the digital switchover. As a Bucks Memberof Parliament it is good to have the opportunity to raisewith a colleague such as you an issue that is not HS2,but concerns a successful local business that providesnews and information, supports local charities, promoteslocal businesses, advertises job vacancies, and even listsschool closures during the winter—oh, and before I forget,it also plays great music.

Mix 96 approached me because it is concerned aboutthe switchover. We all know that small local stations,whether licensed by Ofcom as commercial or communitystations, lie at the heart of communities up and downthe country and hold a special place in the hearts ofmillions of consumers. However, local radio cannotstand apart from consumer trends. It is worth rememberingthat, although levels of music listening have never beengreater, a large proportion of the listening done bythose consumers who are most attractive to advertisersis not done through radio—whether BBC, commercial,analogue or digital— but is instead selected from thousandsof people’s own MP3 tracks, or from an even biggerlibrary ready to stream courtesy of programmes such asSpotify.

There is no doubt that the market is changing, andalthough radio still plays a central role in that, andindeed remains the most personal of media, in somecases people are moving from analogue to digital—whetheror not to digital audio broadcasting—to listening onlineor through smartphone apps. Understandably, that hasleft small local stations such as Mix 96 feeling worried.

Mr Henry Bellingham (North West Norfolk) (Con): Iam delighted that my right hon. Friend has secured thisdebate. Is she aware of the local radio station, KLFM,in my constituency that has been doing a phenomenaljob? It is the local radio station to listen to across myconstituency in factories and places of work. Does sheagree that these changes should be consumer-led, andthat there should be an independent analysis of thecost?

Mrs Gillan: My hon. Friend makes a pertinent point,and I will come to that later in my speech. I am glad towelcome the Minister for Europe, my right hon. Friendthe Member for Aylesbury (Mr Lidington) to the FrontBench. His constituency is within the footprint of Mix96 and he is keen to support this debate.

For a national station, the cost of broadcasting inDAB need not be very different from broadcastingin analogue. For a small local station, however, with asingle FM transmitter, the cost of broadcasting on alocal DAB multiplex with half a dozen transmitterscould well be unaffordable, especially while it is still alsopaying to broadcast on FM. If small stations made thatleap to DAB, they would invariably find that they werepaying for coverage far greater than they had on FM,whether they wanted it or not. DAB is fundamentally

517 51828 NOVEMBER 2013G8 Summit on Dementia

[Mrs Gillan]

the wrong platform for genuinely local radio stationssuch as Mix 96, which is a hugely popular and commerciallysuccessful station. The geographical areas that DABmultiplexes cover are significantly greater—often twoto 10 times greater—than those areas covered by manylocal FM-operated stations.

Tim Loughton (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Con):I would be grateful if I could join the queue to plug alocal radio station. Splash FM serves the Worthing partof the coastal area, and the point my right hon. Friendhas made about increasing geographical coverage wouldmean that it would pay a lot of money to broadcast tothe sea, or perhaps to France. That is of no benefit tomy constituents or local people who want the excellentlocal news and entertainment that local radio stationssuch as Splash FM provide.

Mrs Gillan: I am glad my hon. Friend had theopportunity to intervene, and I hope that several othercolleagues will do so because they feel so passionatelyabout the issue. Sadly, I am old enough to rememberRadio Caroline, when broadcasting to the sea was animportant part of building the culture of listening tothe radio. We take my hon. Friend’s point, however,because from the perspective of Splash FM, that moneywould effectively be wasted.

As hon. Members know, the role played by localradio stations is a considerable one. As things stand, theGovernment are forcing many of them to change theireditorial areas out of all recognition. It strikes me thatforcing a breaking of that editorial link between thelocal community and its radio station flies in the face ofthe Government’s localism and big society agenda.

Julian Sturdy (York Outer) (Con): I congratulate myhon. Friend on introducing this important debate. Asshe rightly says, independent radio stations such as MinsterFM play an important role in our local communities.We need that platform to allow local community radiostations to continue, because it must be about listenerchoice.

Mrs Gillan: I agree entirely with my hon. Friend.That an Adjournment debate at 5 o’clock on a Thursdayafternoon has attracted so many hon. Members, when,to be fair, most of our colleagues will be in their carslistening to their radio stations, is a measure of howpopular such stations are.

Sarah Newton (Truro and Falmouth) (Con): My hon.Friend is making an excellent case. She is right thatmany of our colleagues would like to be here to contributebut cannot because they are driving to their constituencies.Does she agree that it would be great if the Ministercould agree to meet a wider group of colleagues whowould like to stick up for stations such as—

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture,Media and Sport (Mr Edward Vaizey): Name your station!

Sarah Newton: Pirate FM.

Mrs Gillan: The Minister’s sedentary intervention tochallenge my hon. Friend to name her station meansthat he is not entirely unaware of the commercial

opportunities presented by the debate. It is a shame thatmore of our colleagues cannot take advantage of it,but, sadly, such debates come at the end of the day inthe House. The fact that it is taking place at drive timebecause we finish so early on a Thursday is a happyoccurrence.

Mrs Sharon Hodgson (Washington and SunderlandWest) (Lab): The right hon. Lady mentions drive time.Sun FM in Sunderland, my local radio station, givesout the best traffic and travel news. Local stationsprovide another service during bad weather: they let usknow whether our schools will be open or closed. Thatinformation will be unavailable from national radiostations.

Mrs Gillan: I agree entirely with the hon. Lady. Weare coming up to the winter months. That service isinvaluable. As my right hon. Friend the Member forAylesbury will attest, for parents taking children toschools in Buckinghamshire, knowing when schools areopen or closed is an essential service.

Andrew Bingham (High Peak) (Con): I do not wish tobuck the trend. My local radio station, High PeakRadio, is vital for such information, particularly aswinter approaches. We do not have a digital signal inthe High Peak—I could go on at great length about thatto the Minister. If people move to DAB, FM will beforgotten. It will still be there, but people will have theirradios on DAB and not flick back to FM to listen totheir local station, and local stations will be starved out,because radios do not have remote controls for channelflicking like televisions do.

Mrs Gillan: My hon. Friend makes a good point. TheMinister should take on board the fact that, so far,DAB has not been designed with small stations andtheir communities in mind.

Iain Stewart (Milton Keynes South) (Con): I am notsure whether my right hon. Friend can pick up MKFMin her part of Buckinghamshire. Despite its name, itbroadcasts on DAB. It is an excellent local communitystation that aspires to broadcast on FM. I hope that theMinister is able to give some clarity on the timetable fordigital switchover, so that stations such as MKFM canplan for the future with certainty.

Mrs Gillan: I was pleased that, early this year, theMinister provided certainty to some small stations bylisting those that would be permitted to stay on FM.That removes any requirement for those stations to payto broadcast on FM and DAB, but a cost-effectivedigital solution for small stations still needs to be identified.Otherwise, the stations hon. Members have mentionedcould face extinction, because advertisers might, atsome point, believe that it is not worth paying to reachthose who continue to listen to FM stations.

Eric Ollerenshaw (Lancaster and Fleetwood) (Con): Icongratulate my right hon. Friend on securing the debate.Given the size of my constituency, I have two localradio stations to plug: The Bay covers Morecambe bayand Radio Wave in Fleetwood covers the Fylde coast.What happened to the Conservative principle of

519 52028 NOVEMBER 2013Mix 96 (Digital Radio Switchover) Mix 96 (Digital Radio Switchover)

gradualism? Why this sudden move when, as I understandit, only 15% of radios are digital and the market hasgone down recently?

Mrs Gillan: We can always prove everything withstatistics, but that statistic—that the rate of purchase ofdigital radios has decreased—was certainly put to meand there is no doubt about that. At the same time, Iwant to acknowledge how advanced the good companiesare that provide digital technology services: I think thatthere are British components in 45% of digital broadcastingdevices around the world. However, the hon. Gentlemanis right.

Even while FM remains commercially viable, there isa worrying lack of certainty from Ofcom on how longthose stations’ analogue licences would last. It is widelyexpected that the Minister will soon confirm—I have noidea whether he will—the switchover to digital radio,but he needs to address seriously the concerns of ourlocal stations. Although they will not be required toupgrade from FM to DAB, they need a cost-effectiveoption to do so when the time is right for them.

A private company, with the blessing of Ofcom, ran arecent trial on a proposed DAB solution for smallstations, but that did not provide a proven solution forlocal broadcasters such as Mix 96. I hope, therefore,that the Minister is not going to rely on that example tobolster his case. Perhaps he could encourage Ofcom tofund further trials as soon as possible, as I understandthat there are frequency, software, regulatory and signaldelivery issues that make the solution from that trial apoor and inadequate replacement.

The Minister should ask Ofcom to provide smallstations with greater certainty regarding the duration oftheir FM licences. If the Minister can assuage theconcerns of small stations such as Mix 96 and say thatthere will be a cost-effective place for them in radio’sdigital future, he can provide the certainty on digitalradio switchover that the industry as a whole is lookingfor. It is important that the transition to digital is, as myhon. Friend the Member for East Worthing and Shoreham(Tim Loughton) said, consumer-led and carefully managed.If it is mishandled by his Department, he will incur theanger of consumers who will suddenly find that theywill have to find hundreds of pounds to upgrade theircar radios and household sets simply to listen to theradio.

Two out of three radios purchased in the UK todayare not DAB and less than 10% of vehicles have a DABradio. As 21% of radio listening happens in cars, and, asit stands, DAB is not available even on smartphones ormobile phones in the UK, a lot of people would beaffected by the plans as presently proposed. As it is, Iunderstand that the Minister receives more complaintsabout DAB radio than anything else, while the existingFM radio transmission system achieves 99% UK populationcoverage and is both robust and cost effective. I understandthat there is no proposed alternative use for the FMradio spectrum. There is, therefore, no digital dividendto be gained by the Government. I hope the Ministerwill address that point.

I want to make it clear that this is not about cancellingthe digital programme for radio; it is about finding asolution that protects and accommodates our smalllocal radio stations. Many more points could be made,but I hope that the Minister now has the flavour of a

widespread problem and will respond with positivenews for Splash FM, Minster FM, KLFM, Sun FM,Pirate FM, High Peak Radio, MKFM, The Bay, RadioWave—I hope I have not missed anybody’s radio station—and our very own Mix 96 and all their loyal listeners,our constituents and all my colleagues who have comehere today to represent similar views from around thecountry. I look forward to hearing what the Ministerhas to say.

5.14 pm

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture,Media and Sport (Mr Edward Vaizey): I am grateful forthe chance to respond to my right hon. Friend theMember for Chesham and Amersham (Mrs Gillan). Itis good to see you in the Chair, Mr Speaker, given yourstrong interest in Mix 96, and as we are debating adigital subject, I hope you will not take it amiss if I sayhow brilliant your speech was yesterday to the HansardSociety in your approach to digital politics in the21st century. I also welcome to the Front Bench theMinister for Europe, my right hon. Friend the Memberfor Aylesbury (Mr Lidington), who also represents Mix 96.Sadly, he must remain silent, but I suspect, were he ableto speak, he would echo many of the views of my righthon. Friend the Member for Chesham and Amersham.

I thank others who have contributed: my hon. Friendthe Member for York Outer (Julian Sturdy),representingMinster FM; my hon. Friend the Member for NorthWest Norfolk (Mr Bellingham), representing KLFM;my hon. Friend the Member for East Worthing andShoreham (Tim Loughton), representing Splash FM;my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth(Sarah Newton), representing Pirate FM; the hon. Memberfor Washington and Sunderland West (Mrs Hodgson),representing Sun FM; my hon. Friend the Member forHigh Peak (Andrew Bingham), representing High Peakradio; my hon. Friend the Member for Milton KeynesSouth (Iain Stewart), representing MKFM; and myhon. Friend the Member for Lancaster and Fleetwood(Eric Ollerenshaw), representing The Bay and RadioWave; and me, representing Jack FM.

I am delighted to be here talking about this subject.Whenever we debate local newspapers, hon. Membersget a chance to plug theirs, and I suspect that thisdebate will be played on local radio stations up anddown the land. I think, however, that my right hon.Friend slightly missed a trick. I thought she was goingto suggest that we scrap High Speed 2 and spend all themoney on rolling out digital radio, but I am pleased—

Mrs Gillan rose—

Mr Vaizey: Wait, the joke’s coming. I am pleased thatI am not the Minister for HS2, because I found my righthon. Friend’s argument on digital radio so persuasivethat were I that Minister, I would probably collapse inthe face of this Adjournment debate.

Mrs Gillan: I encourage the Minister for Europe,my right hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury(Mr Lidington), not to remain silent on the subject ofHS2, but to inform the Minister of our views inBuckinghamshire about that particular project.Nevertheless, I thank my hon. Friend for his courtesyand for taking this matter very seriously, because theseradio stations are close to all our hearts.


Mr Vaizey: And let me continue in that vein bymentioning another silent hon. Friend, our Whip, whorepresents Spike FM.

Claire Perry (Devizes) (Con): Spire FM.

Mr Vaizey: I am so sorry. Her writing is appalling,Mr Speaker.

Tracey Crouch (Chatham and Aylesford) (Con): TheMinister briefly mentioned local newspapers, and Iwould like to add that KMFM, run by the Kent MessengerGroup, is incredibly concerned about these proposals,not least with its relationships with advertisers andcommercial interests being as difficult as they are.

Mr Vaizey: The point is taken.I take this issue very seriously, being a passionate

radio listener myself. We have 1 billion hours of radiolistening a week, and it was clear to me when I becameMinister that people took their radio listening veryseriously; they are passionate about it. The last Governmentleft us with an intent to get to radio switchover, but noplan to reach it. The key criterion was that digitalradio’s share of the listening figures should be at least50% before we set out the timetable for switchover. Imade it clear in my first speech on this subject asMinister that I would be led by the consumer, and thatis what I mean when I say I agree with the critique ofdigital radio by my right hon. Friend the Member forChesham and Amersham. I will do nothing on switchoverunless I am bringing radio listeners with me.

To get to a stage where we can consider switchover,we have put together a digital radio action plan, ably ledby Digital Radio UK and its superb chief executive,Ford Ennals, and his team, including, in particular, JaneOstler and Laurence Harrison. Substantial progress hasbeen made. I note what my right hon. Friend said aboutwanting not to scrap digital radio, but to support itsroll-out, while also securing a future for local radiostations. I will come to local radio in a moment, but firstI will update her on our progress.

We have taken local radio coverage, be it for localBBC stations or commercial stations, to about 72% andnational coverage—effectively BBC radio stations 1 to5—up to 94%, and this year we launched commercialradio digital services in Northern Ireland. Furthermore,roughly half of all new cars, which are vital to this, havedigital installed as standard, and in the last year almost900,000 cars sold had digital radio in them.

This is a good news story for the UK economy, too.We account for about 50% of the global digital radiomarket. That means real opportunities for British businessessuch as Roberts, Revo and Pure—in Kings Langley, notfar from my right hon. Friend’s constituency.

It is worth pointing out that we are not alone, and theMinister for Europe will take an interest in what I haveto say. Norway and Denmark have already set dates forswitchover—2017 and 2019 respectively—and there hasbeen more progress following the launch of nationaldigital services in Germany in 2011 and the Netherlandsthis year, which has a target switchover date of 2023.Other European markets, including Italy, France, Poland,Sweden, Austria and the Czech Republic are also lookinginto it. Digital radio is now reaching the Asia Pacificregion, where Australia is taking a lead and DABpenetration has already reached 16%.

Andrew Bingham: As chairman of the all-party groupon commercial radio, I am greatly interested in thisdebate and to hear about digital radio being extendedto all the good burghers of Europe, but I would like tomake a plea to have it in High Peak, which has verylittle in the way of a digital radio signal at all.

Mr Vaizey: That brings me neatly on to my nextpoint. I am due to make a major speech about thefuture of digital radio in the middle of December, whenI hope to address particular concerns about coverage.Let me repeat, however, that when it comes to thetimetable and the setting of dates, we have always beenclear that these will be led by the radio listener. Therewill be no switchover until the majority of listening isdigital. It is clear that we are not there yet, and it willcertainly not happen within the time frame that concernsmy right hon. Friend. While good progress has beenmade, with the number of adults with access to a DABdigital radio up 10% year on year and places likeLondon reaching 40%, we need to make more progress.

Let me deal with what my right hon. Friend saidabout Mix 96 and what other hon. Members have saidabout their own local commercial and community stations.I am a huge fan of local commercial and communityradio. In fact, community radio was brought into beingby the last Government; I think it has been a massivesuccess story, as are independent local radio stations.Ofcom’s research shows that local radio still holds valuefor listeners: it is important and valued. Although somemeasures have allowed greater networking between localradio stations, we still require local programming bothat peak time and outside it. Mix 96 is part of the largerradio group. In fact, it is listed as one of the100 bestcompanies to work for by The Sunday Times. Its concernsare well known to us, and they come not just fromUKRD, but from UTV and others.

As for securing a digital future for local commercialand community stations, let me first make it clear thatwe have never said that we require small stations to goover to digital. We have always said that if and whenthere is a switchover, we would maintain their presenceon FM. It is also true that FM can work in tandem withDAB, as AM has with FM for many years. Many of themanufacturers of DAB radios have agreed a minimumspecification, which includes FM. However, I take onboard the point—I think it was made by my hon.Friend the Member for High Peak (Andrew Bingham),who talked about remote-controlled radios—that evenwhere we have an FM-DAB station, switching betweenFM and DAB can be complicated. We are going to seemore sets that switch seamlessly as the FM and DABbuttons are pressed, but that does not mean that we donot have to look for a potential solution for localcommercial radio to get on to DAB at a cost it canafford.

Mrs Hodgson: The Minister mentioned that about50% of new cars have DAB digital radios fitted asstandard. Is he aware, however, that the figure for carscurrently on the road is only about 5%? Irrespective ofwhether the facility for switching between DAB andFM happens, it would not help any of the cars currentlyon the road.

Mr Vaizey: I totally understand the hon. Lady’s point.First, as the timetable moves towards full coverage ofdigital radio, we will see what is known as the car park


being refreshed over a number of years. It is also thecase that the ability to convert an FM radio in a carwith a digital converter is becoming much easier andcheaper. Technology will have a solution, but I take herpoint.

Let me say something about the business of transferringcommunity and local commercial radio to DAB. I saidto my officials, and to Ofcom, that I wanted to find acost-effective route to digital broadcasting for our localstations. Ofcom has made progress—to which my righthon. Friend alluded, although she rightly pointed outthat this was an early initiative and that more workneeded to be done. It has developed a new approach tosmall-scale, low-power digital transmission, using open-source software which makes it possible to get on to thelocal multiplex using an existing FM antenna. Thatapproach was developed initially by Rashid Mustapha,an engineer working at Ofcom, and it must be a brilliantsolution, because I do not normally have an opportunityto name people who work at Ofcom during a debate. Ithas been tested in Brighton with the support of DanielNathan of Juice FM. The initial results are promising,and I hope that smaller stations that are enthusiasticabout digital will get behind the work.

Mrs Gillan: As the Minister knows, we now use newtechnology even in the Chamber. I have just received atweet which says:

“Please mention community radio who have no chance ofaffording digital transmission costs…never mind the listener.”

Perhaps the Minister could take up that point.

Mr Vaizey: This is almost unheard of, but I have leftmy mobile phone in my office, so I have not been able tokeep up with those who have been tweeting on thedebate. However, I advise the tweeter who tweeted touse a piece of old technology called the ear to listen towhat I have to say.

I have already mentioned community radio abouteight times today. I have said again and again that I ama fan of both community and local independent commercialradio. It is incredibly difficult to run a successful localindependent radio station. The people who run themare not rolling in money, or printing money; even those

who run local commercial stations are almost running acommunity service. I met a man who runs one of thosestations in Manchester, and he said that he found ittough going. I recently visited a community radio stationin Swindon, which is supported by hundreds of volunteersand which makes a huge and vital contribution to thecommunity there. I give equal weight to communityradio and local commercial radio in my search for asolution.The key is the FM antenna, which those radiostations will have because they broadcast on FM, alongwith the ability to use software to convert it to a digitalantenna.

I have taken the debate at a gallop because I was notsure whether I would have enough time both to get myjokes in and to respond to the points made by my righthon. Friend. Let me now take up the offer from my hon.Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth. If themeeting that she proposes will be as good-natured andwell informed as this debate, I relish the prospect. Wemight even find time to meet—along with Members inall parts of the House, I should add—on a Friday, whenthe House is debating European matters.

I am a fan of digital radio, and I think that it is thefuture, but my criteria have always been about coverage.We want digital radio to have the same coverage as FM.This is about the consumer, otherwise known as theradio listener. I want to bring the listeners with us, sothat they will effectively have converted themselves todigital radio. That means cheap digital radios, whichare now on the market. It means cheap car conversions,which are becoming cheaper all the time. It meansdigital radios being fitted as standard in new cars. Itmeans good content, like that of Radio 6 Music, thefirst digital radio station to reach more than 1 millionlisteners. Those are our criteria.

We will not be pushed into a switchover date; we willnot get ahead of the radio listener; and we will continueto listen to well-informed, passionate colleagues such asmy right hon. Friend, to whom I am grateful for callingthis excellent debate.


5.29 pmHouse adjourned.


Westminster Hall


[MR GRAHAM BRADY in the Chair]

BACKBENCH BUSINESS

Mental Health (Police Procedures)Motion made, and Question proposed, That the sitting

be now adjourned.—(Anne Milton.)

1.30 pm

Mrs Madeleine Moon (Bridgend) (Lab): I look forwardto this debate under your excellent chairmanship, Mr Brady.I thank the Backbench Business Committee for findingthe time for this debate on a most important subject andI am pleased to see the interest shown by the turnouthere today.

The poor quality of life and of the services availableto people struggling to live with mental ill health hasbeen the subject of previous debates in the House. Thisdebate relates to police involvement with people withmental ill health, particularly during times of mentalhealth crisis. Mental health crisis, as defined by theRoyal College of Psychiatrists, is“when the mind is at melting point”.

It may involve an immediate risk of self-harm or suicide,extreme anxiety, panic attacks or a psychotic episode.How we treat the most vulnerable in society lies at theheart of our values. We made a decision not to hideaway the sick and disabled, as we had hidden them awayin the past in asylums and institutions, but we still havea long way to go in granting them equal status in societyand equal access to justice.

The Mind report “At risk, yet dismissed” shows thatthose who suffer from mental ill health are three timesmore likely to be victims of crime. Shockingly, 50% ofpeople with some form of mental ill health have experienceda crime in the past year, and severely ill women withmental ill health are 10 times more likely to have beenassaulted. Crimes are less likely to be reported andprosecuted, because people with mental ill health fearbeing dismissed or disbelieved. Sadly, the evidence showsthat more often than not they are. How does the Ministerplan to improve police understanding of mental illhealth and ensure more accurate recording of suchcrimes, and will he give a commitment to greaterinvestigation and prosecution for such offences?

Another reason for not reporting is fear of policepowers in relation to mental ill health. Too often, between5 pm and 9 am during the week, at weekends and onbank holidays, police officers are the only first respondersavailable in a mental health crisis, despite the fact thatthey lack the medical knowledge, skills and training toresolve and manage the crisis. They respond not becausethere is a real and immediate threat to members of thepublic, but because mental health services are understaffed,under-resourced and overstretched, and lack facilities.

For example, Miss P, who is 23 and a size 8, is a sweet,loving young girl who has suffered mental ill health formost of her life. She finds it difficult to build relationships

and she is lousy at keeping appointments. She does notdrink alcohol, except when she is in mental health crisis,and when she does, she turns into a violent and abusiveperson. Local mental health services concede that sheneeds a specialist placement, but they cannot find one.In the past five years, police have been called to 130 incidentsand attended court to give evidence for 81 offences,resulting in 18 terms of imprisonment. The gaps betweenher prison sentences are becoming briefer—days, notweeks—and her self-harming and suicide attempts areescalating. The cost to that young girl, her family, thepolice, the courts, the probation service and the PrisonService is huge. I am told that it approaches £1 million,all for one young girl.

When the Minister sums up, I hope he will addressthis critical question: how much longer will we expectour police services to process vulnerable people throughthe criminal justice system due to mental health,underfunding and failures?

Keith Vaz (Leicester East) (Lab): I congratulate myhon. Friend, the hon. Member for Halesowen andRowley Regis (James Morris) and the right hon. Memberfor Sutton and Cheam (Paul Burstow) on securing thisdebate. My hon. Friend will be pleased to know that, asa result of the work done by her and others, the SelectCommittee on Home Affairs will be looking into thisissue, with a possible report next summer.

Will my hon. Friend comment on the study byNottingham university, published in May this year,which shows that 56% of custody officers suffer fromdepression and anxiety? It is not just the victims ofcrime, but the officers themselves. Is it not right that thenew College of Policing should carefully consider theissue of training?

Mrs Moon: As always, my right hon. Friend makesexcellent information available to the House. I am delightedto hear of the study to be made next year by hisCommittee, which is highly regarded across the House.He is right to focus on mental ill health among police. Itis little surprise, given the amount and range of incidentswith which we require them to deal. That is why wemust ensure that the police are called to attend onlyincidents that they can deal with and that they have theskills and capability to manage, so they do not go homeat the end of their shift feeling guilty and bereft aboutan incident that they may perceive they dealt with badly.My right hon. Friend made a most helpful intervention,and I thank him.

The Centre for Mental Health states that police arethe first point of contact for a person in mental healthcrisis and that up to 15% of police incidents have amental health dimension. Other people have told methat mental health interventions occupy up to 30% ofpolice time. The Royal College of Psychiatrists recognisesthat in some areas police cells are the routine place ofsafety, under section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983,when a mental health crisis requires urgent assessmentand management. Many of those detained come fromsocially deprived backgrounds, and some black andminority ethnic groups are over-represented.

The Royal College reports considerable geographicvariation in the use of police cells. During 2012-13, fivepolice areas recorded more than 500 uses of police-basedsection 136 places of safety, while four areas recorded

139WH 140WH28 NOVEMBER 2013 Mental Health (Police Procedures)

[Mrs Moon]

10 or fewer uses, and one had zero. The difference wasthat the latter areas had better health-based servicesand facilities. Will the Minister undertake to talk withthe Department of Health about the urgent need forcommissioning boards to provide an adequate numberof staffed health-based places of safety in every part ofthe country? At present, 36% of all places of safetyunder section 136 are thought to involve police custody.In 2011-12, an estimated 8,000 to 11,000 orders weremade, with 347 involving under-18s. Will the Ministerensure that accurate figures on how often and in whatcircumstances police officers are called to deal withmental health crises are available, so that we can get aclear picture of the problem?

People held by police under section 136 are, as I havesaid, the most acutely vulnerable. One study found thatin 81% of cases involving police-based places of safety,the person was self-harming or suicidal. The IndependentPolice Complaints Commission found that 35% of deathsin police custody involve people with mental ill health.Alarming reports from Inquest show that a number ofthose deaths are linked to police restraint techniques,and that 65 people took their lives within two days ofleaving a police place of safety. Between 20% and30% of people held on section 136 detentions in policecells were subsequently sectioned.

The impact on time and costs associated with policeengagement in mental ill health has never been calculatedaccurately, but it is clear that, in a variety of ways,health service costs are being passed to the police services.It is common for police officers taking people in mentalhealth crisis to accident and emergency or medical-basedplaces of safety for an assessment to be told, “There’sno bed available”, “The person is too drunk”, “Theyare under the influence of drugs”, “They are aggressive”,“They are a child”, or, “They have a learning disability”,all of which condemn that person in crisis to a night inpolice custody. How much longer can we allow theseinformal exclusion criteria around drugs, alcohol,aggression, children and learning disabilities to continue?

Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab): My hon. Friendis making all the points that are in my notes—althoughI was intending not to speak in the debate, but merely tointervene. That is exactly what local police officers havesaid to me. They feel uncomfortable about the policehaving to perform that role and becoming the place ofsafety of last resort. Several parents of adult sons whocan be difficult and dangerous have come to me. Theyare reluctant to call for help when they feel that they areunder threat or that their son may threaten other people,because they do not want them to be in the policesystem—they do not want to criminalise them—but they know that there is nowhere else they can referthem to.

Mrs Moon: I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention.She makes an excellent case for ensuring that crisisintervention teams are available with the skills andcapability to understand and manage mental healthproblems. These are not the skills that we provide ourpolice officers with; this is the skills base that we provideour mental health nursing professionals with, which iswhy specialist crisis teams in mental health servicesmust be expanded and made generally available.

Places of safety in bridewells remove police stafffrom the front line, as they supervise and monitorvulnerable, at-risk individuals and arrange mental healthassessments. The Health and Social Care InformationCentre found that, even where a place of safety washealth based, in 74% of cases transportation was providedby police, not the ambulance service. The police wereproviding an ambulance/taxi service.

More than 40,500 patients absconded from mentalhealth units in the past five years. Again, police officersare expected to find and return these individuals, evenwhen they pose no risk to wider society. Then there arecalls to respond to understaffed mental health unitswhere a patient’s behaviour is deemed to be unmanageable.These are not tasks for police officers. To quote thePolice Federation:

“Police officers should not be called to mental health premisesto assist in the restraint of aggressive/violent patients. Mentalhealth professionals are trained in the control and restraint ofmentally ill patients and have powers to sedate them, whereaspolice officers are trained to subdue, restrain and arrest violentpeople.”

Inquest, Mind and others have highlighted the risks ofpolice restraint, as opposed to mental health restrainttechniques. I welcome the Royal College of Nursingstudy into restraint techniques. I also welcome the ninepilot street triage schemes operating across the 43 policeforces where mental health nurses are either availablewith police officers responding or available to consult.The schemes are making a huge difference, but wecannot wait until 2015 for them to be assessed andreviewed before we put them in place across the publicsphere.

We need suitably staffed hospital places of safety inall areas, catering for all age groups and available 24 hoursa day, so that police stations are used only in exceptionalcircumstances. We also need section 136 to be used lessby better, improved mental health services generally—however, I want to focus on removing the police fromthe equation. We need accurate data—a point I havealready raised with the Minister—on the use of section136 in the police service. The report from the independentcommission on mental health and policing states:

“We need to ensure the culture within policing is one thatrecognises their role in supporting people in crisis and theirresponsibilities under the Mental Health Act.”

There needs to be a higher level of training and awarenessfor police officers. The online training that is currentlyavailable is just not good enough. Some forces haveteamed up with community groups, local health trustsand universities, working with mental health patients,to improve their operation. Best practice from thesegroups needs to be shared and expanded.

The Association of Chief Police Officers lead onmental health says:

“There should be a reduction from 72 to 24 hour detentiontime…for a”

section 136“assessment to take place when a police place of safety is utilised…72 hours should remain for health based”

assessment. The 24-hour period would“reflect the detention time limits in the Police and CriminalEvidence Act 1984…To support this, a statutory time limit forassessments to be undertaken by all health professionals”

for those

141WH 142WH28 NOVEMBER 2013Mental Health (Police Procedures) Mental Health (Police Procedures)

“in police custody should be put in place. The Pace clock shouldbe stopped for 4 hours while assessments are carried out wherethere are criminal offences to be faced”,

so that police are not restricted in the time that theyhave to cross-examine someone. I am confident that Ireflect the feeling in this Chamber and the wider Housetoday. No one would be turned away from an A and Edepartment if they had had a stroke, broken a limb, ifthey had had alcohol or were aggressive. We cannot letmental health services operate to different criteria.

I want briefly to focus on what is a growing area. Weneed to be sure that we have clear guidance and responsesin place for the 800,000 people in the UK diagnosedwith dementia. A 91-year-old man suffering with psychoticdementia was living at home with the support of hisfamily and the mental health team. One evening, aneighbour called the family to say he was wandering thestreet looking for his wife, who had died six yearspreviously. His son went immediately to his father andat around 9 pm called the out-of-hours health servicefor advice. The doctor took the details and asked whetherthe son wanted to bring his father to the hospital orwhether he wanted the doctor to visit the house, but theson said, “No, it’s okay. I’m on top of things. Dad’sokay. I’ve given him a cup of tea and he’s heading forbed.” By 11.30 pm the gentleman was in bed, fast asleepand his son went home.

At 2.30 am, the family had another call from theneighbour, saying, “The police are breaking into yourdad’s house.” Why? Because the out-of-hours doctordecided to watch his back and had sent an ambulance,but it did not arrive till three hours after he called it.The man was fast asleep and the ambulance crew feltthey had to get a response, so they called out the police.The police climbed on to the ledge over the front door,looked in and saw the man in bed, fast asleep and said,“He’s fast asleep”. The ambulance crew said, “No, wemust see him.” The police broke in, terrifying the man,who was greatly distressed—as can be imagined—sothey took him to A and E, because they could nothandle the situation. That is an appalling situation. Thefamily tried ringing the ambulance service and thepolice, saying, “Leave him alone. He’s fine,” but theycarried on. He was highly distressed when he got to thehospital, and thought he had done something wrongand felt that he was the criminal. This was an appallingcase.

There are good ideas and good practice for whenpeople are missing, for example, or have wandered,including using taxi drivers, Citizens Advice andneighbourhood watch to look out for individuals. Policeofficers need clear guidance on how not to exacerbate asituation by going in, in uniform, and frightening peoplewho are wandering.

We have lost 15,000 police officers in the last threeyears. The police must prioritise tackling crime, ensuringpublic safety and upholding the law. It is not the task ofpolice services to fill gaps in an overstretched mentalhealth service. We need to consider how to respond tothe most vulnerable in society. The police must buildtheir partnerships with agencies and organisations bestequipped to provide appropriate help and support. Ilook forward to colleagues’ contributions to the debate,to the Minister’s and the shadow Minister’s responses,and to improved quality of services for those in mentalhealth crisis.

1.49 pm

James Morris (Halesowen and Rowley Regis) (Con):It is a great pleasure to speak in this important debateunder your chairmanship, Mr Brady.

I thank the Backbench Business Committee, the hon.Member for Bridgend (Mrs Moon) and my right hon.Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Burstow).The three of us came together to secure this debate. Ialso speak in my capacity as chairman of the all-partygroup on mental health.

As the hon. Member for Bridgend said, the police areoften on the front line in dealing with people who aresuffering a mental health crisis. As she mentioned, it isestimated that up to 40% of police activity is related tomental health issues. In my region of the west midlands,West Midlands police estimates that 20% of all incidentsthat it deals with involve individuals with mental healthproblems.

Police officers are often asked to deal with complexand challenging situations on the ground. As the hon.Lady pointed out, they have specific powers undersection 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983, and it mightbe worth dwelling on that section’s specific wording:

“If a constable finds in a place to which the public have accessa person who appears to him to be suffering from mental disorderand to be in immediate need of care or control, the constable may,if he thinks it necessary to do so in the interests of that person orfor the protection of other persons, remove that person to a placeof safety within the meaning of section 135 above.”

The latest figures show that some 21,814 people weredetained using section 136 powers last year. As theRoyal College of Psychiatrists has pointed out—thehon. Lady mentioned this—far too many of thoseindividuals are still detained in police custody suites.The Royal College of Psychiatrists talks about 36% ofthose people being detained in police cells, which areessentially a proxy for a health care place of safety.

There were 15 deaths in police custody last year, ofwhich seven could be attributed to, or were related to,specific mental health concerns. A number of the deathsfollowed the use of the police’s section 136 powers. Anumber of the deaths are currently being investigated.

Section 136 is part of the 1983 Act, which built on theMental Health Act 1959. In 1959, there were still aconsiderable number of asylums in Britain; the wholecomplexion of our approach to mental health care wascompletely different from today’s. Thankfully, we do nothave asylums and we are making huge efforts to treatpeople in appropriate settings and in the community.

The reason for section 136 is essentially to give thepolice powers when someone has absconded from anasylum-based setting. There is a strong argument, whichI put to the Minister, that we should consider reviewingthe section 136 power in the context of how we approachthe treatment of crisis care in mental-health settings inthe 21st century. I am not saying that the police shouldnot have the power, in certain circumstances, to detainpeople, but we should have a full review of how thatpower is used.

The relationship raises a number of important issues,not just about how the police are using the power butabout how they interact with the health service whendealing with people detained under section 136. Asthe hon. Lady said, we should work towards ensuringthat places of safety are located in appropriate healthcare settings.


[James Morris]

As the hon. Lady also said, we must ensure that thepolice have adequate training to deal with the oftendifficult and challenging situations that they face. Howeverwe reform the system, there will always be circumstancesin which the police have to deal with people sufferingfrom severe mental anguish and difficulty. The policeneed the appropriate intensive training necessary todeal with such difficult and challenging circumstances,but it is also true that other agencies and public bodies,such as the national health service and the ambulanceservice, have a responsibility to work with the police. Wemust ensure that all those agencies are working inalignment.

In the west midlands, for example, West Midlandspolice has developed a good working relationship withthe West Midlands ambulance service such that, whenWest Midlands police is dealing with people sufferingfrom severe mental issues under section 136, an ambulance,rather than a police car, should take that person to aplace of safety, thereby not creating the context ofcriminalisation. There is a good working relationship inmy area, but I know there are many examples across thecountry of where that is not the case and of where thereare barriers that prevent such important co-ordinatedworking, which supports people who are suffering fromsevere mental health crisis.

Michael Brown is a particularly interesting policeinspector in the west midlands; he tweets under thename MentalHealthCop. He has been writing on hisaward-winning blog about some of the police’s difficultieswhen interacting with the national health service andabout some of the blockages in the system. As the hon.Lady pointed out, one of those difficulties is often thereluctance of local NHS staff, particularly in A and E,to play a role in the section 136 pathway, if I may usethat phrase. Staff are reluctant to take responsibility,and there are often confused lines of responsibilitybetween the police and the NHS about who will takeresponsibility for the care of an individual.

The hon. Lady alluded to the assumption in certainparts of the NHS that the most clinically complexpatients, who are often suffering from a mental healthproblem related to the overuse of drugs and alcohol,should somehow be left in a police cell until they soberup or recover. That situation is not acceptable in anycircumstances—no one suffering from a complex mentalhealth condition should normally be placed in policecells.

Police cells are simply not the right environment forsuch people to end up in. I am not saying that there areno circumstances in which such a person should be heldin police cells—there may be particular circumstancesin which they should—but we should move to a situationin which we do not, in a civilised and compassionatesociety, house people in police cells when they aresuffering some of the most desperate moments intheir life.

Like the hon. Lady, I welcome the street triage pilotsthat the Government have been running across thecountry. Police and community psychiatric nurses areworking together to resolve issues on the ground, and Ilook forward to the Minister’s view on how those pilotshave been working and when we can expect a coherentevaluation of their success. We need to move quickly toroll out those pilots across the country.

There is a broader point on our approach to mentalhealth crisis care in general. This is ongoing work aboutwhich many Members are concerned, but we mustensure that there is better integration between the healthservice, the police and local crisis care teams, often withthe involvement of social services. I understand that theGovernment are working on a crisis care concordat,which will outline the roles and responsibilities of allagencies in relation to crisis care. One way of reducingthe police’s use of section 136 is to ensure that we have acoherent and integrated approach to dealing with mentalhealth crisis care in Britain. We need to tackle theproblem head on. The Royal College of Psychiatristshas said that we“need to focus on reducing the need for section 136 by ensuringthat patients, their families have ready access to appropriate andtimely crisis care.”

I want to dwell for a moment on the role of policeand crime commissioners. Although they have come infor some criticism, some incredibly good work has beendone on this issue by PCCs over the past few months. InStaffordshire, the PCC has been able to take a strategicview of the relationship between the police and localhealth services and has put in place processes to starttackling the problems.

We need suitably staffed hospital-based places ofsafety. That is an absolutely critical and crucial part ofthe picture. A police station should be used in exceptionalcircumstances only. I ask the Minister to consider reviewingthe section 136 powers and updating the definition ofan appropriate place of safety, which is set out in the1983 Act.

I want to mention a particular case that is tangentiallyrelated to today’s debate and illustrates the importanceof all agencies—police, probation, social services andprisons—in dealing with mental health. Members mayremember the tragic case of Christina Edkins, who wasbrutally killed on her way to school from Birminghamto Halesowen earlier this year. It was a particularlytragic and brutal killing, which shocked the wholecommunity in my constituency.

It turns out that the killer, Phillip Simelane, who hadbeen in prison several times and had a history of disturbedand violent behaviour, had been given a psychiatricassessment in prison. That assessment had raised someserious issues about his mental condition, but, followinga breakdown in the process, when Simelane was releasedfrom prison he somehow got lost in the system. Therelationship between mental health services—I think itwas the Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHSFoundation Trust—police, probation and social serviceswas not close enough and Simelane was lost to thesystem. That loss resulted in an absolute tragedy for atotally innocent young girl on her way to school.

I raise that case in the context of this debate onlybecause the importance of all those who deal withpeople with severe mental heath issues can be seen inthe story. The consequences of failure can be devastatingfor individuals and families. Each agency has an absoluteresponsibility to ensure that we avoid such tragedies,which can have a devastating impact on communities.

Oliver Colvile (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport)(Con): Does my hon. Friend recognise that this is aboutnot only the police and the national health service, but


the courts? Better training must be available to thecourts, so that they are better able to deal with suchissues.

James Morris: My hon. Friend makes a good point.Mental health training and awareness need to existthroughout the criminal justice system, because, althoughI am not going to discuss this in my speech, I think thatvictims of crime have disproportionate levels of mentalhealth problems and other issues.

In a compassionate and civilised society, we owe it tothe most vulnerable and those suffering from acutemental distress, anguish and confusion, who get pickedup by the police and are subject to section 136, to treatthem with the dignity they deserve at a time when theymay be experiencing some of the most difficult situationsof their lives. It is incumbent on the police, mentalhealth services, social workers and the Government tobe responsible for ensuring that we achieve that goal ofhealth-based places of safety where people can be treatedin a compassionate and civilised way and can get backon a path to recovery. It is incumbent on us all to worktogether, both in government and in local communities,to ensure that that happens.


Mr Graham Brady (in the Chair): Order. I want tomove to the winding-up speeches at about 25 minutesto 3. I am not putting a time limit on speeches, but I amflagging that up.

2.6 pm

Paul Burstow (Sutton and Cheam) (LD): I will keepthat in mind, Mr Brady. I thank the Backbench BusinessCommittee for enabling us to have this debate and forrescheduling it so quickly. I congratulate both the hon.Member for Bridgend (Mrs Moon) on starting thedebate and setting out many of the issues so well andmy hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen and RowleyRegis (James Morris) on outlining so much of theimportant ground in this area.

My hon. Friend referred to the blogger MichaelBrown, who tweets under the name MentalHealthCopand rightly won the Mind digital media award last year.He probably deserved to win it again this year as hecontinues through his blog to inform and educate notonly the public, but many of his fellow officers. Morepower to his elbow for that.

When I was preparing for this debate, the stand-outfact that jarred with me was that 36% of all peoplesubject to place-of-safety orders find themselves in apolice cell rather than a hospital. On the most recentfigures, that is 7,761 place-of-safety orders. Accordingto Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary, the averagelength of stay in a police cell is over 10 hours and32 minutes —more than 10 hours!

Such people have not committed any crime, but havebeen judged under section 136 of the Mental HealthAct 1983. They are not criminals; they are experiencinga mental health emergency and are being let down by ahealth service that institutionally discriminates againstthose with mental health problems. There are manyways of measuring whether we have achieved parity ofesteem between physical and mental health, and the

numbers we lock up in police cells must be among thestarkest measures of progress. Today’s debate is aboutthe role of the police service in addressing the needs ofpeople with mental health problems. The police cannotcompletely be removed from the equation and do have arole to play.

One in four of us will experience a mental healthproblem at any one time. We are talking about somethingcommonplace, but often hidden in plain sight in oursociety. That is why Victor Adebowale, in his report forthe Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir BernardHogan-Howe, was right to say that mental health issuesare a part of the core business of policing. The currentsituation is not properly serving that purpose.

The issue is not peripheral. Rates of mental healthconditions among offenders range from 50% to 90%.There is no escaping the fact that the police, often asfirst responders, are and will continue to deal withpeople suffering from mental health problems. In London,according to estimates by the mental health unit of theMetropolitan police, 15% to 25% of police activity isrelated to mental health issues. Some estimates put thelevel much higher—40% has been cited in the debatealready. Either way, that amounts, in London alone, tomore than 600,000 calls a year related to mental healthdifficulties.

It is important to stress that people with mentalhealth problems are much more likely to be the victims,rather than the perpetrators, of crime. That fact all toooften gets glossed over in how our media report suchthings. The impact of crime on people with mentalhealth problems can be far more profound, with deeperconsequences, than for those with greater resilience.That is often not reflected fairly or appropriately in howsuch matters are reported.

In October, Victim Support and the mental healthcharity Mind published their study of the victimisationof people with mental health problems—“At risk, yetdismissed”—and it challenges many of the popularmisconceptions. Some of the facts from that report havealready been referred to, but the ones that stand out forme are the facts that women with severe mental illnessare 10 times more likely to be assaulted and that almosthalf of people suffering from a severe mental illnesswere victims of a crime in the past year. The impact ofsuch crimes on the victim is huge.

As the Chair of the Select Committee on HomeAffairs, the right hon. Member for Leicester East (KeithVaz), pointed out in his intervention on the hon. Memberfor Bridgend, it is also right to recognise that the policethemselves are in a stressful occupation, which is oftendistressing and a cause of real difficulties for them.Estimates suggest that in London alone the mentalillness costs to the Metropolitan Police Service areequivalent to £1,000 per employee—a huge, unmanagedcost.

The nature and role of police work, however, alsorequire the police to be in control and psychologicallyrobust. All police services, and the MPS especially, aretherefore in a unique situation, in which the mentalhealth and well-being of staff require particular attention.The statistic we were given earlier—the 56% of staffworking in custody suites who are themselves reportinganxiety and depression—is a stark reminder that ourdebate is not only about them out there, but about all ofus experiencing mental health problems in our lives.


[Paul Burstow]

Lord Adebowale’s report included 12 recommendations.Incidentally, although the report was commissioned bythe Metropolitan Police Commissioner, my understandingis that he has not yet responded to it. When is he likelyto do so?

I will pick up six stand-out common themes from thereport: first, the lack of mental health awareness, touchedon in earlier contributions; secondly, the lack of guidanceand training on suicide prevention, which is an importantelement; thirdly, the lack of adequate care for vulnerablepeople in custody, which goes to the heart of the debate;fourthly, poor inter-agency working—without doubtone of the keys to unlocking so much of what does notwork; fifthly, the disproportionate use of force andrestraint; and finally, the failure to communicate withfamilies, which all too often sits at the heart of failureon these issues.

Much of that is echoed in the report “A Criminal Useof Police Cells?” by Her Majesty’s inspectorate ofconstabulary, which found that the use of police custodyas a place of safety varies from 6% to 76% of the totalnumber of people detained under section 136. As aresult of a shortage of the right staff in the right placesat the right times, people who have not committed acrime are often treated as if they were criminals. HMICput it this way in its report:

“those detained under section 136 who were taken to a policestation were generally treated like any other person in respect ofthe booking-in procedure; risk assessment; and, ultimately, beinglocked in a cell (rather than being taken to another part of thestation).”

The report also found multi-agency working to be patchy,as was awareness of training resources and activity—theyare clearly the areas where relatively small changescould lead to big differences in operation.

The recently published experimental analysis of policedata offers some important insights. It bears out theHMIC finding that there is huge variation in the use ofpolice cells as a place of safety. The Sussex, Devon andCornwall, West Yorkshire, Avon and Somerset, andHampshire forces all recorded more than 500 uses ofsection 136, while Lancashire, Merseyside, Hertfordshireand City of London recorded 10 or fewer uses.

Drilling down into those figures and using them tounderstand why things are so different and what bestpractice might look like, and to ensure its better spread,we can see why the Government should be commendedfor having the statistics collected and such analysisdone. Buried a little deeper in the experimental data,however, is something else. For the first time, there areestimates for the number of under-18s held in policecells under section 136.

In the past year, according to the most recentlypublished statistics, 263 children and young people wereheld in police custody. The report urges caution aboutthat figure, because of the experimental nature of thedata, and I can understand that caution. It should stillbe a source of shame and a spur to act, however, that weare locking up children at a time of deep and acutemental health crisis. The hon. Member for Totnes(Dr Wollaston) has rightly challenged on that issue—sheraised it in Health questions—and I hope that she willbe speaking in the debate.

I hope that the soon-to-be-published concordat onemergency mental health care will do something—morethan something—to stop the barbaric practice of childrenbeing held in police cells when they are having a mentalhealth crisis. Indeed, next year the Care Quality Commissionwill be conducting a themed inspection, looking at thewhole pathway of crisis care—the role of the policeservice and of various aspects of the health service—andI hope that it will also cast light on this issue.

I have some questions for the Minister. There hasbeen good progress on rolling out the liaison and diversionservices in custody suites. That early identification,assessment and referral can result in much better outcomes.Will the Minister give some indication of when the Treasurywill sign off the outline business case for nationalroll-out of the service? Given the numbers of youngpeople in the criminal justice system with mental healthneeds, does the liaison and diversion service cover themas well? Will it ensure that they are always included?

Street triage is being piloted by the Home Office andthe Department of Health, and we have heard how thatcan make a significant difference by bringing healthprofessionals into the equation. How will the streettriage model fit with liaison and diversion? Also, torepeat a rightly put question, how is that model beingevaluated, and what are the time scales for a rapidroll-out should the evaluation show that street triage isworking well, which I understand it is showing? Howquickly therefore can we get it out throughout thecountry?

In the report on police custody as a place of safety,HMIC recommends that if there is not significant reductionin the inappropriate use of police custody by April2016, the Mental Health Act should be amended toremove police stations as a place of safety, except on anexceptional basis. HMIC goes on to state that “exceptionalbasis” should be written into the law and defined. Willthe Minister set out the Government view of thatrecommendation? If that was signalled as an intentionof the Government, would it serve as a further spur toaction throughout government, the NHS, social careand police services?

Finally, sitting at the heart of the disparity betweenmental and physical health and of the institutional biasand discrimination that people with mental illness sufferis deep-seated stigma. The Government deserve muchcredit for funding the Time to Change anti-stigmacampaign—a global leader in such campaigning that ismaking a real difference in this country. So far, anumber of Departments have signed up to play theirown part in the Time to Change campaign. I understandthat there are discussions with the Home Office, and itwould be good to know from the Minister today whenthe Home Office will be signing up to Time to Change.Furthermore, the attitude to and awareness of mentalhealth problems remain an issue in the police service.One way in which forces could address that is by workingtogether to sign up to Time to Change. Will the Ministeruse his good offices to promote Time to Change to chiefconstables and police and crime commissioners?

In conclusion, I want to cite the HMIC report andgive two quotes from it from people detained undersection 136. The first is:

“I was discharged by the mental health crisis team as a low riskto myself and others and not requiring follow-up. I am concernedthat my section 136 detention [in police custody] will show upon…enhanced criminal record checks…in the future.”


Perhaps the Minister will say whether we can ensurethat that does not happen.

The second is:“What have I done to deserve this? I was ill; I was locked up

because I was ill.”

Surely that is not what the police service is there for;that is what the health service is there for.

2.19 pm

Oliver Colvile (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport)(Con): I welcome the opportunity to serve under yourchairmanship in this debate, Mr Brady, and I congratulatethe hon. Member for Bridgend (Mrs Moon), who I amdelighted to count as a friend, although she is unfortunatelyan Opposition Member, and my hon. Friend the Memberfor Halesowen and Rowley Regis (James Morris). I amdelighted to have the opportunity to speak. I alsocongratulate my right hon. Friend the Member forSutton and Cheam (Paul Burstow), and I pay tribute tohim for his work as a Health Minister.

Let me put what I want to talk about in a littlecontext. As I think most Members know, I am Memberof Parliament for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport.My constituency contains a naval garrison that is thebase for 3 Commando Brigade, Royal Marines, as wellas a base for the Royal Navy. Members may be interestedto know that Charles Cross police station, in Plymouthcity centre, is the busiest police station in the whole ofEngland, so I do quite a bit of work with the policestation and go to talk to the police there.

The reason for how busy the station is may well bethe size of its catchment area—it goes over to Tavistockand also to Torpoint and Saltash—or it may be becausePlymouth is a military garrison city, as there are certainlysignificant cultural issues that go with that. We alsohave more licensed premises in Plymouth than there arein the whole of Liverpool—in fact, it is nearly doublethe number. There are several really big issues crowdingin on the police in Plymouth. I pay real tribute to thepolice officers who work at the custody suite in theCharles Cross police station, who find themselves undera fair amount of pressure.

My right hon. Friend the Minister will find a numberof themes going through the debate today, reflecting thegreat concerns we have across the House on this issue.Since the previous time we discussed this matter, realprogress has been made and I pay tribute to him and hiscolleagues, including those in the Department of Health,for that progress.

The last time I talked in a debate on a similar subject,I told the story of a 17-year-old girl who was highlyautistic, and who had kicked off, for reasons of mentalill health, in one of the retail centres in my constituency.She was taken to Charles Cross police station. I have tosay that the police found the situation very difficult, andwere rather challenged by what happened. I want totalk a little about what we can try to do about that sortof situation. When the girl’s mother arrived to pick upher child and help her, she found that the girl wasbanging her head against a wall and having real difficultywith the situation she was in. To my mind, that showsthat we need to make sure not only that there is bettertraining for our police but, much more importantly,

that community health nurses are located in our policestations, to help the police identify situations such asthat one.

Since I last spoke on the issue, Glenbourne unit, up atDerriford hospital in my constituency, has been refittedand reopened. I am delighted that that work has happenedand that there is now much better co-ordination acrossthe divide. However, the story I have told is not unique.I suspect that it happens in every single town and cityup and down the country. Local progress has beenmade, but we have further to go.

I want to make another brief point. Plymouth isa naval military city, so we need to ensure that we have amuch better understanding of how military veterans aretreated. They have been through some pretty difficulttimes in Afghanistan and Iraq. My right hon. Friendthe Minister will know that I have been pressing him toconsider the use of military courts, not to put veteransin front of a court martial or anything like that—theyhave of course retired from the military—but becausewe need to act with much more sympathy when dealingwith veterans who find themselves in the justice system.

I learned about that matter when I went to the UnitedStates of America with the Northern Ireland AffairsCommittee. There we saw at first hand how the USdeals with veterans. There is a specific Department ofVeterans Affairs, which is able to assess people and keepin much closer touch with them. The Department givesall veterans a mobile telephone, so it can ring them up atleast two or three times during the course of the year tomake sure that they are getting on well. The US also hasspecific courts for veterans that are staffed by peoplewho have military experience. I urge my right hon.Friend to consider whether, in a similar way, we coulduse those of our magistrates who have experience in themilitary and will have much better understanding ofwhat can happen to veterans. We visited a court in LittleRock, Arkansas, that has been highly successful and hasfound that veterans do not reoffend once they have beenthrough that process. There are mechanisms in place inthe US to ensure that veterans are looked after.

My final point is that we need places of refuge andsafety. In my constituency, there is a brilliant organisationcalled Twelves Company—if my right hon. Friend isinterested, I would be very willing to bring up membersof that organisation to have a conversation with him—thatdeals with sexual health. One of my constituents wasraped by her husband and had real mental healthproblems; I hope that I played a small role for her bytaking her to see Twelves Company. Since then I havenot noticed her tweeting quite so much on the issue, so Ihope some balance has been found for her and that wehave helped her.

I call for a more joined-up approach to this matter.We need to ensure that the police have alternativessignposted to them, and that the health services and thecourts and justice system recognise that mental health isan issue to consider. Frankly, it is not rocket science, it ismental health.

2.26 pm

Dr Sarah Wollaston (Totnes) (Con): I congratulate allthe previous speakers in this debate, and start by declaringan interest: I am married to a full-time consultant


[Dr Sarah Wollaston]

psychiatrist who chairs the Westminster parliamentaryliaison committee on behalf of the Royal College ofPsychiatrists.

Perhaps more relevantly to today’s debate, I shouldpoint out that I have been in a police cell in the middleof the night. I hasten to add that it was in a medicalcapacity, but I congratulate the Secretary of State forHealth, my right hon. Friend the Member for SouthWest Surrey (Mr Hunt), on advocating work experiencefor MPs. I would advocate more MPs spending a nightin the cells. If they did, they would realise that that isabsolutely the last place someone should be if they areacutely distressed by a mental illness.

That is particularly the case for an acutely distressed12-year-old. Can we imagine a situation in which a12-year-old child with a broken leg would be taken to acasualty department because there was no specialistorthopaedic surgeon or facility to assess them? Thatwould be utterly unthinkable, yet in Devon and Cornwallalone, on three occasions since the start of this year 12and 13-year-olds who have been acutely distressed withmental health issues have been held in police cells. Thatis utterly unacceptable for anyone, but it is particularlyunacceptable that on 25 occasions—I would point outto the Minister that this is in Devon and Cornwallalone—children of 17 or under have been in that situation.

If we look at the situation for adults, we see that,shockingly, there have been 674 occasions on whichpeople have been assessed in cells. As we have heard, theaverage time detained in that situation is 10 hours. Ononly 277 occasions have those assessments taken placein an appropriate place of safety. Devon and Cornwallis second behind Sussex in that terrible league of shame.

The situation is not the police’s fault. I want to stressthat, and I pay tribute to the members of the policealongside whom I have worked in the past, as a forensicmedical examiner, for their professionalism. Many policeofficers have sent me really heartfelt e-mails describingthe difficulties they face. The situation is putting hugepressure on the police. It is a totally inappropriate use ofresources. As Lord Adebowale has pointed out, it representsvery poor inter-agency working, but there is no financialincentive for the NHS to change because the burden ofresourcing falls on the police services.

The situation is totally unacceptable on any clinicallevel. I am disappointed that there is no Health Ministersitting alongside the Minister today, because ultimatelythe situation requires a total refocusing of services. Ifwe look at the statistics, we see that 82% of those whoare detained under section 136 do not go on to compulsoryadmission to hospital. That highlights the point thatmany of these situations could be avoided in the firstplace.

I am sorry to say that some general practitioners willnot see patients unless they have registered. Someonewho is acutely distressed and has paranoia as a result ofmental illness might not recognise that they are unwelland therefore might not register or go to see a doctor.Consultant psychiatrists might refuse to see a patientwithout a GP referral. Those are all hurdles in thesystem. Time and again, carers may be desperate toaccess help for people who are really unwell, but they

must fall off the cliff and become acutely unwell in apublic place before the police can step in with a section136 order that could have been avoided.

I thoroughly welcome the pilot project using triage,but street triage should not be necessary because weshould pick up such situations much earlier. I wouldlike volunteers who work with the homeless, for example,and who may be aware that someone is slipping into adistressed state, to be able to refer them directly topsychiatric services and bypass primary care. Of course,I would like all primary care doctors to ensure that theydeliver the right care at the right time to all theirpatients, as the good ones do, and directly and activelyseek out people who are homeless and vulnerable butwho may not come forward to seek help.

Much of the problem is about funding—it would bewrong not to make that clear. The funding of unitswhere people can be seen in an appropriate place ofsafety is crucial. It is no surprise that the local authoritiesthat have most use of police cells are often in ruralareas, where there are additional geographical challengesin providing appropriate places of safety. But if parityof esteem is to have more than just a hollow ring to it,we must ensure that within the NHS cake there is fairdistribution of funding for mental health, and we mustrecognise in funding formulae that rural areas sometimesface extreme challenges. Sparsity must be recognised infunding if there is to be fairness.

Another problem is that mental health beds are running“too hot”. The CQC has said that in 50% of areas bedoccupancy is 90%, and in 15% of areas it is 100%. Thatcauses delays throughout the system. Ultimately, thereis a problem not just with appropriate places of safety,but beyond that with having beds available when peopleneed admission. On four occasions in Devon and Cornwall,the process of assessment has taken so long that a bedthat was provisionally booked was taken by the time theassessment had been made. All those causes delays inthe system must be addressed: the availability of suitablyqualified section 12 approved doctors; the availabilityof psychiatric beds; and, crucially, the availability ofappropriate places of safety.

Will the Minister examine the effect on children whenmedical facilities are not suitable? There may be securechildren’s homes— my preference, of course, would beto have a medical facility available, but I can say frompersonal experience that anything is better than a policecell. Police cells in the middle of the night are desperatelyfrightening places. They are often full of people who aredrunk and shouting. It is unthinkable that a childshould be in that environment in a police cell. I hopethat the Minister will say that if by next year children asyoung as 12 are still being put in police cells, Parliamentwill legislate to abolish that.

Mr Graham Brady (in the Chair): Order. I am gratefulto hon. Members for keeping to time so well. If theshadow Minister and the Minister take no more than12 minutes each, there will be a couple of minutes forthe hon. Member for Bridgend (Mrs Moon), who openedthe debate, to wind up.

2.34 pm

Jack Dromey (Birmingham, Erdington) (Lab): It isan honour, Mr Brady, to serve under your chairmanship.We have all seen in our constituencies the pain suffered


by those with mental health problems, the trauma thatthat can cause to their families and local communities,and the immense problems that may arise for the police.I welcome the debate and the initiative taken by myhon. Friend the Member for Bridgend (Mrs Moon), theright hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Burstow),the hon. Member for Halesowen and Rowley Regis(James Morris), and the powerful testimony about whathappens at the sharp end from the hon. Member forTotnes (Dr Wollaston).

Police officers have many different roles. They maintainorder, protect life, limb and property, prevent and deteroffences and, when an offence has been committed,take appropriate measures to bring the offender tojustice. However, as the Chief Constable of GreaterManchester police, Sir Peter Fahy, warned earlier thisyear, policing and mental health problems have increasinglybecome the main issue for his officers responding toemergency calls, and that“the force was struggling to cope.”

He is not alone.

Indeed, as the right hon. Member for Sutton andCheam said, such is the increasing number of calls thatrecent reports about the Metropolitan police’s new protocolsuggest that officers have been ordered not to respondto calls from mental health units and emergencydepartments for help to control and restrain patientsunless there is“a significant threat to life and limb”.

Such an uneasy interface between the health service andthe police does not benefit anyone, least of all thosesuffering from mental health issues. That is why HMIC,charities, chief constables, police and crime commissioners,the Police Federation and others have all expressed theirconcern for both the police and those suffering frommental health issues under the current system.

The role of police officers is to ensure the safety ofthe public and deal with individuals who pose a threatto others or themselves. In an emergency involving anindividual with mental health issues, more often thannot a bobby will be first on the scene. Too often, policeofficers and staff must deal with people with complexmental health needs alone, instead of with the supportof experienced and trained medical professionals. Theyare required by the law, when appropriate, to take theindividual to a place of safety. More often than not, theonly option is to take them into custody. It is not rightthat people with mental health issues who have notcommitted a crime are treated as criminals. Those detainedunder section 136 may not have committed a crime, butare suspected of suffering a mental health disorder.

Worryingly, a joint review by HMIC, the Care QualityCommission and Healthcare Inspectorate Wales foundthat police custody was still being used as a primary orsecondary place of safety as a result of, among otherfactors,

“insufficient staff at a health-based place of safety”

and

“the absence of available beds at the health-based place of safety”.

That is increasingly putting a great strain on our policeservice. Statistics show that such incidents may tie upofficers for up to eight hours. That in turn adds furtherstrain on those suffering from mental health issues,

because they are treated like any other person takeninto custody during the booking-in procedure and riskassessment, and ultimately when locked in a cell.

At the heart of the difficulty—several speakers referredto this, including my hon. Friend the Member forBridgend—is the fact that 15,000 police officers will belost by the next election, and police resources are alreadystretched incredibly thinly, without the unnecessary pressureof having to act as stand-in social workers and mentalhealth nurses because those vital services have also beencut back. Police officers are clear that they are not theright people to deal with those who need complexmedical intervention for serious mental illness and thatthe experience of being detained may add undue stressand upset for these people, making the problem worse.

In government, Labour recognised the seriousness ofthe problem and commissioned the Bradley report in2009. However, after three years in government, despitetaking some welcome steps, the Government have beenslow to act on the report’s fundamental recommendations,leaving us with the unacceptable problem that we nowface. Quite simply, we must do better—better for thepolice and better for those suffering with mental healthissues.

As Lord Bradley’s report acknowledged, good trainingand support to inform police practice are vital. To thatend, I welcome the police street triage team pilots, suchas those operating in Newham and Birmingham, and Iencourage further working between mental healthprofessionals and the police. However, as I have said, apolice officer responding to a mental health emergencywill often find themselves left with no assistance. That isunacceptable for the officer, the person concerned andthe general public.

Crucially, therefore, we must have a proper partnershipbetween the police and health providers—as the hon.Member for Halesowen and Rowley Regis rightly arguedand as Lord Bradley’s report also recommended—throughjoint training packages for mental health awareness andlearning disability issues, with community support officersand police officers linking with local mental healthservices. Crucially, we also need to work towards movingaway from the use of custody cells for those detainedunder section 136 to dedicated places of safety, ensuringthat people suffering mental health illness are dealt withsensitively and appropriately, and are given the correctmedical treatment.

Birmingham—the city I am proud to represent—is aleading example of the places of safety strategy. WestMidlands police uses a mental health assessment centreat University Hospitals Birmingham, with an on-sitecommunity psychiatric nurse to carry out assessmentsand refer to appropriate support. Innovative local strategiessuch as that are welcome, leading the way with newapproaches to police procedure and mental health issues.However, three years after the Bradley report, recentreports and calls from those in the police about theproblem getting worse, not better, are cause for concernthat not enough has been done to tackle the issue.

In conclusion, the Government need to recognisetheir responsibility. They urgently need to look holisticallyat the problem, ensuring that the right resources areavailable to free up the police and that people withmental health difficulties get the support they need. It isalso vital that a clear, strategic framework across allDepartments is put in place to help to drive and improve


[Jack Dromey]

partnership working. I believe that policing is aboutmore than just cutting crime, and we believe that officersshould not be expected to plug the gaps in otherDepartments’ shortfalls—neither should those sufferingfrom mental health issues be let down.

2.43 pm

The Minister for Policing, Criminal Justice and Victims(Damian Green): I echo the congratulations that havebeen given to the hon. Member for Bridgend (Mrs Moon)on the way in which she introduced the debate, and tomy right hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam(Paul Burstow) and my hon. Friend the Member forHalesowen and Rowley Regis (James Morris), in thelatter case particularly for his energetic chairmanship ofthe all-party mental health group. I shall start brieflywith the general subject of mental health reform andthen move on to the specific policing aspects of thematter. In doing so, I hope to sweep up a lot of the specificquestions that have been asked during the course of thisvery good debate.

Mental health reform is clearly key to the widerprogramme of health reform, and the Governmentwant to see mental health issues receiving parity ofesteem with physical health issues. The mandate toNHS England has a specific objective“to put mental health on a par with physical health, and close thehealth gap between people with mental health problems and thepopulation as a whole.”

We have shared our developing work with the WelshGovernment, as health, obviously, is devolved, and Iknow that they, too, are considering these matters.

As a basic principle, which has been expressed bymany hon. Members on both sides of the debate, it isimpossible to argue that people facing mental ill healthshould not have their health needs met by professionalswho are able to provide appropriate support and treatment.The police are not best placed to provide that, but theymay have a key role to play in identifying vulnerabilitiesamong people with whom they come into contact.

Essentially, the police come into contact with fourgroups of people who may have mental health problems.First, there are people who have committed a crime, orare arrested on suspicion of committing a crime. Forthose people, it is essential that we strike the rightbalance between bringing offenders to justice and helpingpeople get access to appropriate interventions in orderto tackle factors, such as mental health problems, thatmay be contributing to their offending behaviour. In thesecond group are those who come into contact with thepolice because a member of the public has concerns fortheir safety or for the safety of others, but when nocrime has been committed. In the third are people whomay have been reported as missing. As the hon. Memberfor Bridgend pointed out, they may be elderly and havea history of dementia, or they may be people known tomental health services whose families or carers havereported them as missing. The fourth category is victimsof crime or witnesses who may themselves have mentalhealth problems and need support at every stage of thecriminal justice system, as my hon. Friend the Memberfor Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport (Oliver Colvile)pointed out.

I will go through those groups. We have heard aboutthe review by Lord Bradley, who highlighted that asignificant proportion of prisoners have some form ofmental health problem. One key recommendation wasthat to make that contact with the criminal justicesystem work, we needed to put offenders in touch withtreatment and other support services that can help stoptheir behaviour escalating into more crime. There arecurrently more than 50 adult and almost 40 youthliaison and diversion services working with offenderswith mental health problems, substance misuse problemsor learning disabilities at the earliest point of contactwith the police and courts.

To answer the questions that my right hon. Friend theMember for Sutton and Cheam asked about what ishappening next, from April 2014 we will introduce anenhanced core model across a number of selected areas.The aim is to ensure that those services can lessenhealth inequalities and improve justice outcomes forpeople who come into contact with the criminal justicesystem and for whom a range of complex needs areidentified as factors in their offending behaviour. Myright hon. Friend was right to say that a business casehas been submitted to the Treasury. He asked the eternalquestion of when we will hear back, and I can tell himthat the decision is imminent.

We also know that there is a clear link betweenmental health problems and deaths in custody. That is avery serious issue. Obviously, every death in policecustody is a tragedy, and that is a priority matter for theGovernment. Work in the area is overseen by the ministerialcouncil on deaths in custody. The council’s independentadvisory panel has recently awarded a two-year researchcontract to the university of Greenwich, which will beworking on a number of projects to consider the impactof mental health problems on deaths in custody. Thoseprojects will cover a wide range of the issues that havebeen brought up in individual cases in this debate andelsewhere. That is one stream of work.

Obviously, the Independent Police ComplaintsCommission has a vital role to play in the investigationof deaths in custody. It must be notified of any deaththat occurs in police custody, and it is currently carryingout a review of how deaths in or following policecustody are investigated. A progress report on the reviewwas published in September, and the final report is dueto be published early next year.

Although that is one group of people affected, mostof the debate has rightly involved another group withwhom the police regularly come into contact: peoplesuffering from mental ill health who have not committedand are not suspected of committing any crime. Theremay be concerns for their safety or for the safety ofothers, and they may need to be detained in a place ofsafety for that reason. However, all too often, thosepeople, who are ill, find themselves in police stations.Many contributors to the debate made that point.

Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary’s reporton the use of police cells as a place of safety forindividuals detained under section 136 of the MentalHealth Act found that in a number of areas, the use ofpolice cells remained unacceptably high. Again, myright hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheammade that point. We know that during 2012-13, almost8,000 section 136 orders were made for which a policestation was the place of safety. As has been said, that is


more than one third of the total number of section 136detentions. Straightforwardly, that is unacceptable,other than in truly exceptional circumstances. Those arepeople who are likely to be in crisis, and they need anddeserve proper care and support from people qualifiedto provide it.

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announcedto the Police Federation, at its conference in May, thatshe was taking action, along with my right hon. Friendthe Secretary of State for Health, to ensure that peoplewith mental health problems receive the care, supportand treatment that they need, and that police officersare freed up to do their job of fighting and preventingcrime. That work has made significant progress. Themost visible sign of it will come shortly when theconcordat, which has been agreed by almost 30 nationalorganisations, agencies and Departments, is publishedearly in the new year. A lot of work has gone onbetween the Home Office and Health Ministers on thismatter—that relates to a point made by my hon. Friendthe Member for Totnes (Dr Wollaston). I am happy toassure her that I have been working closely with myhon. Friend the Minister of State at the Department ofHealth, who is responsible for care and support and hasoverall responsibility for mental health policy.

The concordat will be an extremely important documentin taking us forward. It will provide national leadershipby setting out the standard of response that peoplesuffering mental health crises and requiring urgent careshould expect, and key principles around which localhealth and criminal justice partners should be organised.It will leave agencies in both the criminal justice andhealth fields in no doubt about what is expected ofthem.

There has been a lot of talk about places of safety. Iknow that interim arrangements have been made inNorth Yorkshire—the only police force area without asingle facility at the time of the Home Secretary’sannouncement—and that health-based places of safetywill open in York and Scarborough early next year.

The hon. Member for Bridgend asked about exclusioncriteria. The concordat will state that people suffering amental health crisis should be supported in a place ofsafety, and that there should be no automatic criteriathat exclude individuals, although their safety and thesafety of others is the paramount consideration. Sheand others, including my hon. Friend the Member forHalesowen and Rowley Regis, mentioned the streettriage pilots, which have obviously been extremely beneficial.The pilot by Sussex police went live on 16 October andother forces are having their launches in December.West Midlands police is moving along with this, and sois the Metropolitan police. Rather than all the pilotscoming to an end at once, and there then being anassessment and then something else happening, whatseems to be happening is that other areas are picking upthe benefits and expanding the system. I am consciousthat it is being expanded in the east midlands as well.

The point has been made that too often, the policeend up transporting people who ought to be transportedby ambulance. The Association of Ambulance ChiefExecutives is drawing up a national protocol on thetransportation of people in mental health crisis, whichI hope will act as a catalyst for wider change andimprovements.

My hon. Friend the Member for Halesowen andRowley Regis made a pertinent point about the need fora review of the operation of sections 135 and 136 of theMental Health Act 1983. Options for a review of thosesections are currently being examined, and I expect thatwork to get under way this financial year.

There has been much mention of children in thedebate. The practice of routinely holding in policecustody children in a state of mental distress is, ofcourse, unacceptable. Again, that will be dealt with inthe coming concordat. Obviously, I take the point thatyoung people and children are central among all thegroups of people for whom it is inappropriate that theyshould find themselves in a police cell in the middle ofthe night during a mental health crisis. That is one ofthe changes that we need to see.

There was a request from the hon. Member forBridgend for better data collection. The College ofPolicing, which, incidentally, will be doing much of thetraining work that the Chairman of the Home AffairsCommittee, the right hon. Member for Leicester East(Keith Vaz), asked for, recognises the important issuessurrounding mental ill health and policing. In its shortperiod in existence, it has already held an awarenessevent with deputy chief constables. They have agreed onthe need not just for clearer guidance about the use ofrestraint—again, I take the point made throughout thedebate about the difference between mental health restraintand police restraint—but for better capture of data andevidence about the operational demands on police. Thecollege now has a national group working to take thatforward.

The third group that I mentioned was missing people.It is estimated that four out of every five adults who gomissing are experiencing a mental health problem whenthey disappear. If those people have dementia, theymay be frightened, be unable to find their way home orexhibit aggression. The police will often be the first portof call when someone goes missing, so in responding tosuch calls, the police need to work closely with healthservices and other agencies to ensure that people can besafely transferred to the most appropriate place.

Our missing children and adults strategy highlightsthe importance of local areas considering whether theyneed to be doing more to protect children and vulnerableadults who go missing, and provides a framework forthem to do that. The move to bring together the ChildExploitation and Online Protection Centre and the UKMissing Persons Bureau in the National Crime Agencywill result in improved integrated working by lawenforcement across the UK, including missing personsinvestigations.

The last group that I mentioned was victims andwitnesses. The new victims’code, which will be implementedthe week after next, will ensure enhanced support atevery stage of the criminal justice system, including anew entitlement to ask that special measures be used incourt and to be provided with information about thesupport that registered intermediaries can provide.

As the usual gateway to the criminal justice system,the police will have a duty to conduct an early needsassessment to identify victims who may be particularlyvulnerable—including those with mental health issues—andtherefore eligible for enhanced services. Such victimswill be advised of the availability of pre-trial therapy,and access to such therapy will be facilitated if needed.


[Damian Green]

We are legislating to provide police and crimecommissioners with the power to commission supportservices for victims of crime. We intend that, fromOctober next year, the majority of emotional and practicalsupport services for victims of crime will be commissionedlocally by PCCs rather by than central Government.PCCs are well placed to consult, and identify the needsof, victims in their local area and to determine how bestto meet those needs.

Responding to people with mental health problems isnot something that any agency or organisation can doalone. In many areas, PCCs are already playing a pivotalrole in encouraging agencies to come together to addressthe issue. The work that I have talked about highlightsthe importance of joint working nationally and locallyin order to make a real difference.

It is obvious that the police have, and will continue tohave, a key role in dealing with mental health issues asthey arise. They need to be adequately trained to identifyvulnerabilities and behaviours that require furtherintervention, but they are not and cannot replace healthprofessionals. Both types of professionals should be leftto do the job that they are best at doing and trained todo, because that, in the end, will be the best response formental health patients themselves.

2.58 pm

Mrs Moon: I thank you, Mr Brady, for your excellentchairmanship throughout the debate. I also thank myco-sponsors of the debate, because no one could havehad better co-sponsors with greater gravitas or greaterrecognition on both sides of the House for the workthat they do in this area. It is extremely pleasant to seein the Chamber at the end of the debate the hon.Member for Broxbourne (Mr Walker), who has alsoplayed a huge part in raising mental health issues in theHouse.

This is a time of consensus. There is cross-partyagreement that we must move forward. We all recognisethat the police, the voluntary services, the health serviceand, most importantly, people who suffer from mentalill health want recognition that it is time for change andfor a review of the use of section 136 powers for the21st century.

I thank the other hon. Members who have taken partin the debate. The hon. Member for Totnes (Dr Wollaston)demonstrated her insight into issues involving ruralareas and children, and the hon. Member for Plymouth,Sutton and Devonport (Oliver Colvile) paid particularattention to military matters. We all look forward to theconcordat being published in the new year. Let us hopethat between us, across the House, we can ensure thatpeople who suffer mental ill health have the service thatthey desire and deserve.

Retail and the High Street

[MR CHARLES WALKER in the Chair]

3 pm

Ann Coffey (Stockport) (Lab): It is a pleasure to serveunder your chairmanship, Mr Walker. I am pleased,together with the hon. Member for North Swindon(Justin Tomlinson), to have secured the debate. Asco-chair and vice-chair of the all-party parliamentarygroup on retail, we understand that thriving town centresand high streets are the living face of our communitiesand vital to their economic and social well-being. Towncentres influence how people see, experience and relateto their local areas. They are, and always have been,places where we re-affirm our place in our communitiesby meeting and talking to each other. The familiarity ofthe high street can give us a sense of belonging.

Retail is the building block of our high street. Morethan 3 million people—more than one in 10 UK workers—are employed in retail. In my constituency, retail is byfar the largest private provider, and it is responsible formore than a quarter of all jobs. There are many importantissues facing the high street, such as employment, retailskills, business rates and rents, finance for small businesses,car parking and town centre management.

Although I do not underestimate the seriousness ofthose issues, my debate will have a slightly differentfocus. The visibility of the high number of empty shopsscarring our town centres, with one in seven shopsempty nationally and one in five empty in the north-west,can give us the impression that our high streets areslowly shutting down. I do not believe that the situationheralds the final demise of the high street, but itdemonstrates the extent of the challenge faced by theprivate and the public sectors to reinvigorate that publicspace.

The biggest challenge is the impact of online shoppingand developing mobile technology. I see that as anopportunity for the public and private sectors to harnessthose revolutionary technological changes and bringtogether the physical with the digital to provide moreexciting and unique community spaces.

Online sales are set to account for more than aquarter of all retail sales by 2020, and it is predictedthat 4,000 retail stores will be lost by 2015. The latestfigures from the British Retail Consortium show that inOctober, online sales of non-food products reached anew record rate of 18.3%. M-commerce grew by astaggering 300% last year alone, and it will rise further.Already, 72% of us own smartphones, according toresearch by Deloitte, and that will only increase.

Remember the old days, not long ago, when there wasonly one way to shop? We walked down the high streetand into the shop we wanted, spotted the item that wewanted to purchase, bought it and carried it home. Withmobile phones, we can now go into a shopping centre,examine goods, scan barcodes, compare goods online,read reviews and buy either in store or online. Developingmobile technology means that in the future, we will alsoreceive real-time, tailor-made messages from companiesabout myriad offers and discounts in nearby shops.

The thousands of empty shops up and down thecountry cannot all go back to being traditional shops.As a result of the impact of mobile technology, future

161WH 162WH28 NOVEMBER 2013Mental Health (Police Procedures)

town centres will no longer simply be about physicalshopping; they will be about socialising, entertainmentservices and cultural events. That was highlighted byboth the Portas report and the Grimsey report.

Many stores are responding to new technology bybringing together online services with physical shops.Many businesses are equipping their staff with iPads orinstalling kiosks to allow for easy in-store customerordering. A good example of the bringing together ofthe physical and the digital is Amazon’s introduction ofcollection lockers on the high street, which allow peopleto collect their orders rather than waiting for deliveries.eBay has set up a pilot system allowing “click andcollect” orders to be picked up at Argos outlets. JohnLewis has already launched a service that allows customersto collect their order from one of 1,500 local Collect+shops, so customers start their shopping journey onlineand finish it in the town centre, which creates additionalfootfall.

Many shops already have free wi-fi for tailored marketing,which also allows shoppers to read detailed reviews andcompare prices—something that 33% of smartphoneusers are already doing. Apps or scanable QR codesand barcodes help stores to target shoppers for specialdeals and extra branded content on their mobile devicesas they browse the shop. QR codes on shop windowscan divert custom to a website outside normal openinghours, which is particularly useful for a small shop.

Mobile technology is already transforming our highstreet, but let us try to imagine what the high street ofthe future might look like. In Spain, people can alreadyuse phone identification to check in to their local highstreet, after which a host of real-time events and offersflash up on their smartphone to alert them to what ishappening there and then. Such technology can evendirect people to a free parking space, and Westminsteris already pioneering a new app for that. In years tocome, we will also see many stockless shops, which aimto sell their brand. In such shops, customers will sit onsofas and view new collections through high-definitiontouchable holograms, which allow them to feel thetexture of a fabric and have an item delivered to theirhome immediately.

Future technology will identify people from an on-streetface recognition account that they can opt into, whichwill alert key shops and services to the fact that anindividual is coming, to allow them to prepare a tailoredoffer in store. That means that we will receive tailor-mademessages and offers as we walk down the high street.Things that seemed ridiculously futuristic a short timeago will be here soon, such as Google Glass, a head-computer worn like glasses, which an individual canspeak to. It will project images and information on tothe glass, and will function like an interactive searchengine. It is difficult to predict the effect of suchtechnological changes on consumer behaviour, but wemust understand how transformational they will be.

I have already mentioned the Portas and Grimseyreviews. I think it is unfortunate that they seem to be inconflict with each other, because essentially they bothsay the same thing about innovation and partnerships.Stockport is a Portas pilot. Our pilot is based onregeneration of our market and Underbank, and it iscreative industry-led. It is fair to say that it has been abumpy ride, but that is what pilots are about. It hasillustrated the difficulties faced when two very different

cultures—public and private—try to work together. Thegood news is that footfall is up in the markets, newshops are opening and a unique Stockport brand isemerging.

The pilot demonstrated that we need a different kindof public-private partnership to support regenerationprojects based on small retailers and markets. Suchprojects should always have a business plan based onhard evidence and proper analysis of strengths andweaknesses, to arrive at a unique high street offer for aparticular town. If public money is to be spent onbusiness rate relief, buying and letting property to preferredleaseholders, transferring public services to empty shopsor converting empty shops to residential use, we need tosee value for that money, especially as resources willbecome increasingly scarce. I would like the Minister todo what he can to spread the evidence from the Portaspilots and similar innovative schemes across the country,to provide local councils with information that will helpthem develop business plans for their high street. We donot want to be constantly reinventing the wheel.

In Stockport, I am conducting a shopping survey ofpeople who live near the town centre. It is clear that themajority of them use the town centre for small shoppingtrips, up to five times a week in some cases, duringwhich they also go to the bank or the post office or stopfor a cup of coffee. That provides important footfall forthe town centre.

Oliver Colvile (Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport)(Con): The hon. Lady makes a strong case, and I havelistened intently to her contribution. I should declare aninterest, because before I was elected to this place, I didquite a large amount of work in retail development andhave retained a share in it.

One thing I am concerned about is that we need tohave an impact on local car parking, because we needto encourage people physically to come into the urbanconurbations and city centres. If car parking is expensive,as it increasingly is in my constituency, people will bedriven away, and they will end up just using technologyand failing to visit town centres.

Ann Coffey: The hon. Gentleman makes an excellentpoint. The issue comes up again and again—indeed, itcame up in the shopping survey I did. If councils aredeveloping business plans, they also need to take intoaccount the impact of their car-parking charges andwhether those will attract shoppers to their town centres,rather than drive them somewhere else. That is animportant part of any business plan. Converting emptyshops to residential use and into shop fronts for publicservices seems a good plan, because it will encouragepeople to shop in the town centre. The presence ofbanks and post offices is also important in creatingfootfall—a point made by the Association of ConvenienceStores.

The growth of online shopping has weakened manyout-of-town large-format stores, and, as a result, therehas been renewed interest in the convenience format,with a return to smaller, more frequent shopping trips.That could benefit towns such as Stockport.

In our town, there are many new independentshops. It is good to see them exploring ways of workingtogether and of using the internet and social media,

163WH 164WH28 NOVEMBER 2013Retail and the High Street Retail and the High Street

[Ann Coffey]

such as Facebook and Twitter, to support their bricks-and-mortar shops. I was talking to a Stockport businessthat already operates an online store through ASOSMarketplace, which is part of the ASOS fashion retailsite. However, independent retailers across the countryreport that they are struggling to compete with majorinternet retailers, as they lack the funds on their own forlarge-scale online marketing and websites to competewith Amazon and eBay.

An interesting response is new websites for independentretailers such as myhigh.st, which is supported by theBritish Independent Retailers Association. Target 200 isan innovative e-commerce network that gives independentshopkeepers the chance to join together to sell theirproducts online. It also gives towns a platform to showcasewhat is happening in their high streets. Together with“click and collect” and an independent shops loyaltyprogramme, it enables shoppers to buy online, whileencouraging visits in person.

Such innovation may be the way forward for Stockport,bringing an online presence together with the town’sphysical shops. In an affordable way, that will giveindependent retailers additional income through onlinesales, while showcasing Stockport’s bigger retail shops,its markets—including its specialist markets—and itscultural and heritage attractions. That will encouragemore people to visit and shop in the town.

With all the discussion about the demise of the highstreet, I am really concerned that opportunities arebeing missed. It is important that councils and businessesjoin together to use the exciting opportunities offeredby mobile technology to transform the delivery of privategoods and public services on our high streets, turningthem into the exciting community spaces of the future.


Mr Charles Walker (in the Chair): Order. If colleaguescould limit their speeches to around eight minutes,everybody should get in.

3.13 pm

Justin Tomlinson (North Swindon) (Con): It is apleasure to serve under you, Mr Walker. It is an absolutepleasure to follow the hon. Member for Stockport (AnnCoffey), who, with me, co-sponsored the debate. Shedelivered a fantastic speech; not only is she a realchampion of the high street, but, with all her talk of thefuture and what the high street needs, she is a presenterin the making should “Tomorrow’s World” ever bere-launched.

I am a proud retail geek. My parents ran a retailshop, so I spent many hours after school behind theshop counter—I had my very own “Open All Hours”experiences as I was growing up. I am the new co-chairof the all-party group on retail, alongside the hon.Member for Stockport. I am also the vice-chair of theall-party group on town centres.

Town centre regeneration is a major issue in theSwindon area. We were on the cusp of major regenerationin 2007-08, but as the economy crashed, I am afraid thedevelopers went to the wall. However, we are very muchat the front of the queue for the next wave of regeneration.

Regent Circus is taking shape by the day, and it willhave a new cinema and a number of eateries, includingNandos. Judging by my postbag, that is exciting hugenumbers of people. Those things will be here this timenext year, which is a big boost, especially for a town thatcan boast 300,000 shoppers within 20 minutes of it and3 million within an hour. That is one reason why wewere able to secure £65 million of private sector investmentto rebuild the legendary Oasis leisure centre—I am sureMembers have all gone there with their bathing costumes.I have set up a retail forum, and I regularly visit lots ofshops and retailers. This is a key interest for me.

I am an unashamed Mary Portas fan. I know she is acontroversial figure and divides public opinion, but Ithink she shone a light on not only some serious issuesand challenges, but some opportunities for the highstreet. Sometimes we need someone who is straighttalking to come in and shake things up. There wasalmost a collective acceptance of defeat, and there wasno reason for that, because, as Mary Portas has shown,there is so much that can be done to help the high street.

As the hon. Lady said, the high street is important.About 11% of the country’s work force are employed inretail. There is a lot of flexible working, which suits alot of people. Often, people’s first job is in retail. Myfirst job was at Starrs newsagents, although, regrettably,I had to leave because I was spending more than I wasbeing paid on stuff I did not need, because I was alwaysstaring at it and putting it on the shelves. So, for noreason other than that I could not afford to work thereany more, I had to end my newsagent career.

Local authorities have a key part to play. Many areashave an opportunity to pursue redevelopment, but localauthorities must understand that they need to be flexible.There are towns where there are historic reasons whycertain buildings need to be protected, but a lot oftowns need to accept that when a developer says thewhole town centre needs to turn on its axis by 5°, thatmight make all the difference. The success of supermarketsand out-of-town shopping centres comes from the factthat they have built environments that attract customers,and town centres need to replicate that.

Although it is important to attract the brand namesand the anchor stores to the high street, towns musthave space for the small independent shops that createcharacter and give people an extra reason to come offthe motorway at that junction to visit that town centre,rather than those further down the motorway.

We have talked about parking. I was proud that theMary Portas review highlighted Swindon for best practice.Despite challenging financial times, we managed to cutcar-parking charges. We then saw a 10% increase infootfall, following five to 10 years of decreases. Suddenly,cutting charges to £2 for four hours led to a 10% increaseand, crucially, to a much longer dwell time. Previously,people were coming in to do their banking and thenleaving. After the change, they came to do their banking,visited a café and, once they had refuelled, they wouldgo and spend money on shopping, which is great forlocal business.

Oliver Colvile: The other issue is making sure thatthere are other attractions so that people use towncentres. This is also about theatre, museums and otheractivities, which are part of people’s experience of goinginto towns and doing their shopping.


Justin Tomlinson: I thank my hon. Friend for thatbrilliant contribution, which was spot on. I will come tothe night-time economy in a short while.

A number of people will no doubt talk about businessrates, and I do not want to enter into a big debate aboutthem ahead of the autumn statement. However, weneed to recognise that the world is changing. The internetwill continue to grow, and the way customers shop willchange. Business rates need to recognise those changes.The issue is not all about traditional bricks and mortar,and a fair system should recognise that.

The other area where local authorities and, arguably,the Government can go a bit further is super-BIDS—business improvement districts—which are fantastic. Iwork with InSwindon and Forward Swindon, and theydo a great job. We also have the McArthurGlen outletvillage, which is a huge success; it is about to have itsumpteenth expansion and employs about 900 people. Aqueue of retailers is trying to come in. If retailers do nottrade well in the centre, they are removed. How manyhigh streets can say that?

The key to the centre’s success is twofold. First, it hasfantastic car parking, which is a no-brainer. Secondly,there is a single point of contact. If a retailer is thinkingof going there, they know who to speak to. If they wantto go to a town centre, do they speak to the localauthority, the BID company or the landlords? There areall sorts of different things, and there is a lot of confusion.I would love to see a lot more of our towns give the BIDcompanies full control of the town centre so that theyget on with things—whether that is street cleaning,entertainment or planning. That would help to transformhuge swathes of our town centres.

Let me now turn away from what the Governmentcan do. Often the temptation is to say that we can doeverything, but retailers actually have a lot to do, asMary Portas highlighted. Retailers must accept thatthey have to adapt to changing customer expectations,whether that involves the growth of the internet or thegrowth of supermarkets and out-of-town shopping centres.Customer service is crucial. Too many retailers simplytook customers for granted.

I saw that in my parents’ shops when I was growingup. My parents always took time to thank customers. Ifthe normal closing time was half-past 5 but a customerwho came in after work had not finished shopping bythat time, they did not shut; they kept going while therewas someone there. All too often, and particularly insome chains, that attitude is lacking. In any MaryPortas television programme, that is always the firstthing to be highlighted. Customers will vote with theirfeet. If they get bad service, they go away.

Offering something different is another thing to consider.We have Bloomfields deli in Highworth. Everyone saidthat it was mad to open it—“The supermarkets own theworld; you have no chance of surviving”—but it offeredinnovative products that could not be found in thesupermarket, and good quality. The shop sells fine foodsand the staff will wrap things up and put them in hampers.The Christmas deluge of business, allowing the deli tosell products that it could not otherwise, is about tostart, and that is all because of going the extra mile.

Shops have to think about opening hours, becausethe internet is 24/7. Amazon is a big competitor and willdeliver overnight; so why not deliver the same day? My

mother delivered things: it was a wool shop, so therewere a lot of older customers, and on the way home shewould drop things off to some of those would could notget in. She did it because it brought in extra business.John Lewis is a good example of the chain stores thathave embraced the multi-channel approach. About 40%of its business is now click and collect.

The final element of what I am talking about is therole of young people, and encouraging them to start inretailing. The number of young people going to thehigh street has dropped dramatically. When I was growingup, the town centre was the place where young peoplewent, by default, to buy music or computer games, tosocialise and, when they got old enough, to take advantageof the night-time economy. Nowadays, there is a generationof young people who never set foot in the town centrebecause they are the ones who embrace internet andout-of-town shopping the most. We must get the mixright, as the hon. Member for Stockport said.

We must encourage young entrepreneurs to thinkabout retail. We run entrepreneur challenges in schools,which I have just talked about in the business debate inthe main Chamber. I am talking about providing real,tangible experience in a retail environment. I did that inthe Blunsdon market. The young people run a marketstall and the mentors talk to the successful businessesafterwards and explain, “If, after you finish college, youwant to do this, we can talk to landlords and get you aspace in a unit, or you can come back to the market.”From small acorns, businesses grow. All big businessestoday were small businesses once, and young people canbe the best retailers, because they will challenge convention.We should do more to champion that.

3.22 pm

Mr Alan Campbell (Tynemouth) (Lab): It is a pleasureto serve under your chairmanship, Mr Walker. Icongratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport(Ann Coffey) and the hon. Member for North Swindon(Justin Tomlinson) on securing this important debate. Itis a timely one, given the number of retailers who will behoping to do very well in the run-up to Christmas to seewhether they can remain on the high street.

On a positive note, I should say that a lot of hardwork goes on in town centres and high streets to makesure that retail is successful and has a secure future. TheNorth Shields chamber of trade and commerce andWhitley Bay chamber of trade constantly promote theinterests of their members but also of the town as awhole. Newspapers such as The Journal in Newcastleand the News Guardian in my constituency encouragepeople to shop locally and on the high street. I hopethey will also encourage them to get behind smallbusiness Saturday on 7 December.

Perhaps most importantly, to pick up on the pointmade by the hon. Member for North Swindon, manyyoung people and women seem to be setting up retailoutlets in places such as Park View in Whitley Bay. Theyharness new technology and come up with new andinnovative ways to make it an interesting place to visit,spend time and shop.

Many retailers, including many small independents,have a difficult struggle to survive day to day. I want tofocus on one aspect of a complex group of issues, whichhas not yet been covered in the debate: the importance


[Mr Alan Campbell]

of making high streets safe to visit and of enablingretailers to trade without suffering losses through criminality,which can in extreme cases jeopardise their businesses.

The British Retail Consortium survey of December2012 reported that the cost of retail crime in 2011-12was about £1.6 billion, 83% of which was theft involvingcustomers. Half that goes undetected. There is, anecdotally,concern about the possibility that almost three decadesof diminishing crime rates may be levelling out—andmay begin to rise. I hope that that does not happen.

I am told that in 30 of the police force areas there isevidence that crime—particularly acquisitive crime, and,within that category, particularly shoplifting—is increasing.There is a danger of an overall rise in crime. I hope weshall not return to what was traditionally viewed as thelink between recession and crime—albeit with somethingof a lag. I accept that the annual crime figures may notyet show that effect, but I am told that over a period ofsix to nine months a worrying picture has been emerging.

Retailers are on the front line. Newsagents and generalstores stock perhaps the most transportable and resellablegoods of all: alcohol and tobacco. Shoplifting is not avictimless crime. It adds to the retailer’s business costs,as well as to customers’ costs at a time when the cost ofliving is rising. Often, independent retailers are thehardest hit, if not because of the sheer volume of theproblem, then because of the effect on their businesscosts.

The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill iscurrently being considered, and there has been concernabout the definition of low-value shoplifting as beingwhen the value of the stolen goods does not exceed£200. That is a lot of money to many independentstores. There is a perception, and even greater concern,that people arrested for shoplifting are sometimes beingcautioned again and again, and that any recompense forthe retailer is missing. I know that that is not theMinister’s area of responsibility, but I ask him to drawit to the attention of his ministerial colleagues.

Some retailers I speak to have been asking whetherthe Government intend to review the guidance onshoplifting. We read almost daily about people stealinghousehold goods—including, increasingly, food. Sometimesthat is, obviously, to feed a family. There could benumerous reasons for what is happening, such as benefitchanges, worklessness or just criminality. However, itcould also be part of organised crime, and, as far as Iam concerned, a crime is a crime.

The police and courts need appropriate and proportionatepenalties to be available, and £200 is an awful lot ofmoney to a shopkeeper. Organised crime gang membersmay individually steal goods worth less than £200, butthat can hardly be described as low-level crime; and it ishardly something that warrants a caution. I know fromexperience that there are many good schemes for combatinghigh street, and particularly retail, crime. Many tradersin Whitley Bay are linked by a radio system, and theyhave a good relationship with the police. However, theykeep saying, “We are doing our bit; can you make surethat, should people steal from us, the penalties will beproportionate?”

I want to end on a slightly different aspect of thesame issue: the unfortunate and all too frequent verbalabuse and threats of violence towards retail staff. I draw

the House’s attention to the Freedom from Fear campaignof the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers,which focuses on violence against shop workers. Itwould be nice if the Minister said something in supportof that campaign and of those who work in retail.

3.29 pm

Martin Vickers (Cleethorpes) (Con): It is always apleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Walker.I join others in congratulating my colleagues, the hon.Member for Stockport (Ann Coffey) and my hon. Friendthe Member for North Swindon (Justin Tomlinson), onsecuring this timely debate.

We do not need surveys or focus groups to establishthat high streets are popular with our constituents,whose natural instincts support a thriving high street. Isuspect that is even more true in some of our smallermarket towns. High streets in towns such as Barton-upon-Humber in my constituency, which has a good mix ofindependent shops, are certainly highly valued by localpeople. I am pleased to say that Cleethorpes itself has athriving shopping area, in the appropriately namedHigh street and down St Peter’s avenue, with a good mixof shops that is well valued by the local community.

As has already been suggested, the retail environmentis changing dramatically. Too many attempts are madeto preserve the high street scene and ignore the fact thatshopping habits have changed due to the internet andwhat almost amounts in some cases to the migration ofthe town centre to a different location on the edge oftown or urban retail parks. We have all witnessed whatstarts simply as an edge-of-town supermarket expanduntil a cluster of other retail units form around it; in ashort space of time, we have a competing town centre orhigh street. Whether or not those changes are for thebetter, we cannot alter the fact that the customer hasdecided that they are here to stay.

The Portas review was established and, as I stated inprevious debates, I see little in it that does anythingmore than apply a sticking plaster to a gaping wound. Ido not blame the Government for using a celebrity tofront the review. Sometimes celebrities can draw moreattention to issues than any politician or businessmancan. To be fair to Mary Portas, her report recognisesthat retailers need fewer shops and recognises the onwardmarch of the supermarkets, which is of course the mainreason why we need fewer retail units. She is half rightwhen she states:

“We have sacrificed communities for convenience.”

I suggest that in most cases the communities are stillthere, but they shop elsewhere. I look back to my earlychildhood in Fuller street in Cleethorpes. It still existsand the same 80 or 90 houses are still occupied, but MrMarrows, the grocer down the street, and Mr Nocton,the butcher round the corner, along with the baker, thehardware shop and many others, have long disappeared.

Like every town in the country, Cleethorpes simplyhas too many retail units. Nocton’s butchers stood onGrimsby road, which is the main road between Grimsbyand the adjoining town of Cleethorpes. It is also themain entrance to the resort of Cleethorpes, and themany bricked-up, derelict properties do not enhancethe reputation of what I am pleased to say is still athriving resort. Property values and rents are low. Manysole traders are surviving without necessarily thriving.


Whether the property owners are the traders themselves,a local landlord or indeed an absentee landlord, anincentive is needed to convert many of the now emptyretail units to residential use. With the powers grantedto local authorities by the Government’s localism agenda,councils have sufficient powers in their armouries toembark on regeneration schemes. The reality is thatvery little is happening. Parades of shops up and downthe land scar the communities they once served. Wemust quickly embark on schemes that can revitalisesuch areas.

In the North East Lincolnshire council area, which isone of the councils that serves my constituency, schemesto renovate empty houses already exist, but they onlyscratch the surface. This Government and previousGovernments have poured many millions into variousinitiatives that, as I said earlier, only apply an Elastoplastto a wound. We need initiatives that perhaps allow localauthorities to spend that sort of money on compulsorypurchase, rather than repave vast areas or patch up onelittle area. I have served on a local authority, so I knowhow difficult compulsory purchase is to achieve. Itoften takes two, three or more years to accomplish for arelatively small group of properties, and we need tomake it easier. The resources spent on various initiativeswould be better spent on buying up properties. Councilscould then sell them at a knock-down price—perhapseven give them away—with a compulsory brief thatwhoever purchased them had to convert them or usethem for a particular scheme.

Roberta Blackman-Woods (City of Durham) (Lab):The hon. Gentleman is making a number of importantpoints about the powers local authorities have to shapetheir areas. Does he accept that recent Governmentchanges deregulating permitted development make itmuch more difficult for local authorities to influencewhat happens on the high street?

Martin Vickers: I am afraid that I do not agree withthe hon. Lady. I am very much one for freeing up theability of councils to put together plans, schemes andinitiatives of the sort I mentioned, which, although theymay need central funding to kick-start them, are bottom-upschemes. I cannot agree with her.

Much is made of car parking charges. I agree that inan ideal world we would not have them—my hon.Friend the Member for Brigg and Goole (Andrew Percy)will refer to the successful schemes that North EastLincolnshire council has introduced—but getting rid ofcharges is not a panacea. I recall mentioning in a similardebate that I was the councillor on North East Lincolnshirecouncil responsible for environmental services, includingcar parking. We discussed it time and time again andhad various initiatives to help with Christmas shoppingand the like, but the reality is that we got £1.25 millionin income from car parking charges. If a council isproviding services elsewhere, it simply cannot at a strokesay, “We’ll do away with that £1 million.” It is a problem.

Grimsby town centre, the main shopping centre thatserves my constituency, has a successful and thrivingshopping centre, Freshney Place, which charges. Peoplego there in their thousands, often at the expense ofgoing to other areas that do not charge. If the offer is

right, people do not mind paying a modest amount forparking. I can see that I have just exceeded my eightminutes, so I will conclude there and hand over.

Mr Charles Walker (in the Chair): I intend to call thewind-ups at six minutes past four and give each of theFront Benchers 11 minutes. Ms Coffey can have twominutes at the end.

3.37 pmMary Macleod (Brentford and Isleworth) (Con): I

want to make a few brief remarks. I thank the hon.Member for Stockport (Ann Coffey) and my hon. Friendthe Member for North Swindon (Justin Tomlinson) forsecuring the debate, because this issue is important toall of us. We all have local communities in our constituencies,and we want them to thrive and our traders to succeed.We want independent traders, of which there are fewerand fewer, to be a key part of that. The debate is criticalbecause it is about communities, which are usuallycreated with shopping centres and high streets at theircentre. High streets can help to create stronger communities,and we want to ensure that they can continue to do so.My first two jobs were in shops in Scotland, so the topicis close to my heart.

The debate is topical, given that we are coming to theChristmas period and a lot of shops and traders arefeeling nervous about the next few weeks. As has beenmentioned, more people are shopping online and out oftown. In London, big chains are pushing up rents. Myconstituency is in west London. People think of Londonas a city, but apart from the inner city, London is madeup of little villages. I have several specific high streets inmy constituency that I look at in particular: Chiswickhigh road; High street in Brentford; High street inHounslow; South street in Isleworth; Thornbury roadin Osterley; and London road.

The Mayor of London has taken this issue on as ahigh priority. Recently, two of my high streets havereceived £4.8 million in support from the Mayor’s outerLondon fund. That has helped in creating a town centremanager, markets, Christmas lights—any initiative thatwould bring people to the high street and make it afocal point for people to shop and go to the restaurantsthere. A lot has been done. Of course, we have heardalready about the Portas review. In fact, Mary Portasopened a shop on my local high street, Living andGiving, which is a shop for Save the Children—it is acharity shop on Chiswick High road. Some interestingpoints came out of that review, and the pilots have beenset up. Also, in London after the summer of unrest andriots that we had, there is a high street innovation fund,and a lot has been done to encourage local markets. Alot has been done in that way, and the Government havedone a lot to help to support small businesses, as manyof us were saying earlier today in the main Chamber.

There are some things we have tried to do locally. Anew market has been set up in Brentford on Sundays, towhich lots of high quality traders have been coming,including new traders. A market is a great way in forsomeone who wants to start a business. Also, I have aregular forum with my traders in Chiswick to hear theirconcerns and try to do something about them. I certainlykeep in touch with what is happening with the regenerationand transformation of two of my bigger high streets, inBrentford and Hounslow, which needed a lot of workdone to them.


[Mary Macleod]

We have started to provide free parking for 30 minutesin some areas. I have been pushing my borough toextend that scheme right across the borough—my hon.Friend the Member for North Swindon talked about, Ithink, a 10% increase in trade from such a scheme. Thatis the right way to go, and is hopefully something thatwill be implemented right across the borough as soon aspossible, because it will certainly encourage people tocome to the local high street, as opposed to going out oftown. We are also looking at business improvementdistricts. We do not have any in my part of west Londonat the moment, but there are many across London andwe want to try to build on those.

When I speak to my traders, including on the highstreet, they talk about business rates—especially in London,with its high rateable values. Ideally, I would like theMinister’s support when I go and speak to the PrimeMinister next week about what we do about businessrates, because I would like a more fundamental reformof them. Traders have also asked me where they can gofor help. Many of our traders try going to their localcouncillor or perhaps reaching out to a range of people,but who is responsible for our traders on the highstreet? Who looks after their concerns? As MPs, wehave our constituents, and I have said to my localtraders that I will absolutely help to represent theirinterests and listen to their concerns, because they are acore part of the local community.

Some of the things we are looking forward to includesmall business Saturday on 7 December, when a lot ofactivities will be taking place then across my constituency.That has helped to create a real sense of community,which is really important. Something we are seeing a lotof in London is empty shops. I would like to encouragethe use of pop-up shops, which are another way for newentrepreneurs to test out their markets, starting smalland growing from that. The more we can do to encouragepop-up shops as a starting-point, the better.

When it comes to local authorities, we want to encouragepeople to shop on the high street; therefore, there mustbe real diversity there. In some of my local areas wehave seen a whole stream of estate agents or charityshops, but what we want is a good mix, because that iswhat will get people to come to the high street. When Igo down Turnham Green terrace in Chiswick, it iswonderful to see a queue outside my butchers, MackenBrothers, on a Saturday. That just goes to show that ifsmall traders on the high street are good and peopleknow about them, they can be hugely successful. Someof the best moments for me—for example, Devonshireroad street parties—have been where the high streetshave got together and created events to improve thesense of community and to get shoppers to come theirstreets. They have been absolutely superb.

The key thing for us—all hon. Friends and hon.Members here today—is: what needs to be done to helpthe high street and help local traders to thrive? If thereis more that the Government can do to support them—whether through taxation or business rates, encouragingflexibility on parking and diversity, or looking at howwe use empty shops and encourage more pop-up shops—that will be a step in the right direction.

Mr Charles Walker (in the Chair): Hon. Members arebeing very self-limiting—very well-behaved.

3.45 pm

Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con): Thank you, Mr Walker,for calling me to speak. I will try to be as good as mycolleagues have been.

Action for Market Towns is a national charity andthe representative body committed to the vitality andviability of market towns across the country, withmembership from such towns all across Britain. After ahighly selective process, this year my constituency waschosen as the location for its annual conference, earlierthis month. Congleton was chosen as an exemplarymodel of good and joint working of all five townpartnerships in my constituency—Alsager, Congleton,Homes Chapel, Sandbach and Middlewich. They arenot competing against one other, but supporting eachother to maintain vibrant local communities, includingtheir high streets. I spoke at the conference and afterwardsconducted a Q and A session with the delegates. I wantto bring back to this debate and to the Minister some ofthe comments that delegates made about what more theGovernment could do to help to boost market townsand other smaller communities, with a particular emphasis,of course, on the high street.

One of the first points that delegates made was thatlocal enterprise partnerships could offer more opportunityto help to diversify town centres, as part of their widerlocal economic growth strategies. However, the feelingwas that LEPs tend to focus on supporting big business,not on places, and that LEPs perhaps need to focusmore on supporting market towns or working withgroups of smaller businesses. The question to the Minister,therefore, is: how can individual towns and their businessesinfluence and access LEP funds more effectively? Isthere perhaps a need or an opportunity for Governmentto inform LEP strategy development at national andlocal level, to ensure that LEPs listen to and respondeffectively to community representatives, including thoserepresenting smaller retailers?

My second point relates to developing the policy formulti-purpose town centres. I think we all acknowledgethe need for town centres to diversify, so that they canprovide retail alongside community services and play astronger leisure, culture and amenity role. There is alsoan acceptance of the potential to deliver that throughneighbourhood planning. There is the future high streetsforum, but comment was made that although this holisticview of town centres is accepted, it does not seem to beproportionately represented on the forum. I have lookedat the proportion of representatives on the forum,and there certainly seems to be a preponderance ofrepresentatives from big business and big retailers, withrelatively few representing the smaller high street retailers.The question is: are there real champions of smallbusinesses to make their voices and views heard on thefuture high streets forum, providing an holistic view ofmulti-purpose and sustainable town centres to be deliveredthrough localism and the right to plan or communityrights? Is the balance right on that forum to ensure thatthis will happen?

Thirdly, there is the issue of the reuse of public assetsin towns. Maintenance of public services and employmentin and around town centres is, as we know, vital to localwell-being and prosperity. However, there is concernthat empty public buildings could be made more readilyavailable by authorities for social and communityenterprises, perhaps at below market value if they are


lying empty. That was something that the delegatesreally wanted me to draw to the attention of the Minister.Perhaps wider local economic benefit could be takeninto account in calculating best value—using the PublicServices (Social Value) Act 2012, for example—in thesale and reuse of such public assets in and around towncentres. How can we achieve this?

I wish to touching briefly on charity shops. Their rolein the vibrancy of town centres was something of acontroversial subject among the delegates, perhaps shroudedin anecdote. It was suggested that more informed researchwas needed. Although there are negative aspects, includingrate relief—especially relating to the sale of new products—and the clustering of charity shops in prime retaillocations, on the positive side, charities and social enterprisesoccupy empty units, diversify town centres and, in someinstances, provide a broad range of services beyondretail. I have been involved for several years in a charityshop in Widnes that occupies a former empty jeweller’sshop. At the back of the town centre, we provide drugaddiction advice, debt advice, pregnancy counsellingand free legal aid. To inform the work of the future highstreets forum, what objective research is undertaken tounderstand and inform policy and good practice on theimpact of charity shops and social enterprises on towncentre vitality?

Finally, I am sure that the Minister would not wantme to speak in his presence without referring to localplans, the national planning policy framework and towncentres. The delegates acknowledged the potential benefitof new funding sources through the communityinfrastructure levy, which they welcomed, but there wasstrong consensus that the application of localism throughneighbourhood planning and wider community rightscould provide new opportunities for local businessesand community groups to determine the vitality oftheir town centres.

However, there were concerns that local proposals forsustainable business development were being overruledby proposals from large retailers and housing developers.I know of a situation near me in Tattenhall, westCheshire, where a neighbourhood plan on whose creationlocal groups spent an enormous amount, including fora local referendum, is now being challenged through thecourts by a major developer.

There is widespread concern that the continuing lackof agreed local plans leaves communities open to anydevelopment that is proposed—developments need onlymeet the NPPF requirements—and about the fact thattown plans are being ignored when planning appealstake place. I refer the Minister once again to the plightof Sandbach, where some 500 properties will now bedeveloped on the wrong side of the town centre, causingconsiderable congestion and other difficulties. Sandbachtownsfolk do not object to development, but they wantit in the right place. If only we could have waited untilthe local plan was finalised, that development wouldhave been in the right place. What can be done to ensurethat local community and business engagement inneighbourhood planning for sustainable growth is notoverruled by the inconsistent application of the NPPF,and particularly by the financial resources of majordevelopers?

From my own leadership experience as senior partnerin a community law firm on the high street for almost25 years, I know how much hard work, care and devotion

go into local community life on behalf of local businesses.I want to support that, particularly in my constituency,in the years to come.

3.53 pm

Andrew Percy (Brigg and Goole) (Con): It is a pleasureto serve under your chairmanship, Mr Walker. I concurwith colleagues who have paid tribute to the hon. Memberfor Stockport (Ann Coffey), my hon. Friend the Memberfor North Swindon (Justin Tomlinson) and the otherswho have helped secure this debate.

Town centres are incredibly important to my constituency,all 257 square miles of it. We have a lot of historicmarket towns, including Brigg, Epworth and Crowle, aswell as bigger centres such as Goole. My constituencyalso covers part of Scunthorpe, so Scunthorpe towncentre, although it is not in my constituency, is incrediblyimportant. Like other Members, I am committed to ourtown centres. I spent some time working in the USmany years ago, and I was staggered when I asked thepeople I was living with, “Where is the town centre?”and they looked at me and said, “What do you mean?” Isaid, “Where is it? There must be one. I’ve walked andwalked until the pavement ran out”—the town wasHamilton, New Jersey. The community just did nothave a town centre. I was on a street called Edinburghstreet, I remember, which was pronounced “Edinburgstreet” in New Jersey.

At the time, the thought that town centres in manyplaces had either closed down or simply did not existwas alien to me, but that was a number of years ago.Sadly, some of the things that have happened in the UShave started to happen here, particularly since the moveto out-of-town shopping centres. Maybe we have caughtup with the trend, or maybe we have regressed. I do notknow which, but it is definitely having an impact.

The life and future of town centres in my constituencyis fairly positive. They are still the centre of most of mycommunities when it comes to accessing GP services,post offices or even council services. They are also ameeting place for many generations, and they provide ahuge number of jobs. I concur with other Membersabout the importance of retail jobs. My first job at 12was being a paperboy, but at 15, I got a job in a shoeshop, supplying Hush Puppies and Jouralle shoes to theassorted masses of what was then Humberside. FreemanHardy Willis was the name of the company. I then got ajob working at McDonald’s, which I did for five yearsthrough college and university. I understand the valueof retail jobs, particularly to young people but also tothose who want to work flexibly or part-time.

Our local town centres have been supported stronglyby the local council. I want to highlight several examplesfrom North Lincolnshire council that could be appliednationally and that show what can be achieved for ourtown centres when local authorities and town centreretailers work in partnership. When we took control ofmy town council in 2011, we were swift in removingparking charges in Brigg. Since then, the council hasintroduced free parking periods, with the strong supportof the Scunthorpe Telegraph, an excellent local newspaper.We have extended free parking into Scunthorpe, and Ihope we can go further. It was the previous Labourcouncil, sadly, that imposed charges in Brigg.


[Andrew Percy]

The importance of those measures came home to meduring the first Christmas after we removed the chargesin 2011. I went to open Santa’s shack in Brigg, in one ofour famous hardware stores—other options are available,of course—and the manager of the shop said to me,“You wouldn’t believe the impact the free parking periodhas had.” People are not fearful of being ticketed. Theyunderstand the rules, and they know that they can comeinto Brigg and shop for two hours, so they do not driveto an out-of-town centre on the edge of Scunthorpe orelsewhere; they come into Brigg to do their shopping.We should not underestimate the value of free parking.

Nor should we underestimate the value of reasonableparking attendants. Epworth is having a big problem,and retail businesses are struggling. Retailers have beento see me, and I have got the council to agree to reviewthe aggressive enforcement of parking rules that isdriving people out of our town centres. Free periods area good start, but after two hours when the free periodexpires, parking attendants must be reasonable.

In response to a little campaign that I ran with Gooletown centre, a local council of mine has managed to getfree wi-fi in Goole town centre by working with JibbaJabba, a local broadband provider based in Doncaster.It is an excellent name; those of us from the ’80s willremember “The A-Team”. Anyone who comes intoGoole and logs on to the wi-fi will be greeted by a nicepicture of me welcoming them to the free wi-fi service.[Interruption.] Take-up has been high; whether peoplerepeat their visit I am not sure.

That is in the East Riding of Yorkshire part of myconstituency. I took the idea to North Lincolnshirecouncil, which has agreed to roll out wi-fi to all ourtown centres to support local businesses. Many of ourtowns, such as Epworth, have burgeoning café and foodoutlet environments, which I strongly support. Theyhave said to me that having free wi-fi has been importantin Goole. People come in, sit there and use it with theirtablets out, and they buy an extra coffee while doing so,because they realise that they can get fast internet whileenjoying their lunch or coffee break, as people do thesedays.

Councils must be proactive on crime. Town centrecrime is a concern, particularly for small retailers. Wehad a bit of a spike in Epworth not so long ago. I ampleased that, working with local councillors there—Liz Redfern and David Robinson—we managed to get£45,000 out of the council to install CCTV cameras inEpworth town centre, which retailers have welcomed.We also got the local council to fund extra policecommunity support officers there and provide two newPCSOs in the Isle of Axholme and others in parts ofnorth Lincolnshire. Again, it is working in partnershipbecause it understands that crime is important in respectof retail and the economy, and in making people feelsafe and confident enough to come into town centres. Iwelcome that partnership.

There are other simple things that councils can do.We set up a body in Brigg, of which I am the chairman—Iam not in control of everything in the constituency; thisis not some despotic regime—called Brigg 2020, aregeneration partnership. I also chair one in Goole,called Goole Renaissance. In Brigg, we got the councilto look at the street furniture and ask, “What is attractive

about our town centre and what isn’t?” The battered oldrailings that welcome people into town do not exactlysay, “This is a place to come and enjoy an afternoon”,or “Enjoy your shopping.”That is not acceptable. Simplyby doing an audit of such things and getting the councilto commit to replacing them, we can change the appearanceof our town centres.

When councils get it—when they understand it—andwhen they do not see themselves as being in conflictwith retailers, it can work. Sometimes, retailers say,“The council is not doing enough for us,” and sometimesthe council says, “Oh, well, retailers are just complainingabout parking, yet again. It’s the usual thing,”or, “They’recomplaining about litter.” When we park all thosetraditional tussles and replace them with proper partnershipworking, we can achieve a great deal. We do not have agreat number of empty shops in the smaller markettowns in my area.

We still have a big problem in town centres, and I donot know how the Government are responding to thematter. Sadly, in the past few years, in Scunthorpe, oneof the bigger town centres, Marks & Spencer has left,although it is returning to my constituency at an out-of-townunit on the edge of Scunthorpe. Although we have triedto get it into the town centre, it is not interested in that.It is difficult to know how the Government shouldrespond to the flight away from big town centres. In thepast couple of weeks, McDonald’s, of all companies,has announced that it is leaving Scunthorpe town centre,despite its being incredibly busy. It mentioned businessrates, the shift of people out of town and online sales, asothers have done.

I have gone 30 seconds over time, despite beingself-limiting. There was much more that I wanted to say,not about various positions that I hold but about whatwe can do to support our town centres by working inpartnership. I hope that the Government will respondto questions raised by colleagues and to my concernsabout the need to continue extending small businessrate relief and about our biggest stores, to ensure thatthere is a fair, level playing field in town centres and outof town.

Mr Charles Walker (in the Chair): Order. I remindFront-Bench speakers that we will allow the Memberwho secured the debate two minutes at the end, soperhaps they could be self-limiting as well.

4.3 pm

Roberta Blackman-Woods (City of Durham) (Lab):It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship,Mr Walker. I thank my hon. Friend the Member forStockport (Ann Coffey) and the hon. Member forNorth Swindon (Justin Tomlinson) for securing thisdebate and pay tribute to their work as joint chairs ofthe all-party retail group. I pay tribute to all hon.Members who have spoken passionately about theirareas. I will return in a moment or two to some specificpoints that they raised.

The importance of high streets and retail cannot bebetter demonstrated than in Stockport, where, as myhon. Friend eloquently outlined, retail is a significantpart of the economy and contributes a large proportionof jobs in the town. Stockport is benefiting from thereshaping of the town’s retail offer, and in a way it isforging a new identity. That is to be applauded.


I am pleased that my hon. Friend the Member forTynemouth (Mr Campbell) mentioned the Union ofShop, Distributive and Allied Workers campaign tokeep shop workers safe, because we do not talk enoughabout that in the House and we have to consider it whenthinking about regenerating our high streets and towncentres.

I am glad that most hon. Members mentioned smallbusiness Saturday on 7 December. I am sure that we areall getting behind it and supporting our small businesses.It is worth highlighting.

It is pertinent to discuss the state of our high streets.We have had a number of debates on the subject in theHouse recently and in the past few years. The issue willnot go away, and the reason for that is clear: we areseeing a decline in the variety of businesses that makeup our high streets. There are now more than twice asmany betting shops in British high streets than all thecinemas, bingo halls, museums, bowling alleys and soon put together, but the situation is not inevitable.Positive interventions can be made, and we should notaccept the automatic decline of our high street due totrends of online shopping and so on. We have to makethe right interventions, and they must be supported bythe Government, who must help the process ofdiversification that we know is needed.

The facts make concerning reading. At this moment,one in seven of Britain’s shops lie empty, and in someplaces it is one in three. Given that position, the Governmentshould take action to support the high street, but recentdata show us that, in a large number of areas, the highstreet revolution has failed to take off. Vacancy rates,although improving, are doing so only marginally, witha reduction from 14.2% to 14.1%.

The Government’s approach is fragmented. A numberof initiatives have been mentioned. We have Portaspilots, town team partners, the future high streetsforum, a high street innovation fund, the high streetrenewal award, a fund for business improvementsdistricts, local enterprise partnerships, local authorities,neighbourhood plans and neighbourhood business plans.Most commentators are saying that we need a moreco-ordinated approach, nationally and locally, to helpour high streets.

The Government should consider more closely theadvice in the Grimsey report, which in many waysechoes what was set out in the Portas review. As myhon. Friend said, that report seeks comprehensively toaddress the challenges facing the sector. Grimsey set anobjective to repopulate high streets and town centres ascommunity hubs, with more housing, education, arts,entertainment, business and office space, health andleisure provision and, of course, shops. He also suggestedsetting up a town centre commission for each town,with a defined skills base and structure, to build a20-year vision for each town. He thought that theGovernment should, at least, pilot that approach. Healso said that we should prepare for a wired town centreand that there should be particular support for our highstreets, to enable them to embrace new technology, asmy hon. Friend outlined. We are not seeing a specificenough initiative to deal with that issue.

In his foreword to his report, Grimsey said:“We’ve seen reviews, pilots, future high street forums and more.But none of these initiatives are making much impact and there isa frustrating sense of policy being conducted in the margins. Theneed to grasp the nettle is bigger than ever.”

He acutely identifies the most serious challenges facingthe industry, saying:

“The bigger area of concern, though, is the plight of smallerretailers. Many remain horribly stressed financially with an averagerating that hovers perilously above the Company Watch warningarea. The same pattern applies in the supply chain. For independentshops, a sector that the Business Secretary has previouslyacknowledged to be an essential part of a healthy high street, thefuture looks very uncertain. The fact that our analysis shows46.6 per cent of all retailers in the UK are in the warning area,and by definition at serious risk of failure, should be a loudwakeup call to ministers”—

and to all of us. He states:“As a check up on the health of the high street, the prognosis is

not good. Over 20,000 businesses are at risk and we can expectmore and more business failures”

unless action is taken.“There are around 40,000 empty shops in the UK, and this has

remained”

pretty“constant over…three years.”

The question must be, what are local government andcentral Government going to do about that?

Part of the answer, undoubtedly, is to enable changeof use for premises. What the Government are doing onchange of use, however, is making things worse, notbetter. We know that the consequence of the Government’schanges, particularly those since May, has been to allowmore bookies and payday lenders to set up shop on ourhigh streets. The Government are taking away fromlocal authorities the ability to shape what is happeningon their high street and to respond to communitydemand, yet we know that communities want their localauthorities to have more control of high street improvement.

A recent survey by Deloitte shows that 73% of peoplewant customers to have a strong role in shaping the highstreet, and 47% want local authorities to be able to dothat. Only 13% want landlords to be able to shape whathappens on the high street, yet that is exactly what wehave ended up with under this Government. Becauseplanning permission is no longer required for manychanges of use on our high street, our local authoritiesand communities have no ability to shape what is happening.That is the exact opposite of the approach that the hon.Member for Cleethorpes (Martin Vickers) suggests, whichis that local authorities should have powers to shapewhat happens on the high street, such as by having morerights to purchase properties compulsorily.

The hon. Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce) madean excellent point on local authorities using social valueclauses to help, for example, local people set up start-upunits—there would be more pop-up shops. That isexactly the set of uses that local authorities might wanton their high street, but if it is simply left to the marketto say how empty properties will be used or changed, weare not likely to get the sorts of premises that localpeople want.

What is likely to happen, as I witnessed when I visitedWoolwich high street last week, is that in a row of 16shops, nine will be payday loan companies or bookies.Local people told me that they are very unhappy withthe situation. They said that, in the past couple of years,the council had indeed spent money on the town squarebut that it was being thoroughly undermined by thenumber of fast food outlets and so on in the area.


[Roberta Blackman-Woods]

The last time I raised that point with the Minister, hewent out and said to the media, “This is about Labourtrying to say to you that you shouldn’t be able to buy aMcDonald’s.” I make it clear that that is not what weare saying; we are saying that people do not want anover-saturation of a particular type of shop on theirhigh street. As the hon. Member for Brentford andIsleworth (Mary Macleod) said, what we need isdiversification on our high street. People are telling usclearly that they want independent retailers and communityuses; they do not want to see one type of premisestaking over the high street.

I hope the Minister will help us to understand howthe Government’s approach will assist with thatdiversification, because I cannot see that approach operatingin practice. In fact, we know from across the countrythat the opposite is happening. The Government coulddo more. The Government must urgently address changeof use and the relaxation of permitted development,and they must give local authorities and communitiesreal powers to shape their high street. That is urgent,but the Government need to do other things. They mustconsider the wider economy, too.

A recent report by the Centre for Cities claims thatthe biggest factor affecting the success or failure of ourhigh street is the overall strength of the town or citycentre’s economy, and the slow economic recovery overthe past three years has really affected the high street.The Government should be doing more to addressbusiness rates, increasing rents and higher energy costs,all of which are particularly affecting small business.Again, small businesses themselves are asking theGovernment to address those issues urgently.

Mr Charles Walker (in the Chair): I thank the shadowMinister for her perfectly timed speech.

4.15 pmThe Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for

Communities and Local Government (Brandon Lewis):It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship,Mr Walker.

I congratulate the Members who secured this debate,which has been very interesting, not least because, in themain, it has been positive about the great things that arehappening across our high streets and town centres.There has been positive consideration of what more canbe done to ensure that, in the 21st century, we have towncentres not only that we can be proud of but that serveand reflect what the community needs and wants. Fromthat point of view, the debate has been extremely good,interesting and positive.

One of the fundamental differences between the hon.Member for City of Durham (Roberta Blackman-Woods)and me—my hon. Friend the Member for Cleethorpes(Martin Vickers) outlined this fairly well—is that Ithink the high street is what we make it. We have tounderstand that the high street is changing. In someways, the high street will get smaller and town centreswill shrink as retail demand changes. I will address thatin a moment.

It is very much not for the Government to managethe high street from the top down. The Grimsey reportoutlines, and I have discussed this with Bill Grimsey,

that the Government should dictate exactly how a highstreet plan should be done and who should do it. Thereport contains an idea for taxing successful retailers tohelp less successful or smaller retailers. We certainly willnot be considering the introduction of more taxes thathit retailers in the way that the previous Governmentperhaps would have done.

We clearly want businesses to have flexibility. When Italk to businesses, they say that they want flexibility toevolve and reflect. To be entirely honest, I am slightlyconfused by the shadow Minister’s comment that weshould have flexibility for diversification without allowingflexibility for planning changes in the high street. I amnot sure how we can have it both ways. The reality isthat councils have the ability through planning permission,not least through article 4 and through the regulation ofgaming, to ensure that the high street balance is correct.

On fast food, I have never said anything of the sortsuggested by the shadow Minister. The point I havemade previously is that it is not for the Government todictate whether there are too many or too few fast foodrestaurants. High streets and town centres will reflectwhat we, as customers and consumers, demand throughhow we shop and what we use, whatever the company—whether it is a small local business or a big brand name.

Big brand names are often run by local businesspeople, either directly or as a franchise, and they certainlyemploy local people and spend good money on theirshops. They can be an important part of the high street.As my hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Goole(Andrew Percy) said, we tend to miss those companieswhen they start talking about moving, but, equally, theyare an important part of the high street. We should notknock that. The big brand names are there because weuse them, which is the reality of life.

The hon. Member for Stockport (Ann Coffey) madea thoughtful and powerful speech on the digital worldin which we now live. I think that we are now thecountry with the highest online shopping usage as apercentage of shopping population. We must be awarethat things are changing. Google glasses are potentiallypart of what we could be seeing in future.

The hon. Lady is right that we need to spread bestpractice. A debate such as this—we have heard someexamples this afternoon—is a good way to do that. Wehave put £1 million into the Association of Town CentreManagement, and the future high streets forum isconsidering how we share best practice, whether it isthrough the 333 town teams, through volunteers workingin their local area or through the Portas pilots. Moregenerally, we are all working across the media to promotegood examples of best practice.

In my constituency of Great Yarmouth, we have atown centre partnership and a business improvementdistrict, or BID. I am a huge fan of BIDs. One of thethings that the Great Yarmouth BID has done is tointroduce wi-fi across the town, which has been massivelywelcomed by the local community. The hon. Lady isabsolutely right that we must ensure that our townsembrace such digital technology, not least as retail andour high streets change. I appreciate the title of thedebate, but our high streets are growing towards beingnot only somewhere that we go to shop and do otherthings, but a destination for leisure and hospitalitywhere we may do some shopping. We must recognisethat fact.


My hon. Friend the Member for North Swindon(Justin Tomlinson) touched on his experience and declaredhimself another unabashed Mary Portas fan. He canjoin my club. Mary Portas has done a fantastic job, notleast in raising the issue’s profile and setting out ajourney and ideology, to which the key is recognisingthe unique selling point of every individual town centre.

From the success of the Portas pilots and town teamsaround the country, we can see that there is no homogeneoustick list; different things work differently in differentplaces. Good things can work brilliantly in one place,but they will not necessarily work somewhere else, so wemust examine how different areas evolve. I congratulateThe Daily Telegraph on its current high streets campaign,a part of which is a competition to find, through itsreaders, the best high street, and I am delighted to bechairing the panel. An interesting thing that has comefrom that is how every area is different and how areasare embracing their differences to make them stand outas unique selling points.

My hon. Friend also mentioned parking charges.Braintree, for example, saw a 40,000 increase in footfallas soon as parking charges were reduced. Parking chargesare an important part of the mix, and areas should beacutely aware of that. He was also right to highlightyoung retailers and young people being part of the highstreet. The high street should absolutely be a leisure andhospitality area, which is a point that links perfectly tothe contribution of the hon. Member for Tynemouth(Mr Campbell). He spoke about the importance ofsafety on our high streets, particularly given the growingnight-time economy. That economy is to be embracedas an important part of the high street, but the staffwho work there need to be safe. People have the right tobe treated with respect and will provide good customerservice as a result. Equally, when our children andfriends go out, we want to know that they are safe. Theyhave the right to feel safe.

My hon. Friend the Member for Cleethorpes describedthe changing shape of the high street. He mentioned thesmall business rate relief, and I am proud that theGovernment have trebled that to over £900 million tohelp businesses right across the country. He makes a fairpoint about how retail is changing and how retail spacesin many areas need to shrink. I am pleased that we areconsulting on the flexibility to change retail spaces backto residential use, which would increase footfall in ourtown centres and allow them to reflect the changetowards leisure and hospitality.

Hair and beauty, and the service industry in general,is one of the fastest-growing parts of the high street.Businesses such as Fusion in Gorleston in my constituencyhave spent a fortune improving their shop fronts. Myhon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce)mentioned the future high streets forum. I am lookingat its membership and want to change it slightly toreflect the hospitality and leisure aspect of high streets,including the service industries. Hairdressers, for example,have not been a part of it before. The high streeteconomy is no longer just about retail. It is wideningand small businesses represent a part of that.

My hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth(Mary Macleod) mentioned parking and pop-up shops.We practise what we preach in the Department forCommunities and Local Government—not only didwe proudly cut our costs by 60%, but we also have a

pop-up shop, which I recommend for hon. Members’Christmas shopping. She is right that areas should beconsidering such things. In Great Yarmouth, our towncentre partnership and the council are looking at exactlythat sort of thing, almost as an alchemy centre to givenew independent retailers the opportunity to develop,to test the market and to grow.

My hon. Friend, along with other hon. Members,also referred to business rates, about which I do getcomments from time to time. We must appreciate thatnot only do we have the autumn statement next week—Iwould not want to prejudge what the Chancellor willsay—but that retail is only one part of business rates.When we looked at the revaluation, we found that therewould have been 800,000 losers and just 300,000 winners,of which retail would have been one, as would much ofthe hospitality and leisure industries. We must be cautiouswhen making presumptions about business rates, butwe can discuss that another time. I outlined the matterduring Communities and Local Government questionson Monday.

My hon. Friend the Member for Congleton mentionedlocal enterprise partnerships, which should, where relevant,consider town centres as important. In some areas, ifemployees will have somewhere good to go, the towncentre can actually be part of what will attract a companyto invest in an area. A good, vibrant town centre can bethe heartbeat of a community. My hon. Friend theMember for Brigg and Goole touched on that whenhe mentioned the town centre being at the centre of acommunity.

Charity shops do have an important part to play. Myhon. Friend the Member for Congleton mentionedresearch, and Demos is currently carrying out some onthis very issue. Good charity shops can play an importantrole in the community. They receive both good and badpress, but any kind of retail outlet on the high street canbe good or bad depending on how it is presented andlooked after. Charity shops sometimes offer coffee facilitiesand can also get involved running community eventsfrom their stores. They can also be a huge draw forfootfall.

My hon. Friend also touched on planning, and councilsnow have the ability to have a play in that systemthrough their local plan. We have discussed this before.I hope that her council will hurry up and get its localplan in place. I am quite happy to chastise them a littleas it has been somewhat slower in getting its plantogether than residents would appreciate.

My hon. Friend the Member for Brigg and Goolemade important points about how the town centreshould be the heartbeat of its community. I am pleasedthat he has such a positive view of the future and he isquite right to do so. The town centre is an importantsource of employment in the community and can providea fantastic career path. Despite the numbers of peopleemployed in hospitality and retail in this country, weoften undervalue the sector and do not promote enoughjust what a fantastic career it can be. Someone startingout in retail could end up in the House of Commons,which could happen to anyone, or they could have afantastic career in retail, which goes across many differentorganisations, or they could be an entrepreneur runningtheir own independent business—hopefully benefitingfrom the Government’s small business rate relief.


[Brandon Lewis]

In conclusion, our town centres have a really goodopportunity as we move forward. Change is happeningon the high street and the high street must change. Highstreets should grasp the opportunity to become whatthe consumer wants them to be in the 21st century. TheGovernment must tread a careful line. We want not tointerfere and create false economies, but to create afacility where local people, local businesses and localauthorities can work together to provide what we allwant—vibrant, successful high streets and town centresthat are the heartbeat of their communities and successfulnot just now, but for years to come.

4.27 pmAnn Coffey: With the leave of the House, I will briefly

respond. Thank you, Mr Walker, for chairing this debate.I thank my co-sponsor and co-chair of the all-partygroup, the hon. Member for North Swindon, whom Ilook forward to working with on retail issues. He clearlyhas huge knowledge and real experience in the sector. Ialso thank the shadow Minister and the Minister fortheir thoughtful replies.

I thank all hon. Members for their contributions,which were based on their different experiences anddifferent constituencies. It is a strength of the constituencysystem that it enables Members who represent big cities,rural communities or coastal towns, where many differentthings happen, to contribute to such a debate. Therange of topics has been huge—jobs, crime, planning,parking, partnerships, empty shops, local initiatives,business improvement districts and everything else.

It has been a fantastic debate that has shown thecomplex interaction of factors, and that the problemsare not easily solvable by one simple public policy orprivate initiative. I stress again that we need public-privatepartnerships to provide innovation and to transformthe high street, but they must be the right kind ofpartnerships, namely those based on evidence of theright kind of interventions.


4.29 pmSitting adjourned.


Written Statements


BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS

Trade Foreign Affairs Council andWTO Ministerial Conference

The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovationand Skills (Michael Fallon): My noble Friend the Ministerof State for Trade and Investment, Lord Green ofHurstpierpoint, has made the following statement:

The Trade Foreign Affairs Council will take place in NusaDua, Bali on 3 December 2013. The Council meeting is being heldin the margins of the ninth WTO ministerial conference which isbeing held from 3 to 6 December 2013. I will be representing theUK at both and I will be acting as a vice-chair at the ministerialconference.

The Trade Foreign Affairs Council is being held in the marginsof the WTO conference to allow any essential business pertainingto the conference to be finalised.

Negotiations are under way on a set of deliverables that couldbe agreed at the ministerial conference. Some of these form partof the Doha development agenda (DDA) and if agreed, wouldconstitute the first multilateral agreement for 20 years. Somenon-DDA issues are also likely to be agreed at the conference forexample, the secession of Yemen to the WTO.

The Government’s objectives for the conference are to:Reiterate our commitment to the multilateral trading systemby pushing for an ambitious and balanced outcome to theconference.Support a political understanding on the text of an ambitiousand legally binding trade facilitation agreement.Support agreement on a limited number of agriculturalissues which would be of benefit to developing and leastdeveloped countries.Support the establishment of the monitoring mechanism forspecial and differential treatment for developing and leastdeveloped countries.Support the WTO ministerial decisions on: the operationalisationof the services waiver for least developed countries; preferentialrules of origin for least developed countries and cotton.Support the extension of the moratorium on charging customsduties on electronic transmissions and the extension of themoratorium on bringing non-violation and situation complaintsunder the trade related aspects of intellectual property agreement.Welcome the accession of Yemen to the WTO.

Student Support

The Minister for Universities and Science (Mr DavidWilletts): In the spending review this summer, we announcedour intention to end the undergraduate national scholarshipprogramme (NSP) after 2014-15. That decision wasbased on evaluation which has shown that there aremore valuable ways of widening access and enlargingthe choices students make about higher education throughthe negotiated access agreements of universities. In thelast three years the funding of access has greatly increasedand we are now able to deploy these resources to greatereffect. By bringing forward from 2015-16 the planned

reduction of £100 million in funding for the NSP we areable to redirect £25 million to establish a new networkto support collaborative outreach.

Universities, colleges and schools will benefit from aninvestment of £25 million in 2014 to help them worktogether more effectively as they reach out to encouragemore people from disadvantaged backgrounds to applyto university.

The funds will be used to create a locally-basednetwork and crucially will provide a single point ofcontact for schools seeking information on how to bepart of outreach activity. A single point of contact willbe simpler for schools enabling them to make contactwith all their local universities and colleges.

Well thought-out outreach activities can raise aspirationsand attainment, enabling bright young people from lowincome or other underrepresented backgrounds to seethat university really can be an option for them. Weknow that outreach is most effective when delivered as asustained programme of activity over time. Outreachtherefore needs to be directed towards young people atdifferent stages of their educational lives and beginearly at primary level. These new arrangements willhelp to do this in a more targeted and sustained way.They will also help more mature learners through linkswith further education colleges, employers and localcommunities.

The national scholarship programme will remain inplace for 2014-15, targeting £50 million from Governmenttowards students in most need of help. Universities willalso continue to support NSP awards in the final year ofthe scheme, in addition to offering other bursaries andscholarships to their students.

To make the programme more flexible for students inthis transition year, we have removed the £1,000 limit onthe amount of the award that can be given in the formof cash. We have also reduced the minimum level ofaward for full-time students to £2,000, which meansthat 100,000 students could still receive an award, in linewith our original estimate.

The Government have also announced previouslythat £50 million from the NSP would be refocused in2015-16 to support students from less advantagedbackgrounds to access postgraduate education, and inareas that support the Government’s ambitions forgrowth.

Our reforms have ensured that universities investsignificantly in widening access. The director of fairaccess has reported that institutions plan to spend over£700 million a year by 2017-18 on such measures—greatlyincreased from £444 million in 2011-12. Evidence showsstudents are not being deterred. Latest available datafrom UCAS show that for the 2013-14 entry cycle morestudents than ever before are getting their first choice atuniversity; the entry rate for 18-year-olds in England isthe highest ever; and the proportion of 18-year-oldsfrom the most disadvantaged backgrounds applying touniversity has increased to the highest level recorded.

TREASURY

Turks and Caicos Islands (Tax Agreement)

The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury (Mr DavidGauke): An arrangement comprising of an exchangeof letters amending the 2009 tax information exchange

19WS 20WS28 NOVEMBER 2013Written Statements Written Statements

agreement (TIEA) with the Turks and Caicos Islandswas signed on 26 November 2013 to permit automaticand spontaneous exchange of information. At the sametime an agreement was also signed to improve internationaltax compliance which sets out the precise details of theinformation which will be automatically exchanged.The text of the agreement to improve international taxcompliance has been deposited in the Libraries of bothHouses and will be made available on HM Revenue andCustoms’ website. The text amending the tax informationexchange agreement will be scheduled to a draft Orderin Council and laid before the House of Commons indue course.

DEFENCE

Foreign Affairs Council

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence(Dr Andrew Murrison): The 19 November 2013 DefenceForeign Affairs Council opened with consideration ofthe European Defence Agency budget: I successfullyargued for a flat cash settlement. Discussing the defenceindustry in more detail than the previous day’s jointSession with Foreign Ministers, Defence Ministers werebroadly agreed on initiatives to improve small andmedium-sized enterprise access to the defence marketand on the need to avoid unnecessary new legislation.The UK backed measures to increase competition butexpressed concern over the potential of some proposalsto damage exports and opposed Commission ownershipof high-end military or dual-use capabilities.

On common security and defence policy (CSDP)operations, the UK welcomed the extension of Althea’sExecutive mandate; supported the French view thatEuropean Union Training Mission in Mali (EUTM)should be extended, subject to a robust estimate ofcosts; and argued for a two-year extension to Atalanta’smandate with a conditions-based end state. The UKalso supported remarks from the NATO Secretary-General,who attended the meeting, highlighting the importanceof co-ordination and co-operation between the EU andNATO.


Warsaw Climate Change Conference

The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change(Mr Edward Davey): The annual conference of theparties (COP) to the United Nations framework conventionon climate change took place in Warsaw, Poland, from11-23 November. The United Kingdom was representedby the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Changeand the Minister of State, Department of Energy andClimate Change, the right hon. Member for Bexhill andBattle (Gregory Barker).What we agreed

All countries in the United Nations frameworkconvention on climate change committed at Durban in2011 to negotiate, by 2015, a new global, legally bindingagreement, applicable to all nations, to come into forceby 2020.

The UK’s key objective for the Warsaw conferencewas to make progress in agreeing the means by whichthis 2015 deal will be reached. We achieved this objective:all nations have agreed to start their homework toprepare for a global climate change deal in 2015.

The world now has a work programme, with timetables,for the 2015 deal: countries will draft the negotiatingtext for the 2015 agreement which is to be ready by nextyear’s COP in Lima; and all major economies will beexpected to propose their initial contributions to thedeal by the first quarter of 2015.

In addition, we made some progress on increasingmitigation ambition before 2020: the conference set outa process to focus on specific sectors of high mitigationpotential and increase technical analysis. It agreed thatMinisters from all countries, not just parties to theKyoto protocol, will convene in June 2014 to reviewambition.

This was also a conference that dealt with the importantmechanics of the international climate regime and continuedto build the foundations for the global agreement in2015.

We finalised a package on rules, finance andco-ordination to help protect tropical forests. We alsoreached agreement on a comprehensive package formeasuring, reporting and verifying emissions for bothdeveloped and developing countries. This is important,as it will give us an accurate, consistent picture of howmuch is emitted and by whom.

Climate finance and loss and damage

Climate finance and loss and damage associated withclimate change were the other key issues in Warsaw.

On finance, this year’s conference agreed a timetabletowards initial capitalisation of the green climate fund(GCF) in late 2014, subject to the GCF board takingthe final decisions to operationalise the fund, and a newprocess for assessing progress in scaling up climatefinance to $100 billion per year by 2020 from public,private and alternative sources.

The conference established a new institutionalarrangement for loss and damage— the “WarsawMechanism”, with a remit to enhance and promoteknowledge of and approaches to addressing loss anddamage. It does not have decision-making powers or aremit to seek new funding. It will report to the annualclimate conference and comprise finance, adaptationand technology experts. It will be reviewed in 2016.

Overall assessment

The agreements we reached in Warsaw are importantin setting out the next steps towards the 2015 agreementand in building and strengthening the architecture ofthe international climate regime.

We achieved a good result in Warsaw by demonstratingagain the UK’s credentials on climate. The UK continuedits strong record of leading on climate change action:demonstrating our ambition at home, our support todeveloping countries and our leading influence in theEU and with international partners.

We joined the United States in their policy of endingsupport for public financing of new coal-fired powerplants overseas, we announced extra help for some ofthe world’s poorest to adapt to the impacts of climate


change and we unveiled a major new package of supportfor tackling deforestation in partnership with the US,Germany and Norway.Next year

While the long negotiations in Poland showed thereare many tough talks ahead of us, the determineddiplomacy of the UK and EU achieved our aims,building alliances with our friends across the world.

Looking ahead, 2014 will be an intensive year ofnegotiations, with negotiators developing a frameworkfor the new agreement by COP20—in Lima, Peru—andmajor economies preparing their contributions to thenew deal for submission in early 2015.

Importantly, the UN Secretary-General will host aleaders’ summit in 2014. This will be the first time thatworld leaders meet to discuss climate change specificallysince Copenhagen. This will be an important opportunityto make further concrete progress towards the globaldeal in 2015 and in raising mitigation ambition.

ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Bovine TB

The Secretary of State for Environment, Food andRural Affairs (Mr Owen Paterson): I wish to inform theHouse of some further important steps that theGovernment are planning to take to tackle bovine TB(bTB). BTB is the most worrying and costly animalhealth problem facing our cattle farmers today, withmore than 305,000 cattle slaughtered in Great Britain inthe past decade alone. These plans are designed toaddress the risk of cattle-to-cattle transmission of thedisease. They form part of the Government’s widerstrategy for achieving national bovine TB-free status inEngland within 25 years.

Today I am announcing our approach for addressinga number of long-standing weaknesses in our bovineTB controls. The first concerns the problem of late TBtests by a small minority of cattle farmers. Late testingis unacceptable, so from 1 January 2014 anyone whofails to complete their test by the set deadline, even byone day, will see their CAP scheme payment reduced.The reductions will vary, depending on the seriousnessof the case, but the outcome I want to see is no latetesting at all.

I am also launching a consultation on proposals forfurther tightening of cattle controls. Our proposalsbuild on the raft of enhanced cattle measures that havebeen in place for many years, a number of which wereenhanced in 2012. They include abolishing the pre-movement testing exemption for movements of cattle toand from common land. In doing this, we will needto find ways of ensuring that the testing requirementsdo not prejudice the very important part that grazingon some commons plays in protecting and maintainingvaluable habitats.

The proposals also include phasing out the practiceof lifting bovine TB restrictions on parts of a restrictedholding. In future the whole of a holding would beeither restricted or officially TB free any one time.

I am also consulting on proposals that would, as alast resort, enable wild or untestable cattle to be culled.It is important that we have the means to take action inexceptional cases where cattle of unknown disease statuscannot be safely tested.

The final proposal in this consultation is designed torespond to the Members of this House, and theirconstituents, who have pressed the Government to makeavailable information on the location of bovine TB herdbreakdowns, so that livestock farmers are better equippedto deal with the local risks to their herds. This wouldbuild on the risk-based trading scheme launched earlierthis month, which encourages farmers to share detailsof the disease history of any cattle they sell so buyersare better able to manage any disease risks.

I recognise that these rigorous measures will be toughfor a significant minority of livestock businesses. However,we will not achieve the aims of our strategy, and be ableto guarantee the future of the thriving cattle industrywe all wish to see, without tackling all of the vectors bywhich this disease can spread. That is why I remaincommitted to doing everything possible to get on top ofand eradicate this devastating disease in both wildlifeand cattle.

HEALTH

Tobacco Control

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health(Jane Ellison): I am today announcing that we haveasked Sir Cyril Chantler to carry out an independentreview of the public health evidence on standardisedpackaging of tobacco products.

Tobacco use is a significant public health challenge.Our evidence-based tobacco control strategies play anessential part in delivering the Government’s continuedcommitment to reduce the number of people in thiscountry who are dying prematurely.

It is important to explore avenues that have thepotential to contribute to this long-standing aim. InJuly we said that we would keep the policy of standardisedpackaging under review as we examine the emergingevidence. As part of this ongoing work we have thereforecommissioned a review with the following terms ofreference:

To give advice to the Secretary of State for Health, takinginto account existing and any fresh evidence, as to whetheror not the introduction of standardised packaging is likelyto have an effect on public health (and what any effect mightbe), in particular in relation to the health of children. It willbe a matter for the chair to determine how he undertakes thisreview and he is free to draw evidence from whatever sourcehe considers necessary and appropriate.The review will report by March 2014.It will be an independent review, with advice to the Secretaryof State contained in a report. An independent secretariatwill be appointed by the chair, who will set out the method ofhow he will conduct the review in more detail in due course.The secretariat will be wholly accountable to the chair, and itwill be for the chair to guide and task them in their work ashe sees fit.

We intend to reach a decision on standardised tobaccopackaging once Sir Cyril has made his report. TheGovernment will introduce standardised tobacco packagingif, following the review and consideration of the wider


issues raised by this policy, we are satisfied that thereare sufficient grounds to proceed, including public healthbenefit.

The Government also intend to take advantage ofthe opportunity offered by the Children and FamiliesBill, which is currently being considered in the House ofLords, to table a Government amendment to take enablingpowers now which would allow regulations to be madeto introduce standardised tobacco packaging later, if itis decided to proceed with this policy.

TRANSPORT

VOSA/DSA

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport(Mr Robert Goodwill): Earlier this year we consulted onour motoring services strategy which set out our intentionto put the customer at the heart of what we do.

One of our objectives was to identify ways in whichto give customers a better service and reduce costs. As aresult of that, we announced in July that the DrivingStandards Agency (DSA) and the Vehicle and OperatorServices Agency (VOSA) would merge to form a singlemotoring agency. The creation of a single agency isintended to deliver the following strategic objectives:

Motorists and businesses will benefit from more convenientand cost-effective motoring services—such as driving testsand goods vehicle testing;

Delivery of the same high-quality testing and standardsservices to motorists and businesses, but with greater efficiency;

Delivering testing in a way which is more flexible andconvenient for customers; this merger offers opportunities toexplore and extend this in the future;

Create opportunities to identify synergies between thetwo organisations and service improvements that couldpotentially enable a reduction in fees.

I have considered a range of options for the name ofthe new agency, and have decided that it will be knownas the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA),to reflect the work of both its predecessors and thecrucial contribution they make to road safety.

In keeping with Government practices, the cost ofthe rebranding of the agency will be kept to a minimum,and a number of changes will be made to legislation—givingpowers to the agency to conduct its work.

I am therefore announcing the new name today, toenable these changes to be made and to allow theAgency to plan its rebranding in a cost effective manner.The agency will therefore begin to use its new nameimmediately with formal and full integration takingplace over the coming months. Until the merger iscomplete on 1 April 2014, references to DVSA will alsoinclude a statement “incorporating DSA and VOSA”.


Petition


OBSERVATIONS

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE

Trafficking in the Sinai DesertThe Petition of Peter Lytton Cobbold, Ginette Lytton

Cobbold, Sr. Natalia Gomes, Anthony Clarkstone, NifledaWessling and Aemro Iyasu,

Declares that criminal gangs in Egypt’s Sinai Desertare kidnapping, trafficking and brutally torturing refugeesand asylum seekers, primarily from Eritrea and Sudan.

Amnesty International reported on 1 April 2013:“many people held captive in Sinai have been subjected to extremeviolence and brutality while waiting for ransoms to be paid byfamilies. Including beatings with metal chains and whips; burningwith cigarette butts or heated rubber and metal objects; suspensionfrom the ceiling; pouring gasoline over the body and setting it onfire...being urinated on and having finger nails pulled out. Rapeof men and women, and other forms of sexual violence have beenfrequently reported.”

The Petitioners therefore request that the House ofCommons presses the United Nations to identify andapprehend traffickers in the Sinai, and to assist andprotect victims of trafficking.

And the Petitioners remain, etc.—[Presented byMr Frank Field, Official Report, 22 October 2013; Vol. 569,c. 1p .]

[P001241]

Observations from the Secretary of State for Foreignand Commonwealth Affairs:

I understand and sympathise with those who havesigned the petition. I share your concerns about thereports of the treatment of Eritrean, Ethiopian andSudanese refugees in Sinai, many of whom are trying to

get to Europe and Israel. The British Governmentstrongly condemn all instances of violence and particularlythe killing of innocent people who have sought to leavetheir homes for a better future. We have raised ourconcerns about the treatment of migrants, includingrefugees being held hostage in the Sinai, with the EgyptianMinistry of Foreign Affairs on many occasions, mostrecently at Ambassadorial level in Cairo. Former Ministerfor the Middle East and North Africa, right hon. AlistairBurt MP raised the issue during an official visit to Israelin late 2012. My staff has also been in contact with theOffice of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees(UNHCR) in Cairo, which deals with asylum seekers inEgypt, a task delegated to them by the EgyptianGovernment.

FCO officials have discussed this issue with the EritreanEmbassy in London, the Eritrean Government in Asmara,and with various members of the Eritrean Diaspora inthe UK. In July 2013 the Minister for Africa met withthe Eritrean Foreign Minister, and earlier this month,FCO officials, along with officials from the NationalCrime Agency and West Yorkshire Police, held discussionsabout the growing problem of human trafficking withvarious members of the Eritrean Diaspora. We arefollowing up on these discussions by looking at thepossibility of providing practical support to Eritrea’santi-trafficking and victim protection efforts. We continueto urge the Eritrean Government to bring to justice anyEritreans involved in human trafficking and have takenevery opportunity to raise the need for political, economicand human rights reforms with the Eritrean Government.

The British Government have encouraged the Egyptianauthorities to find a solution to the complex and interrelatedsecurity challenges in the Sinai, including kidnapping.A lasting solution to these challenges will require ajoined-up response, including the security forces, butalso encouraging improved levels of engagement andopportunity for the local Bedouin population.

9P 10P28 NOVEMBER 2013Petitions Petitions

Written Answers to

Questions


FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICEBurma

Mr Burrowes: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreignand Commonwealth Affairs what reports he has receivedon the use by the Burmese Army of human shields inShan State, Burma on 13 October 2013. [177173]

Mr Swire: We are aware of these reports, but are notin a position to verify the specific allegation of the useof human shields by the Burmese army in Shan State.We continue to closely monitor the peace process andallegations of human rights abuses in conflict states inBurma. We remain positive that further peace talks inthe coming months will lead to a nationwide ceasefireand inclusive political dialogue that takes account ofinternational human rights standards.

Mr Burrowes: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreignand Commonwealth Affairs what recent meetings theBritish ambassador to Burma has had with familymembers of Burmese political prisoners who remain injail. [177177]

Mr Swire: British embassy officials are in contactwith the lawyers of a number of political prisoners. Wemeet regularly with civil society organisations includingthe Assistance Association for Political Prisoners Burmato discuss developments. We have also provided Englishlanguage and human rights training to a number ofreleased prisoners and are in regular contact with theRemaining Political Prisoners Scrutiny Committee.

We welcomed the release of a further 69 politicalprisoners on 15 November which represents anotherstep towards fulfilling President Thein Sein’s commitment,made during his visit to London in July, to release allpolitical prisoners by the end of the year.

I continue to raise the issue of political prisoners, anddid so most recently with Minister for the President’sOffice, Tin Naing Thein, on 22 November, and againmade clear that we did not want to see new arrests orpolitical activists re-arrested.

Alex Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State forForeign and Commonwealth Affairs what funding hisDepartment provides to the UN Special Rapporteur onthe situation of human rights in Myanmar. [177190]

Mr Swire: The British Government does not directlyfund the United Nations Special Rapporteur on thesituation of human rights in Myanmar (Burma). UNSpecial Rapporteurs are funded from the UN regularbudget, of which the UK contribution is 5.17%.

Alex Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State forForeign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports hehas received of British or international companies orindividuals giving strategic or public relations advice tothe Government of Burma. [177192]

Mr Swire: We are aware of a number of British andinternational companies and individuals who are providingadvice to the Government of Burma, across a range ofsubjects. We encourage the Government of Burma todraw on reputable international expertise where it canadd value to the issues that they are tackling.

Mr Burrowes: To ask the Secretary of State forForeign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps theGovernment has taken to obtain the immediate andunconditional release of Bauk Ja and other remainingpolitical prisoners in Burma. [177285]

Mr Swire: Daw Bauk Ja is still detained with courtproceedings ongoing. We continue to follow her caseclosely: British officials from the embassy in Rangoonraised Daw Bawk Ja’s case with senior members of theBurmese Government in August. We also remain intouch with local Burmese organisations that supporther and the many other political prisoners that remaindetained.

I raised the issue of political prisoners with Ministerfor the President’s Office, Tin Naing Thein, on 22 Novemberand made clear our concern about the political prisonerswho are still detained in Burma.

Paul Blomfield: To ask the Secretary of State forForeign and Commonwealth Affairs what meetings hehas held with Burmese ethnic political and civil societyleaders in the last year. [177323]

Mr Swire: Four British Ministers have visited Burmain the last year. I visited in December 2012 and the Ministerof State, Department for International Development,my right hon. Friend the Member for Rutland andMelton (Mr Duncan), visited in June 2013. During ourrespective visits, Mr Duncan and I met a wide range ofleading Burmese political, religious and civil societyleaders to discuss Burma’s human rights situation andreform agenda. The British ambassador and embassyofficials also meet regularly with ethnic and civil societyleaders, in Rangoon, Naypyitaw, in the ethnic states,and in Thailand.

In London, I engaged with a range of Burmese ethnicand civil society representatives at a briefing event inMarch 2013. The Foreign and Commonwealth Officeand Department for International Development officialsregularly meet representatives of Burma’s ethnic andcivil society groups, both those based in the UK andthose visiting from Burma, such as the visit of the’88 Generation’ of former political prisoners in June.

Ministerial colleagues, including the Prime Minister,the Secretary of State for Foreign and CommonwealthAffairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond(Yorks) (Mr Hague), and I, have met key Burmesepolitical figures in the UK including: President TheinSein; Ministers in the President’s Office Aung Min andSoe Thane; and opposition leader Aung Sang Suu Kyi.

Kenya

Dr Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreignand Commonwealth Affairs what reports he has receivedfrom the British High Commission in Kenya about theproposed ban on khat in that country; and whether hehas received representations from the Kenyan governmenton that matter. [177445]

369W 370W28 NOVEMBER 2013Written Answers Written Answers

Mark Simmonds: The British high commission Nairobihas reported Kenyan concerns within Kenya about theeconomic and social impact of the proposed reclassificationof khat as a class C drug. We have discussed therationale behind the proposed ban with the KenyanGovernment on a number of occasions; on 17 September2013 the Secretary of State for Foreign and CommonwealthAffairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond(Yorks) (Mr Hague), discussed the matter with hisKenyan counterpart, Amina Mohamed. Most recentlyon 20 November the Head of Africa East and Westdepartment at the Foreign and Commonwealth Officemet the Kenyan Parliamentary Select Committee onkhat in London,

Ministers’ Private Offices

Mr Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreignand Commonwealth Affairs whether he (a) has appointedor (b) intends to appoint an enlarged ministerial office.

[177516]

Hugh Robertson: The implications of the change onrecruitment to Private Offices are currently being considered.

Somalia and Somaliland

Rushanara Ali: To ask the Secretary of State forForeign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessmenthe has made of the effect of a reduction in remittanceson security in Somalia and Somaliland. [177438]

Mark Simmonds: The Government remains determinedto help facilitate a resolution to the challenges facingthe Somali remittance corridor following the decisionby Barclays Bank to withdraw services from a numberof money service businesses. The Government is in theprocess of establishing an Action Group on Cross BorderRemittances. One of the working groups of the ActionGroup will be mandated to develop a safe corridor pilotto ensure the continued flow of remittances to Somaliathrough secure, legitimate and accessible channels. Thisworking group will consider, among other things, theimpact that changes in the money service business sectormight have on Somalia’s wider stability and economicdevelopment. In the meantime, there are still a numberof legal channels for remittances to flow through, asoutlined in the Factsheet issued by the Foreign Officeon 17 October, a copy of which will be deposited in theHouse of Commons Library.

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has not assessedwhat the effect would be of a reduction in remittanceson security in Somalia and Somaliland. Any suchassessment would be hard to substantiate given the lackof economic data available. However, there is no evidenceat present to suggest that remittances to Somalia havereduced, or are likely to do so significantly in the nearfuture. Nor is there any evidence that the securitysituation has changed as a result of money servicebusinesses in the Somali corridor losing their bankaccounts.

Venezuela

Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State forForeign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussionshe has had with his Venezuelan counterpart on peaceand democracy in that country and the need for freeand fair mayoral elections in December 2013. [177576]

Mr Swire: The UK urges all parties in Venezuela towork together to reduce tension and promote politicalreconciliation, particularly around the municipal electionson 8 December. The Secretary of State for Foreign andCommonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Memberfor Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague), wrote to the VenezuelanForeign Minister Elias Jaua on 18 November to expressour hope that the UK and Venezuela can work tofurther our existing areas of bilateral cooperation. Ialso wrote to my counterpart and offered to discuss ourrelationship in more detail. Our ambassador in Caracashas had a number of discussions with governmentrepresentatives and others about the electoral processand the importance of building bridges between allparts of Venezuelan society.

SCOTLAND

Flexible Working

Mr Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotlandhow many officials in his Department make use ofcompressed hours arrangements as part of the CivilService’s flexible working hours scheme (a) above and(b) below director level. [177403]

David Mundell: Two Scotland Office officials belowdirector level make use of compressed hours arrangementsas part of the Civil Service’s flexible working hoursscheme. The Scotland Office has no officials abovedirector level.

Secondment

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotlandhow many of his Department’s civil servants have beenseconded to (a) the private sector and (b) trades unionsin each year since 2010. [177723]

David Mundell: No Scotland Office officials havebeen seconded to (a) the private sector and (b) tradesunions since 2010.

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State forScotland how many secondees from (a) trades unionsand (b) the voluntary sector have worked in hisDepartment since 2010. [177746]

David Mundell: The Scotland Office has not had anysecondees from either the trade unions or the voluntarysector since 2010.

NORTHERN IRELAND

Air Passenger Duty

Jim Shannon: To ask the Secretary of State for NorthernIreland what steps she is taking to review air passengerduty in order to maintain competition for both investorsin and visitors to Northern Ireland. [176974]

Mrs Villiers: The impact of Air Passenger Duty(APD) on Northern Ireland was carefully considered in2011 and in recognition of Northern Ireland’s unique


circumstances, the Chancellor agreed to the Executive’srequest for the devolution of Bands B, C and D APDfor all direct long-haul flights departing from NorthernIreland airports.

The Executive did not request the devolution of APDfor short-haul flights in Band A nor has this been raisedwith me subsequently by any Executive Minister. If arequest for the devolution of Band A APD did comeforward from the Executive, the Chancellor and I would,of course, consider it.

The devolution of short-haul Band A APD flights would,as a result of the Azores judgment, entail a correspondingreduction in the block grant which the Minister forFinance and Personnel has estimated could be up to£90 million.

Flexible Working

Mr Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for NorthernIreland how many officials in her Department makeuse of compressed hours arrangements as part of theCivil Service’s flexible working hours scheme (a) aboveand (b) below director level. [177402]

Mrs Villiers: In my Department, two officials belowdirector level make use of compressed hours arrangements.

No members of the senior civil service have sought tomake use of such arrangements.

Marriage

Michael Fabricant: To ask the Secretary of State forNorthern Ireland pursuant to the answer of 21 November2013, Official Report, column 979W, on marriage, if shewill raise the matter of equal marriage with the FirstMinister and the Deputy First Minister and take stepsto encourage them to introduce same-sex marriages inNorthern Ireland. [177458]

Mrs Villiers: The constitutional arrangements in placemean that extending equal marriage to Northern Irelandis a decision for the Northern Ireland institutions totake.

Travel

Chris Leslie: To ask the Secretary of State for NorthernIreland what the cost of travel within the UK was forher Department in each year since 2010; and how muchof this was spent on (a) hire cars, (b) helicopter hire,(c) hotel accommodation and (d) subsistence. [177171]

Mrs Villiers: The details requested for travel withinthe UK are shown in the following table:

£

Total cost of travel (including flights and rail) Hire cars Helicopter hire Hotel accommodation Subsistence costs)

2010-11 411,714 637 Nil 48,606 15,114

2011-12 480,263 438 Nil 111,169 22,016

2012-13 506,467 1,722 Nil 107,553 26,076

The costs relating to 2012-13 were greater than inprevious years as a result of the very successful Jubileevisit to Northern Ireland, and the hosting of the G8summit in Fermanagh. Post-2010-11, the Departmentgenerated significant savings by ending all former rentalagreements for accommodation in London although, asa natural consequence, hotel and subsistence costs increased.

In addition, on coming to office, the Governmentended the practice of former Secretaries of State, includingthe previous Labour Government, of using a private jetfor routine travel between Great Britain and NorthernIreland. This has saved considerable sums of money forthe taxpayer, and helped the Department play its part inbringing under control the spiralling costs of Governmentwe inherited.

WORK AND PENSIONS

Flexible Working

Mr Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Work andPensions how many officials in his Department takeadvantage of compressed hours arrangements as partof the civil service flexible working hours scheme (a)above and (b) below director level. [177580]

Mike Penning: Within DWP compressed hours refersto a contractual arrangement between the Departmentand its full time employees. This arrangement means

that the employee works their standard contractualhours over fewer days than normal.

A total of 3,042 employees, all of which are belowdirector level have such an arrangement recorded on theDepartment’s personnel computer. No officials abovedirector level have such an arrangement recorded.

DWP employees are generally able to work ‘flexitime’. This means that, within limits and at times set tomeet business need, employees may work longer hoursthan normal and use the excess hours to take ’flexileave’. Such informal, non-contractual, irregular occurrencesare not recorded on the Department’s personnel computer.

Jobcentre Plus

Stephen Timms: To ask the Secretary of State forWork and Pensions how many Jobcentre Plus offices(a) are and (b) are not wheelchair accessible. [177759]

Esther McVey: The Department does not keep anyspecific record of Job Centre Plus sites which are or arenot accessible by customers in wheelchairs. I can, however,confirm that as part of the formal planning and designof Jobcentre Plus offices, due consideration is given tothe provisions of access for our customers with a widerange of disabilities, including those in wheelchairs.This involves both planning and building warrant approval,on the basis of compliance with both the BuildingRegulations and the Disability Discrimination Act,subsequently the Equalities Act. All our sites fully


comply with legislation. Where full physical access toany of our buildings cannot be achieved by all ourcustomers, the Department makes alternative arrangementsto make our services available, such as offering a homevisit.

Personal Independence Payment

Chris Williamson: To ask the Secretary of State forWork and Pensions what steps he plans to take toimprove the personal independence payment (PIP)application system; and if he will compensate PIP claimantswho have received unacceptable levels of service.

[177579]

Mike Penning: The different stages that need to happenbefore we can make a decision on a claim for PIP can beviewed by accessing the PIP Claimant Journey, which isavailable at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pip-claim-process-overview-the-claimant-journey

The length of time it takes to deal with a claim dependson how long each stage actually takes for individuals.

As PIP is a new benefit we are looking closely at howlong the claimant journey is taking against originalestimates. We are working with operational colleaguesand providers to ensure that all the steps in the processare as smooth as they can be. We continue to look at ourprocesses to ensure that satisfactory arrangements arein place to assess a person’s entitlement to PIP.

Any delays experienced in the new claims process willnot affect the date from which claimants are paid-allsuccessful claims will be paid from the date the claimwas initially made or the date the qualifying period ismet, whichever is the later.

As for the administration of all benefits, a claimant isfree to complain about the service they have receivedfrom the Department for Work and Pensions. A complaintmay result in a special payment if the claimant hasexperienced unfair treatment or suffered financially.More information on how claimants can complain abouttheir claim to PIP is available on the Governmentwebsite:

https://www.gov.uk/complain-disability

Unemployment: Young People

Stephen Timms: To ask the Secretary of State forWork and Pensions (1) for what reasons he does notplan to implement the EU’s Youth Guarantee in theUK; [177680]

(2) what funding is available from the EU forimplementing the Youth Guarantee in the UK; [177681]

(3) what his policy is on the EU’s Youth Guarantee.[177682]

Esther McVey: The European Commission isencouraging member states to use the Youth EmploymentInitiative (YEI) to implement the Youth Guarantee, butthis remains a non-binding EU recommendation. Althoughwe support the aims of the Youth Guarantee and agreewith much of the supporting guidance, we do notbelieve a four month guarantee is right for the UK,since over 80% of 18 to 24-year-olds flow off of jobseeker’sallowance within six months. We will instead be using

the YEI money in England on other interventions designedto tackle youth unemployment and to complement theGovernment’s substantial existing investment.

HOUSE OF COMMONS COMMISSION

Pay

Mr Frank Field: To ask the hon. Member for Caithness,Sutherland and Easter Ross, representing the House ofCommons Commission, pursuant to his answer of 18November 2013, Official Report, column 916W, onstaff, when the London Living Wage will be paid to allagency staff. [177443]

John Thurso: The Chair of the Commission and theHouse Service take the London Living Wage (LLW)very seriously. All current House staff are paid at leastthe LLW and all agency staff supplied to the House arepaid at least the LLW.

Contractors with dedicated staff who are based onthe estate are paying those staff at least the LLW, with asmall number of exceptions which are being addressed.Good progress is being made towards ensuring thatother contractors that provide services to the Houseare, in relation to our contracts, paying their staff atleast the LLW (or the Living Wage if based outsideLondon).

Travel Office

James Wharton: To ask the hon. Member for Caithness,Sutherland and Easter Ross, representing the House ofCommons Commission, how much the House ofCommons Travel Office has paid in carbon offsetting ineach of the last five years. [176740]

John Thurso: The House of Commons Commissiondecided in 2006 that the House should make paymentsto offset carbon emissions from air travel paid by theHouse and booked using the Parliamentary Travel Office.The sums paid via the Government’s offsets scheme inrespect of travel in the past five years were:

£

2006-07 26,0252007-08 17,5702008-09 15,9182009-10 and 2010-11 23,682

The House is participating in a carbon offsets auctionthat is due to take place shortly for travel in recent years.

ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Additives: EU Action

Mr Havard: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs what submissionshis Department made to the European Chemical Agency’s(ECA) consultation on the use of azodicarbonimide;and what further steps his Department plans to take inrespect of the ECA’s consultation. [176273]


Dan Rogerson: The UK REACH Competent Authorityin the Health and Safety Executive responded to theEuropean Chemicals Agency’s (ECHA) public consultationon whether to recommend that azodicarbonamide (ADCA)should be prioritised for inclusion in Annex XIV ofREACH (substances subject to authorisation). The UKproposed not to prioritise ADCA until we can beconfident that authorisation is an appropriate andproportionate measure to take.

The UK will continue to argue its position whenECHA’s member state committee again considers theproposed recommendation in December. ECHA’sprioritisation has no legal effect but is a recommendationto the European Commission, which in turn has toconsider whether to bring forward a legislative proposal.Any proposal has to be voted by member states.

Bovine Tuberculosis

David Morris: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs how far the UKis from developing a safe oral vaccine for bovinetuberculosis in cattle. [177702]

George Eustice: Preliminary studies have been undertakenon an oral vaccine for bovine tuberculosis in cattle; butour priority is in delivering field trials for the injectablecattle vaccine and associated test to differentiate infectedfrom vaccinated animals (DIVA). The successful outcomeof these field trials we hope will lead to the granting ofa licence for the vaccine and international validation ofthe DIVA and to their deployment as another tool totackle this dreadful disease.

David Morris: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs what remunerationis available to farmers who train to become lay badgervaccinators for each badger they vaccinate. [177703]

George Eustice: Lay badger vaccinators are not paidfor each badger they vaccinate.

David Morris: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs whether farmerscan access his Department’s start-up grants funding forpeople who want to train as a lay badger vaccinator.

[177704]

George Eustice: I refer my hon. Friend to theGovernment’s recent response to the EFRA SelectCommittee on this very point:

To date, there has been very limited interest in thistraining course from farmers. Farmers who want tovaccinate badgers and are members of a voluntary andcommunity sector (VCS) organisation like a WildlifeTrust can apply to train as lay vaccinators and receivethe current grant. They will, of course, benefit indirectlyfrom the subsidy in cases where they are willing to allowVCS organisations to vaccinate badgers on their holding.

Unless and until there is evidence of strong demandfor training from farmers, the Government does notbelieve that providing a general subsidy to train farmersas lay vaccinators which would need be notified as anagricultural state aid would provide good value formoney.

Bovine Tuberculosis: Lancashire

David Morris: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs whether thereare any (a) reported and (b) confirmed cases ofbovine tuberculosis in the Lune Valley. [177701]

George Eustice: A cluster of bovine TB breakdownshas been identified on cattle farms in the Lune Valley ofNorth Lancashire. The first case was detected at the endof last year near Kirkby Lonsdale. In line with DEFRA’snew policy for the low TB risk areas of England, theAnimal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency(AHVLA) instigated a programme of enhanced TBtesting of all cattle herds situated within a 3 km radiusof the index infected farm. The additional targeted TBtesting has revealed a small number of additional infectedherds in the area and the 3 km cattle testing zone hasbeen widened as a result across North Lancashire andsouth Cumbria. At the end of July, a total of five“confirmed” TB breakdowns had been identified in thiscluster, including the original case. Epidemiologicalinvestigations by AHVLA into the origin of these TBbreakdowns are continuing.

Deer

Jim Shannon: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate hehas made of the number of muntjac deer in Englandand Wales in each of the last five years; and what stepshe is taking to stop their spread and increase innumbers. [176945]

George Eustice: The Government monitors deerdistributions and not numbers per se, and for thatreason in the last five years there have been no estimatesof the number of muntjac in England and Wales. Whatwe do know is that muntjac continue to expand theirrange.

Currently the Government’s main focus is on reducingmuntjac impacts on designated woodlands in England.The Deer Initiative and the Animal Health and VeterinaryLaboratories Agency’s National Wildlife ManagementCentre (recently transferred from the Food andEnvironment Research Agency) have done some modellingfor Natural England on future trends. Beyond suchwoodlands, primary responsibility for wild deermanagement lies with individual landowners, and it isfor them to decide whether to take action. The Governmentassists those affected by or wishing to manage deer bythe provision of advice and guidance from NaturalEngland and the Deer Initiative.

Dogs: Imports

Jim Fitzpatrick: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs how many puppiesarrived in the UK in (a) 2011 and (b) 2012 under theBalai Directive 92/65/EEC. [177266]

George Eustice: This question could be answeredonly at disproportionate cost.


Flexible Working

Mr Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment,Food and Rural Affairs how many officials in hisDepartment make use of compressed hours arrangementsas part of the Civil Service’s flexible working hoursscheme (a) above and (b) below director level. [177395]

Dan Rogerson: 53 people within core DEFRA arerecorded as having a compressed or condensed workingpattern; none of these are at Director level or above.

Informal arrangements for working compressed hoursthrough the Flexible Working Hours Scheme are notrecorded centrally; it would be of disproportionate costto provide this information.

Flood Control

Guy Opperman: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs how many extraproperties will be protected from flooding in (a)Northumberland, (b) the North East and (c) the UKas a result of the funding secured in the 2013 spendinground. [177410]

Dan Rogerson: We have made a long-term commitmentto record levels of capital investment in flood defencesbetween 2015-16 and 2020-21. At least 300,000 householdswill benefit from this investment.

At this stage I cannot say how many of these will bein Northumberland and the North East. A programmeof new projects starting after April 2015 will be agreedwith Regional Flood Defence Committees by autumn2014.

Fly-grazing: North East

Chi Onwurah: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessmenthe has made of the extent of fly grazing in the NorthEast and the consequent effect on the environment andlocal residents. [177574]

George Eustice: DEFRA is aware of the issues relatingto the problems of fly grazing, but no specific assessmenthas been made on the extent of the problem in thenorth-east. There is a range of existing legislation thatcan be used to deal with the issues, including the AnimalsAct 1971 and the Animal Welfare Act 2006. In addition,because fly grazing is a form of antisocial behaviour,existing anti-social behaviour legislation and forthcomingmeasures in the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and PolicingBill may be used to tackle it.

Food: Low Incomes

Mr Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to theanswer of 21 October 2013, Official Report, column55W on food: low incomes, when he expects to publishthe findings of its research project on the landscape offood aid provision and access in the UK. [177567]

George Eustice: DEFRA has commissioned researchto review publicly available evidence on the landscapeof food aid provision and access in the UK.

All Government-funded research projects are requiredto go through the necessary review and quality assuranceprocesses prior to publication. Once this process iscomplete, the conclusions of this work will be madeavailable on the Government’s website.

Marine Conservation Zones

Dr Offord: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans hisDepartment has for the introduction of reference areaswhich were included in its December 2012 consultationon marine conservation zones. [177289]

George Eustice: Reference areas were not included inthe December 2012 consultation following advice fromthe Statutory Nature Conservation Bodies, which includeda recommendation to review the approach to theseareas. This review is expected to start in 2014.

Dr Offord: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment,Food and Rural Affairs whether his Department plansto make recommendations for management measures atmarine conservation zone sites. [177290]

George Eustice: Management measures for each ofthe 27 marine conservation zones (MCZs) will be drawnup and put in place by relevant public authorities. DEFRAand delivery partners are working together to ensurethat the management measures that are to be put inplace will provide effective protection for designatedsites.

Any management measures that are required for MCZswill be applied on a case-by-case basis. Managementmeasures will be implemented at sites most at risk ofdamage first, regulating only those activities which havea detrimental impact on the features. In cases wherethere is a high risk to designated features being damaged,emergency measures may be put in place to ensure theprotection of vulnerable habitats and species.

Dr Offord: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment,Food and Rural Affairs what protection his Departmentplans to afford to mobile species within the developmentof the network of marine conservation zone sites.

[177293]

George Eustice: Sectoral measures (such as fisheriesmanagement, by-catch mitigation measures and protectedspecies licensing) are likely to be the most effective toolsin conserving widely dispersed and mobile species. However,Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) for such specieswould be considered if there is clear evidence that theconservation of a highly mobile species would benefitfrom site-based protection measures in English waters.The need for MCZs for seabirds will be consideredwhen work to develop Special Protection Areas forbirds under the EU Wild Birds Directive has beencompleted. The mobile species Smelt and Black Breamare included within the first tranches of MCZ designations.

Overseas Territories Joint Ministerial Council

Dr Offord: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment,Food and Rural Affairs what environmental issues hisDepartment plans to discuss at the Joint MinisterialCouncil on the Overseas Territories; and if he willdiscuss an implementation plan for the Overseas Territoriesbiodiversity strategy at that Council. [177297]


George Eustice: The Joint Ministerial Council will havea non-plenary session dedicated to environment issues.The purpose of the session is to provide an opportunityfor Overseas Territory Government officials to havein-depth discussions with corresponding UK experts.Should there be any queries relating to the implementationof the Overseas Territories Biodiversity Strategy, DEFRAofficials will be on hand to answer these.

Staff

Mrs Hodgson: To ask the Secretary of State forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) what proportionof employees in his Department are (a) female and (b)male, by each Civil Service pay grade; [176588]

(2) what proportion of employees in his Departmentis (a) white British and (b) black, Asian and fromother minority ethnic groups, by each Civil Service paygrade; [176640]

(3) what proportion of employees in his Departmenthave a physical or learning disability, by each CivilService pay grade. [176658]

Dan Rogerson: The proportion of female and maleemployees in core DEFRA by each Civil Service Gradeas of 31 March 2013 was:

Percentage

Gradeequivalent Female Male

AA 45 55

AO 62 38

EO 60 40

HEO 51 49

SEO 47 53

Grade 7 42 58

Grade 6 36 64

SCS 40 60

All Grades 50 50

The data provided as follows only covers employeeswho have declared their status.

The proportion of declared White, and Black, Asianand other minority ethnic employees (BAME) out ofthe total number of employees who declared their ethnicityin core DEFRA by Civil Service Grade as of 31 March2013 was:

Percentage

Gradeequivalent White BAME

AA 54 46

AO 69 31

EO 73 27

HEO 84 16

SEO 93 7

Grade 7 94 6

Grade 6 92 8

SCS 99 1

All Grades 84 16

We do not analyse data across ethnic and nationalitylines together so are not able to show data white Britishas requested.

The proportion of declared disabled employees outof the total number of employees who declared theirstatus in core DEFRA by Civil Service Grade as of 31March 2013 was:

Grade equivalent Disabled (percentage)

AA 27

AO 15

EO 15

HEO 13

SEO 7

Grade 7 8

Grade 6 12

SCS 9

All Grades 12

BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS

Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013

Ian Murray: To ask the Secretary of State forBusiness, Innovation and Skills pursuant to the answerof 21 October 2013, Official Report, column 964W, onEnterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013, if he willpublish the report on his Department’s review ofAcas’s scenario planning work for the implementationof early conciliation. [177568]

Jo Swinson: The internal audit referred to in myanswer of 21 October 2013, Official Report, column964W, is a report prepared for Acas internal managementprocesses. To make such a document public might prejudiceany future audit process because staff being auditedmay be inclined to be less open about issues withauditors. It will not therefore be published.

Acas are happy to convene a meeting to discuss theirplans for implementing Early Conciliation with thehon. Member if this would be helpful.

Flexible Working

Mr Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Business,Innovation and Skills how many officials in his Departmentmake use of compressed hours arrangements as part ofthe Civil Service’s flexible working hours scheme (a)above and (b) below director level. [177387]

Jo Swinson: The Department for Business, Innovationand Skills (BIS) does not hold this information centrally.To collect this information from within the Department,and to analyse it, would incur a disproportionate cost.

We offer a number of different types of workingpatterns under our flexible working policies, includingcompressed hours, annualised hours, home working,term-time working, part-time working, job sharing, andflexitime.

Decisions on the availability of compressed hours aretaken within each business unit as the managers on theground are best placed to judge the demands of theworkload and the contribution of the individual. It isthe workload and business demands that determinewhat working patterns can be accommodated.


Older People: Crime Prevention

Paul Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State forBusiness, Innovation and Skills if he will implement therecommendations of Age Cymru’s Scams and Swindlescampaign. [177591]

Jo Swinson: The Government is aware of the seriousnessof the issues raised by the Age Cymru campaign. Aswas discussed during the recent Westminster Hall debate,we have put a number of measures in place to addressthe criminal behaviour behind these postal internet anddoorstep scams. This included a round table meeting on25 November, chaired by my noble Friend BaronessRanderson, which brought together organisations fromacross Wales, including enforcement and consumerprotection agencies, Royal Mail, BT and Ofcom, todiscuss how we can work together to reduce olderpeople’s exposure to such scams.

More broadly, the National Trading Standards Boardhas set up the National Scams Hub (NSH) which ishosted by East Sussex Trading Standards Service. TheNSH are working with partners including Action Fraud,the Royal Mail and the Metropolitan police to identifyand to support the victims of mass marketing fraud.Once identified, the NSH works with the victim’s localTrading Standards service, local police forces and otheragencies to provide support which addressed the victim’sbehaviour. The home authority reports to the NSH atfour and 26 weeks on the result of the intervention.

Alongside this, the Consumer Protection Partnership,which brings together the government-funded consumerorganisations, has identified mass marketing scams asan area where there is significant consumer detrimentand, therefore, an issue for priority action. As part ofthat, the Citizens Advice Service and the Trading StandardsInstitute launched a scam awareness campaign in Maythis year, which I endorsed, to raise awareness and tohelp empower consumers to take firm action againstscams.

The Government also provides for advice on scamsthrough various agencies—particularly through the CitizensAdvice Service, which provides clear and practical guidanceto consumers through its Consumer Advice Helplinewhich can be contacted on 08454 040506 (08454 040505for Welsh speakers) or via their website:

www.adviceguide.org.uk

Overseas Trade: Females

Chi Onwurah: To ask the Secretary of State forBusiness, Innovation and Skills what (a) guidance hisDepartment issues and (b) targets his Department hasset UK Trade and Investment on promoting women intrade delegations and exporting. [177700]

Michael Fallon: UK Trade and Investment has notbeen set specific targets relating to the issue of promotingwomen in trade delegations and exporting more widely.

Privatisation

Tom Blenkinsop: To ask the Secretary of State forBusiness, Innovation and Skills what assessment hisDepartment has made of the value for money of therecent sales of (a) the Royal Mail and (b) mortgage-style student loans. [177677]

Michael Fallon: The Royal Mail share sale objectivesincluded a requirement for the sale to represent overallvalue for money for the tax payer. This objective wastaken into consideration in all decisions relating to theInitial Public Offering in October. The National AuditOffice has announced that it will be conducting a valuefor money examination of the privatisation of RoyalMail Plc to be published in spring 2014.

The successful bid for the mortgage style studentloans from Erudio Student Loans was judged to representthe best available value for money option following acompetitive process involving around 40 interested partiesand 10 serious bids. The price paid is also in excess ofthe estimated value of the loans to the Government hadit retained them.

Respiratory System: Diseases

Dr Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for Business,Innovation and Skills what recent discussions he hashad with Novartis to encourage them to maintainrespiratory research in the UK. [177575]

Mr Willetts: Ministers and officials in the Governmenthave regular contact with Novartis and otherpharmaceutical investors and discussions cover a rangeof policy issues.

I met with senior representatives from Novartis on 30October to discuss the potential changes to their researchoperations in the UK, which are currently underconsultation. Novartis have noted that the proposedchanges are a result of a global review of their researchactivities.

The Department remains in close contact with Novartisregarding the impact of these proposed changes.

Shipbuilding: Industry

Mr Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State forBusiness, Innovation and Skills what UK firms havewon shipbuilding contracts as a result of trade missionssince January 2011. [177219]

Michael Fallon: UK Trade and Investment (UKTI)does not have the details of all the contracts won as aresult of trade missions since January 2011; our recordsshow that in this period UK firms supported by UKTIhave won orders in excess of £230 million for marineequipment and systems.

Students: Loans

Tom Blenkinsop: To ask the Secretary of State forBusiness, Innovation and Skills (1) how many outstandingmortgage-style student loans were held by the StudentLoans Company in each month since January 1999;

[177675]

(2) what the (a) number and (b) value was ofmortgage-style student loans held by the Student LoansCompany in each month since January 1999 that were(i) repaid in full, (ii) being repaid in accordance withtheir terms, (iii) below the repayment threshold, (iv) notbeing repaid in accordance with their terms and (v)were written off. [177676]


Mr Willetts: The Student Loans Company (SLC)publishes statistics on Student Loans and Repayments.Information on the monthly status of these loans since1999 is not readily available and cannot be compiled,except at disproportionate cost.

Statistics on student loan outlay and repaymentsrelating to mortgage style loans are published by theSLC each year in Table 1 (Repayments, Deferrals andArrears) and Table 2 (number of Borrowers) of theStatistical First Release ″Student Loans for HigherEducation in England″. The figures are published onthe SLC website:http://www.slc.co.uk/statistics/national-statistics.aspx

Supermarkets: Sales Promotions

Katy Clark: To ask the Secretary of State forBusiness, Innovation and Skills what recent assessmenthe has made of adherence to the Government’s PricingPractices Guide by supermarkets. [177216]

Jo Swinson: The Pricing Practices Guide providesguidance for business on compliance with the consumerprotection from unfair trading regulations 2008 whichoutlaw, among other things, price indications which arelikely to mislead the average consumer.

Adherence to guidance and to the provisions of theregulations is the responsibility of the supermarketsand monitored by the enforcement authorities; localauthority Trading Standards officers and the Office ofFair Trading (OFT). The OFT and the Trading StandardsService monitor practices by supermarkets, includingcompliance with the Pricing Practices Guide and theOFT’s specific Principles on Food Pricing Display andPromotional Practices agreed with eight supermarketslast year. The Principles were a result of the OFT’sassessment of practices in the sector. Where TradingStandards officers conclude that a business is not complyingwith the regulations, they have a range of enforcementoptions which they can bring to bear.

Tax Havens: Africa

Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Business,Innovation and Skills what discussions he has had withfinancial institutions on advice offered to investors inAfrica on the use of tax havens. [177258]

Michael Fallon: No such discussions have taken place.

COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Fire Services

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State forCommunities and Local Government pursuant to theanswer of 18 November 2013, Official Report,column 649W, on fire services, how many (a) full-timeand (b) retained firefighters there were in each of thelast 10 years. [177456]

Brandon Lewis: The following figures refer to Englandonly, any further figure’s would be a matter for therelevant devolved Administration.

The numbers of whole time and retained duty systemfirefighters in England since 2002 are shown in thetable. Also included are the incident attended in theseperiods. Over this period overall firefighter strength hasreduced by 5.9% while the number of incidents havealmost halved (-46%).

Number of firefighters (strength) and incidents attended England, 2002-13

As at 31March

Total numberof whole timeand retained

firefightersWhole

time

Retainedduty

system

Incidentattended

(2001-02 to2012-13)

2002 42,374 31,761 10,613 990,793

2003 42,415 31,699 10,716 958,142

2004 42,679 31,826 10,853 1,016,028

2005 42,151 31,097 11,054 861,384

2006 41,917 30,596 11,321 843,734

2007 42,404 30,558 11,846 854,371

2008 42,353 30,580 11,773 791,747

2009 41,955 30,088 11,867 717,805

2010 41,634 29,735 11,899 680,592

2011 41,171 29,018 12,066 647,244

2012 39,869 28,166 11,558 606,704

2013 - - - 519,907

Note:Figures may not total due to rounding and are for full-time equivalent.Source:https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/fire-and-rescue-authorities-operational-statistics

Local Plans

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State for Communitiesand Local Government what recent assessment he hasmade of the adequacy of the resources available to thePlanning Inspectorate for the consideration of localdevelopment plans. [177383]

Nick Boles: The Planning Inspectorate has an ongoingprocess of reviewing the level of resources it requires toexamine local plans, and as part of this it monitors theexpected date for the submission of plans for examination.It carries out these ongoing assessments with a view toclosely matching the number of trained inspectors andother staff to anticipated workload. Current informationsuggests an ongoing requirement of about 25 full-timeequivalent inspectors. The Planning Inspectorate is currentlyrecruiting additional inspectors on fixed term contractsto ensure it can satisfy forecast demand, and help localcouncils finalise their up-to-date local plans to shapewhere development should and should not go.

Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State forCommunities and Local Government how manyplanning inspectors are engaged in the consideration oflocal development plans. [177384]

Nick Boles: Inspectors appointed by the PlanningInspectorate are currently examining 80 local plans.These plans include core strategies, comprehensive localplans, area action plans, minerals plans and other morefocused development plan documents. A total of 44inspectors (some of whom are part-time) are workingon these examinations, 23 are conducting more thanone examination concurrently. For example, some inspectorsare examining more than one plan within a particularlocal authority or are dealing with plans in differentlocal authority areas.


Peter Luff: To ask the Secretary of State forCommunities and Local Government how many localdevelopment plans are currently under considerationby the Planning Inspectorate. [177385]

Nick Boles: There are currently 80 local developmentplans under examination by the Planning Inspectorate.

Non-domestic Rates: Appeals

Hilary Benn: To ask the Secretary of State forCommunities and Local Government what the averagelength of time taken for business rate appeals to belisted for a hearing by the Valuation Tribunal was; andhow many such cases are outstanding. [175146]

Brandon Lewis [holding answer 12 November 2013]:As was the case under the last Administration, businessrates appeals are listed in accordance with the ValuationOffice Agency’s programming protocols for dealingwith appeals. The Valuation Tribunal Service lists forhearing those business rate appeals that have not beensettled by the target date set by the Valuation OfficeAgency; this is the point when the negotiation periodbetween the ratepayer and the Valuation Office Agencyshould end.

The Valuation Tribunal does not hold informationallowing it to identify the amount of rateable value ofthe claims in outstanding appeals.

To assist public scrutiny, I have placed in the Libraryof the House a table for the number of rating listappeals in each year since 2001. It shows how thenumbers of appeals rise and fall according to the revaluationcycle. Appeals can be made years after a revaluation hasoccurred. Businesses can submit appeals against the2010 rating list up to 31 March 2017, and appealscontinue to be submitted.

I would observe that:These are appeals against a revaluation that was carried out

under the Labour Government. As of 13 November 2013, wehave carried forward 140,100 appeals which have reached theValuation Tribunal. To place this in context, 10 years ago in 2003(i.e. at a similar stage in the revaluation cycle), the LabourGovernment was carrying forward 412,600 appeals. There were1,735,000 hereditaments in total on the 2010 Rating List. Thebusiness rates system allows multiple appeals to be made againstthe same property over several years. The numbers are likely toinclude a proportion of appeals that relate to multiple entries onthe same property.

The postponement of the 2015 rates revaluation has allowedthe Valuation Office Agency to allocate more resources to clearingappeals. The Agency cleared 24% more appeals than in theprevious year (224,000 in England in 2012-13, up from 181,000 in2011-12). The number of outstanding rating appeals has fallen insix successive quarters.

Of course, many appeals are resolved by the Valuation OfficeAgency. I would note that over 565,000 appeals in England havebeen resolved by the Valuation Office Agency and/or the ValuationTribunal Service since 1 April 2010. The number of outstandingappeals is falling all the time and has dropped by 37% over thelast 12 months.

Three quarters of all appeals to the 2010 list which have beendecided to date have resulted in no change to the rateable value.

For those appeals against the 2010 list with a ValuationOffice Agency target date in the first quarter of 2013-14,I note that 87% of programmed appeals were first listedto a hearing date which fell within 24 weeks of thetarget date; 9.3% of programmed appeals were first

listed to a hearing date which fell between 24 to 36weeks of the target date; 2.3% of programmed appealswere first listed to a hearing date which fell between 36to 48 weeks of the target date; 1.5% of programmedappeals were awaiting a hearing date. The ValuationOffice Agency prioritises hardship cases, seeking a swiftresolution or working with the Valuation Tribunal tofacilitate an early listing.

Notwithstanding the extra resources being allocatedto tackle the backlog thanks to the postponement ofthe 2015 revaluation, this Government wants to improvetransparency in the valuation system, including improvingthe system for challenging rateable values. We are currentlyconsidering how best to do this, and will consult asappropriate.

Luciana Berger: To ask the Secretary of State forCommunities and Local Government how manybusiness rate appeals are currently awaiting a decisionfrom the Valuation Tribunal; and what estimate he hasmade of the combined rateable value of those claims.

[175636]

Brandon Lewis [holding answer 18 November 2013]:As was the case under the last administration, businessrates appeals are listed in accordance with the ValuationOffice Agency’s programming protocols for dealingwith appeals. The Valuation Tribunal Service lists forhearing those business rate appeals that have not beensettled by the target date set by the Valuation OfficeAgency; this is the point when the negotiation periodbetween the ratepayer and the Valuation Office Agencyshould end.

The Valuation Tribunal does not hold informationallowing it to identify the amount of rateable value ofthe claims in outstanding appeals.

To assist public scrutiny, I have placed in the Libraryof the House a table for the number of rating listappeals in each year since 2001. It shows how thenumbers of appeals rise and fall according to the revaluationcycle. Appeals can be made years after a revaluation hasoccurred. Businesses can submit appeals against the2010 rating list up to 31 March 2017, and appealscontinue to be submitted.

I would observe that:These are appeals against a revaluation that was carried out

under the Labour Government. As of 13 November 2013, wehave carried forward 140,100 appeals which have reached theValuation Tribunal. To place this in context, 10 years ago in 2003(i.e. at a similar stage in the revaluation cycle), the LabourGovernment was carrying forward 412,600 appeals. There were1,735,000 hereditaments in total on the 2010 Rating List. Thebusiness rates system allows multiple appeals to be made againstthe same property over several years. The numbers are likely toinclude a proportion of appeals that relate to multiple entries onthe same property.

The postponement of the 2015 rates revaluation has allowedthe Valuation Office Agency to allocate more resources to clearingappeals. The agency cleared 24% more appeals than in the previousyear (224,000 in England in 2012-13, up from 181,000 in 2011-12).The number of outstanding rating appeals has fallen in sixsuccessive quarters.

Of course, many appeals are resolved by the Valuation OfficeAgency. I would note that over 565,000 appeals in England havebeen resolved by the Valuation Office Agency and/or the ValuationTribunal Service since 1 April 2010. The number of outstandingappeals is falling all the time and has dropped by 37% over thelast 12 months.


Three quarters of all appeals to the 2010 list which have beendecided to date have resulted in no change to the rateable value.

For those appeals against the 2010 list with a ValuationOffice Agency target date in the first quarter of 2013-14,I note that 87% of programmed appeals were first listedto a hearing date which fell within 24 weeks of thetarget date; 9.3% of programmed appeals were firstlisted to a hearing date which fell between 24 and36 weeks of the target date; 2.3% of programmedappeals were first listed to a hearing date which fellbetween 36 and 48 weeks of the target date; 1.5% ofprogrammed appeals were awaiting a hearing date. TheValuation Office Agency prioritises hardship cases, seekinga swift resolution or working with the Valuation Tribunalto facilitate an early listing.

Notwithstanding the extra resources being allocatedto tackle the backlog thanks to the postponement ofthe 2015 revaluation, this Government wants to improvetransparency in the valuation system, including improvingthe system for challenging rateable values. We are currentlyconsidering how best to do this, and will consult asappropriate.

Non-domestic Rates: Parking

Caroline Dinenage: To ask the Secretary of State forCommunities and Local Government if he will bringforward proposals to ensure that small retailers andlarge superstores are subject to the same business rateregime in relation to any parking spaces by their shops.

[177182]

Brandon Lewis: Business rates are a tax on the rentalvalue of non-domestic property. Any factor contributingto the rental value of non-domestic property is includedin the assessment of the rateable value. This includesthe availability of car parking either within the propertyor in the immediate locality. In this context, supermarketswith car parking spaces are likely to have a higherrateable value than ones without—and therefore willpay higher business rates.

Rented Housing

Mr Denham: To ask the Secretary of State forCommunities and Local Government what proportionof households were living in (a) social housing and(b) private rented housing in each region of Englandin the most recent year for which data is available.

[177854]

Kris Hopkins: As outlined in the written ministerialstatement of 18 September 2012, Official Report, columns31-33WS, my Department no longer publishes statisticsby Government office region.

Social Rented Housing

Mr George Howarth: To ask the Secretary of Statefor Communities and Local Government how many(a) evictions and (b) eviction proceedings have takenplace in England and Wales in (i) April, (ii) May, (iii)June, (iv) July, (v) August and (vi) September 2013since the introduction of the spare room subsidy.

[176304]

Kris Hopkins: The latest mortgage and landlordpossession statistics can be found at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/257007/mortgage-landlord-possession-bulletin-q3-2013.pdf

I observe the latest bulletin states:“An analysis was carried out looking at the effects of the

benefit cap on eviction claims. It compared the number of evictionclaims in the four local authorities where the benefit cap wasinitially rolled out to the number of claims in the rest of thecountry... The analysis showed that the number of claims fell inthree out of four of those authorities, in accordance with thenational pattern, showing that the benefit cap had no visible effecton eviction claims in that quarter” (Ministry of Justice, Mortgageand landlord possession statistics quarterly, July to September2013, November 2013).

The bulletin notes there is a slight trend in recentyears for the number of actions to change in line withthe number of people living in rented accommodation.

That said, figures for the number of landlord possessionclaims leading to orders so far in 2013 are not substantiallydifferent from 2012.

Stephen Timms: To ask the Secretary of State forCommunities and Local Government what estimate hehas made of the number of families moving into propertiesvacated as a result of the abolition of the under-occupancypenalty since April 2013; and if he will make a statement.

[177679]

Kris Hopkins: The Department does not hold thisinformation.

Written Questions: Government Responses

Hilary Benn: To ask the Secretary of State forCommunities and Local Government when he plans toanswer parliamentary questions 175145 and 175146,tabled by the hon. Member for Leeds Central on7 November 2013. [177570]

Brandon Lewis: Parliamentary question 175146 hasbeen answered today. Question 175145 will be answeredshortly; we have been liaising with the Valuation OfficeAgency to obtain previously unpublished data.

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Electoral Register: Northern Ireland

Dr McCrea: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister whenhe last met the relevant Northern Ireland ExecutiveMinister to discuss individual electoral registrationwithin Northern Ireland. [176895]

The Deputy Prime Minister: I have had no suchmeetings with Northern Ireland Executive Ministers.

Ministerial Policy Advisers

Mr Betts: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister (1) howmany officials in his Department, and at what grades,are employed to provide direct support to his specialadvisers; [177503]

(2) how many special advisers, and at what grades,are employed to provide support to him. [177504]


The Deputy Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Memberto the answer given to him by the Minister for theCabinet Office and Paymaster General, the right hon.Member for Horsham (Mr Maude), today.

Public Expenditure

Dr McCrea: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister whatchange there has been in the overall cost of his Officesince he took office. [176894]

The Deputy Prime Minister: The Deputy Prime Minister’sOffice is an integral part of the Cabinet Office. Costsare published each year in the Cabinet Office’s AnnualReport and Accounts which are available at:https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/cabinet-office-annual-reports-and-accounts

HOME DEPARTMENT

EU Justice and Home Affairs

Jacob Rees-Mogg: To ask the Secretary of State forthe Home Department (1) how many joint investigativeteams including the UK have been set up owing toArticle 5 of the EU-USA mutual legal assistanceagreement in each of the last five years; what the aims,activities, participants and achievements of each ofthese teams were; whether the UK would seek toengage with such teams if the UK ceases to be boundby that agreement pursuant to Article 10 of theProtocol on Transitional Provisions annexed to the EUtreaties; what legislative and operational measureswould need to be established by the UK to facilitatesuch engagement; and what assessment she has madeof the feasibility of such engagement; [172739]

(2) what the cost to the public purse has been of UKparticipation in the EU-USA mutual legal assistanceagreement in each of the last five years; [172760]

(3) what changes to the UK-US mutual legalassistance agreement have been required by the EU-USmutual legal assistance agreement; and in how manycases each of these changes has had a significant effecton mutual legal assistance between the UK and US ineach of the last five years; [172761]

(4) whether the Government intends to retain unchangedexisting provisions of the UK-US mutual legal assistanceagreement required by the EU-US mutual legal assistanceagreement if the UK ceases to be bound by that latteragreement pursuant to Article 10 of the Protocol onTransitional Provisions annexed to the EU treaties; andwhat her assessment is of whether the US will agree tosuch retention or will agree to necessary changes.

[172762]

James Brokenshire: Article 5 of the EU-US mutuallegal assistance (MLA) agreement has been transposedinto the UK-US MLA treaty as article 16 ter. No jointinvestigation teams involving the UK have been set upowing to article 5 of the EU-USA mutual legal assistanceagreement or article 16 ter of the UK-US MLA treaty.Article 16 ter will remain in force when the UK ceasesto the bound by the EU-US MLA agreement, unless theUK and US agree otherwise.

Information on the cost of UK participation in theEU-US mutual legal assistance agreement is not heldcentrally.

Amendments to the UK-US MLA treaty as requiredby the EU-US MLA agreement are provided in theInstrument and Exchange of Notes dated 16 December2004, available online at:

http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm76/7613/7613.pdf

These amendments were intended to supplement, notreplace, bilateral arrangements.

The amended bilateral treaty came into force on 1February 2010. No records are held on the number ofcases in which these amendments had a significanteffect. The bilateral UK-US MLA treaty (as amendedby the Instrument) will continue to be in force unless, oruntil, the UK and US agree to amend the bilateraltreaty.

As the Home Secretary said to Parliament on 9 July2013, as a point of principle, the UK’s internationalrelations in policing and criminal justice are first andforemost a matter for Her Majesty’s Government. Asthe UK has opted out of this measure, it is important tonote that on 1 December 2014, the UK will be able toagree the terms of our MLA arrangements bilaterallywith the US. In the meantime, the Government willretain unchanged existing UK law and practice and willmaintain co-operation with the USA with a UK liaisonprosecutor and a US legal attaché in Washington andLondon, respectively.

European Public Prosecutor’s Office

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Secretary of State forthe Home Department what steps her Department istaking to ensure that the personal details of UK citizens,whether they be suspects, victims or witnesses, are nothanded by Eurojust to the office of the EuropeanPublic Prosecutor. [177379]

James Brokenshire: The coalition agreement is clearthat the UK will not participate in any European PublicProsecutor’s Office (EPPO). The UK has also not optedin to the European Commission’s parallel proposal toreform Eurojust. One of the Government’s considerationsin taking that decision was to ensure that we haveclarity about the relationship between Eurojust and theEPPO, including any exchange of personal data betweenthe organisations. The Government has undertaken toreview its decision on participation in a reformed Eurojust,in consultation with Parliament, at the point the newregulation is adopted. The future direction of the EPPOis currently unclear pending a decision by the Commissionon whether to maintain, amend or withdraw the proposalfollowing the yellow card issued by national Parliamentschallenging the proposal on the grounds of subsidiarity.

Flexible Working

Mr Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for the HomeDepartment how many officials in her Departmentmake use of compressed hours arrangements as part ofthe civil service’s flexible working hours scheme (a)above and (b) below director level. [177398]


James Brokenshire: The number of officials in theHome Department making use of compressed hoursarrangements as part of the civil service’s flexible workinghours scheme as at 31 October 2013 is (a) fewer thanfive at director level and (b) 1,044 below director level.All such arrangements are subject to business andoperational need.

Human Trafficking

Mr Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for theHome Department (1) how many meetings of the Inter-Departmental Ministerial Group on Human Traffickingthere have been since it was set up; [177037]

(2) what assessment she has made of the working ofthe Inter-Departmental Ministerial Group on HumanTrafficking. [177076]

James Brokenshire: Since the Inter-DepartmentalMinisterial Group (IDMG) was refocused in May 2010,the group has met eight times:

17 October 2013 (ad-hoc meeting chaired by the Prime Minister)9 September 201317 June 201311 March 201317 September 201217 April 201211 October 201117 February 2011.

The IDMG published its second report on 18 October.The report updated on the actions from the initialIDMG report published in October 2012 which highlightedthree areas where the UK recognised the need to strengthenits approach: data collection, raising awareness withfront-line professionals and co-ordination of preventionactivities. A Joint Strategic Group (JSG) was setup andtasked to consider these areas in more detail. The JSGset up six multi-agency sub-groups to consider theissues, identify the problems and gaps and generaterecommendations. The Chair of the JSG is now amember of the IDMG establishing a clear and effectiveline of communication between the Government andcivil society organisations.

Progress has been made in all three areas and thereport can be read in full here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/251487/9794-TSO-HMG_Human_Trafficking.pdf

The Government keeps the effectiveness of the IDMGunder review.

Identity and Passport Service

Chris Bryant: To ask the Secretary of State for theHome Department what the cost of rebranding theIdentity and Passport Service to Her Majesty’s PassportOffice will be. [156615]

Mr Harper [holding answer 21 May 2013]: Her Majesty’sPassport Office undertook rebranding in line with allGovernment Departments and Agencies following thenew HM Government Corporate Identity requirements,which are designed to provide a cohesive, cost-effectiveand consistent approach to Government branding.

In line with the rebranding Her Majesty’s PassportOffice took the opportunity to change its name from″Identity and Passport Office″. The cost of this was£78,600.

Kings Science Academy

Kevin Brennan: To ask the Secretary of State for theHome Department pursuant to the answer from theParliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Educationof 22 November 2013, Official Report, columns 1089-90W, on Kings Science Academy, if she will publish alltelephone conversations between Action Fraud and theDepartment for Education in relation to theinvestigation into Kings Science Academy, Bradford.

[177762]

James Brokenshire: When Action Fraud takes a report,the victim or the person reporting is asked to provide asmuch information as possible concerning the allegedsuspect, the victim, how the incident took place, detailsof any other organisations that the fraud may have beenreported to and any transaction or bank accountinformation that is known to the reporter. Thus thecontents of reports and phone calls are confidential,however the person who made the report can be providedwith a copy of the report which Action Fraud submittedto the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau on request.

Kevin Brennan: To ask the Secretary of State for theHome Department on what date and by what meansAction Fraud first informed her Department that thepolice were taking no further action in relation toKings Science Academy in Bradford. [177767]

James Brokenshire: It would be for the police todecide whether to take further action. Such decisionsare not routinely reported to Ministers.

Kevin Brennan: To ask the Secretary of State for theHome Department what discussions Action Fraud hadwith the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau on thecase of the Kings Science Academy, Bradford prior toinforming her Department that no police action wouldbe taken. [177769]

James Brokenshire: On 1 November a discussiontook place between the National Fraud IntelligenceBureau (NFIB) and the National Fraud Authority (NFA)when the report was identified to establish what hadoccurred. The NFA subsequently listened to the recordingof the call alongside the report and confirmed to theNFIB that an administrative error had led to the reportbeing classified as an Information report and not acrime report. Decisions on how to proceed with individualcases are operational matters for the police.

Offenders: Deportation

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Secretary of State forthe Home Department pursuant to her answer of29 October 2013, Official Report, column 422W, onoffenders: deportation, what the nationalities were ofthe offenders who either received or were consideredfor a conditional caution to facilitate their removalfrom the UK. [177339]


Mr Harper: Since my answer on 29 October 2013,Official Report, column 422W, additional conditionalcautions with foreign national offender conditions havebeen administered. The current figures are as follows:

Number

Total conditional cautions issued 20Of which, successful removals fromthe UK

13

In progress 4Discontinued 131 Of which one was removed from the UK without a conditionalcaution.Note:All figures quoted have been derived from management informationand are therefore provisional and subject to change. This informationhas not been quality assured under National Statistics protocols.

It is not possible to provide the nationalities of thoseconsidered for conditional cautions but not issued withthem because they are not currently recorded. Thenationalities of the offenders who have been issued witha conditional caution are as follows: Albania, Bangladesh,Brazil, Cameroon, Georgia, India, Iran, Libya, Mauritius,Nepal, Pakistan and Trinidad and Tobago.

Organised Crime

Huw Irranca-Davies: To ask the Secretary of State forthe Home Department what recent assessment hisDepartment has made of the annual cost to the economyof organised (a) crime and (b) food crime. [177488]

James Brokenshire [holding answer 27 November 2013]:On 7 October 2013 the Government published theSerious and Organised Crime Strategy, which sets out anew national response to serious and organised crime,and estimates that the social and economic costs oforganised crime in this country are at least £24 billion ayear. This assessment is drawn from the Home Officestudy ″Understanding Organised Crime: Estimating thescale and the social and economic costs″ (also published7 October 2013).

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) and Departmentfor Food, Environment and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)are working together in order to explore different waysof detecting food fraud and, where possible, to assesscosts. FSA and DEFRA are working on improvedintelligence flows and information sharing to help anticipatefood fraud.

Passports

Fiona Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for theHome Department how many passports are returnedto HM Passport Office each year owing to errors incontent. [177638]

Mr Harper: Her Majesty’s Passport Office does notcollect this information centrally and to provide thisinformation would be at disproportionate cost.

Secondment

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for theHome Department pursuant to the answer of 19 November2013, Official Report, column 862W, on secondment,what her estimate was of the cost of collecting data onthe number of private sector secondees to her Department.

[177692]

James Brokenshire: Pursuant to the answer of19 November 2013, Official Report, column 862W, theestimated cost of collecting data on the number ofprivate sector employees currently seconded to the HomeOffice would be in excess of £1,800. This exceeds thecost threshold for answering parliamentary questionsof £850.

UK Border Agency

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for theHome Department how many allegations were madeand recorded by the UK Border Agency’s allegationsdatabase for each month in 2013. [176119]

Mr Harper: The Intelligence Management System(IMS) intake statistics for 2013 are set out in the followingtable. It should be noted that intake covers all types ofincoming information and not solely allegations madeby the public.

Number

January 5,920February 6,564March 6,003April 6,301May 6,219June 6,316July 6,822August 6,494September 6,036October 6,532Total 63,207

All figures quoted are management information whichhas been subject to internal quality checks. This informationhas not been quality assured under National Statisticsprotocols.

CABINET OFFICE

Drugs: Death

John Woodcock: To ask the Minister for the CabinetOffice how many deaths have been recorded wheresubstance abuse was a contributing factor in (a)England, (b) North West England and (c) Cumbria ineach of the last five years. [177693]

Mr Hurd: The information requested falls within theresponsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I haveasked the authority to reply.

Letter from Glen Watson, dated November 2013:As Director General for the Office for National Statistics, I

have been asked to reply to your recent question to the Ministerfor the Cabinet Office asking how many deaths have been recordedwhere substance abuse was a contributing factor in (a) England,(b) North West England and (c) Cumbria in each of the last fiveyears. (177693)

The tables provide the number of deaths where the underlyingcause was related to drug misuse for (a) England, (b) the NorthWest region and (c) the county of Cumbria, for deaths registeredfrom 2008 to 2012 (the latest year available).

The numbers of drug-related deaths registered in England andWales from 1993 to 2012 are available on the ONS website:

www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/subnational-health3/deaths-related-to-drug-poisoning/index.html


Table 1. Number of deaths related to drug misuse, England, the North West andCumbria, deaths registered from 2008-121, 2, 3

Deaths (persons)

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

England 1,802 1,729 1,625 1,461 1,356

NorthWest

344 323 278 309 285

Cumbria 17 15 19 15 171 Cause of death was defined using the International Classification of Diseases,Tenth Revision (ICD-10). Deaths were included where the underlying cause wasdue to drug poisoning and where a drug controlled under the Misuse of DrugsAct 1971 was mentioned on the death certificate. More details on the definitionof a death related to drug misuse can be found in the background notes of the’Deaths related to drug poisoning in England and Wales’ statistical bulletinwww.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/subnational-health3/deaths-related-to-drug-poisoning/index.html2 Figures are based on boundaries as at August 2013 and exclude deaths ofnon-residents.3 Figures are based on deaths registered, rather than deaths occurring, between2008 and 2012. Due to the length of time it takes to hold an inquest, it can takemonths for a drug-related death to be registered. Additional information onregistration delays for drug-related deaths can be found in the annual statisticalbulletin:www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/subnational-health3/deaths-related-to-drug-poisoning/index.htmlBox 1. International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes

used to define deaths related to drug poisoning

Description ICD 10 codes

Mental and behavioural disorders due to druguse (excluding alcohol and tobacco)

F11-F16, F18-F19

Accidental poisoning by drugs, medicamentsand biological substances

X40-X44

Intentional self-poisoning by drugs,medicaments and biological substances

X60-X64

Assault by drugs, medicaments and biologicalsubstances

X85

Poisoning by drugs, medicaments and biologicalsubstances, undetermined intent

Y10-Y14

Electronic Government: Misrepresentation

Sir Greg Knight: To ask the Minister for the CabinetOffice what steps he is taking to discourage members ofthe public from using websites that charge for servicesthat are currently provided free by the Government.

[177471]

Mr Hurd: The Government Digital Service is workingwith Departments to get a clearer view of the scale ofthis problem. In cases where there is belief that awebsite operator is acting in a clearly misleading way,Government will act to curtail their activities viaorganisations such as the Advertising Standards Agency,Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioner’sOffice and search providers.

In the year since the launch of Gov.uk in October2012 it had received 429 million visits. It was recentlyranked as the 46th most visited website in the UK.

Ministerial Policy Advisers

Mr Betts: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Officewhat the total cost of (a) special advisers to theDeputy Prime Minister and (b) officials providingsupport to those special advisers was in the last year forwhich data is available; and how much of that cost was(i) salaries, (ii) on-costs, (iii) accommodation costs, (iv)office costs and (v) other costs. [177502]

Mr Maude: Information on special adviser numbersand pay bands can be found at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/special-adviser-data-releases-numbers-and-costs-october-2013

My departmental organogram is available at:http://data.gov.uk/organogram/cabinet-office

Further information about the costs of the DeputyPrime Minister’s Office are available at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/cabinet-office-annual-reports-and-accounts


Mr Jenkin: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office(1) whether he (a) has appointed or (b) intends toappoint an enlarged ministerial office; [177508]

(2) what ministerial guidance is being prepared onenlarged ministerial offices (EMOs); what external academicbodies or think tanks have submitted drafts of suchguidance or related draft guidance to his Department;and when any such guidance on EMOs will be published.

[177573]

Mr Maude: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer Igave on 25 November 2013, Official Report, column115W, to the hon. Member for South Antrim (DrMcCrea).

This guidance develops the policy on ExtendedMinisterial Offices outlined in the Government’s ’OneYear On’ report on Civil Service Reform in June of thisyear. The EMO policy reflects the conclusions of therecent Institute of Public Policy Research (IRRP) Report‘Accountability and responsiveness in the senior civilservice’. That report found that UK Ministers are undersupported in comparison with other countries, eventhose with Westminster-derived systems such as Australiaand Canada. The Institute for Government has alsoargued for more powerful ministerial offices.

The Government will provide an update on theintroduction of Extended Ministerial Offices in its nextreport on progress against the Civil Service ReformPlan.

EDUCATION

Children: Mental Health

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Education(1) what assessment he has made of the use of mindfulnessin schools to reduce stress and absenteeism; [179113]

(2) what assessment he has made of the use ofmindfulness in schools to improve attention spans ofchildren; [179114]

(3) what assessment he has made of the use ofmindfulness in schools in developing lifelong healthymental health habits; [179115]

(4) what assessment he has made of the use ofmindfulness in schools in (a) improving behaviour and(b) increasing educational attainment. [179116]

Elizabeth Truss: The Department for Education hasnot conducted any assessment of the use of mindfulnessin schools. Individual head teachers can decide whetherthey wish to adopt approaches relating to mindfulness.


Educational Exchanges

Mr Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State forEducation what recent discussions he has had with theSecretary of State for International Development onpotential benefits of schools in the UK being pairedwith schools in developing countries. [177639]

Elizabeth Truss: Both the Department for Educationand the Department for International Developmentrecognise the benefits of schools linking to stimulatemeaningful collaboration across cultures. The BritishCouncil and the Department for International Developmentjointly fund the Connecting Classrooms global educationprogramme which offers British schools partnershipswith their international counterparts, including schoolsin developing countries. The Department for Educationis represented on its Supervisory Board.

In addition, the Department for Education has aninput to the Department for International Development’sGlobal Learning Programme (GLP), launched on 20November by the Secretary of State for InternationalDevelopment, my right hon. Friend the Member forPutney (Justine Greening), and has a representative onthe Programme’s Advisory Board. The GLP focuses ondeveloping pupils’ knowledge and understanding ofglobal challenges such as poverty, inequality andsustainability.

Mr Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State forEducation what estimate he has made of the number ofschool pupils in the UK who took part in a foreignexchange programme in each of the last five years.

[177640]

Elizabeth Truss: The Secretary of State for theDepartment for Education has made no such estimate.The Department for Education does not collect data onnumbers of pupils taking part in foreign exchangeprogrammes. It is up to individual schools to decidewhether to participate in exchanges.

Free Schools

Kevin Brennan: To ask the Secretary of State forEducation when he plans to comply with theInformation Commissioner’s decision notice of 18November 2013 in relation to completed free schoolapplications. [177646]

Michael Gove: We will respond to the InformationCommissioner’s Office decision notice within the statutorytime scales set out in the Freedom of Information Act2000.

Kings Science Academy

Mr Ward: To ask the Secretary of State for Educationpursuant to the answer of 22 November 2013, OfficialReport, column 1090W, on Kings Science Academy, bywhat method his Department supplied the evidence ofpossible fraud to Action Fraud. [177587]

Michael Gove: Officials at the Department for Educationreported the case to Action Fraud’s national call centreon 25 April by telephone. All the information requestedby Action Fraud was provided.

Kevin Brennan: To ask the Secretary of State forEducation (1) with reference to the investigation intoKings Science Academy, Bradford, on what dates (a)his Department requested an update from Action Fraudon what steps had been taken following the Department’sreferral of the matter to Action Fraud in April 2013 and(b) he or Ministers of his Department were informedthat no further action was being taken by police;

[177765]

(2) what disciplinary sanctions he has consideredusing in relation to the leadership of the Kings ScienceAcademy in response to the findings of his Department’sinvestigation into the Academy’s finances; [177768]

(3) whether he or Ministers in his Departmentauthorised the decision to report the findings of thereport into Kings Science Academy by telephone callrather than in writing to Action Fraud. [177763]

Michael Gove: Officials at the Department for Educationreported the case to Action Fraud’s national call centreon 25 April. An additional telephone call was made toWest Yorkshire Police’s Economic Crime Unit, whoconfirmed that this was the correct way to report fraudand that no further action was required.

Following the Department’s referral to Action Fraudon 25 April, an update was requested on 5 September.Action Fraud subsequently notified the Department on1 November that the information provided had beenwrongly classified as an information report rather thana crime report. This error has been rectified by ActionFraud and West Yorkshire police have confirmed theyare now investigating. Action Fraud has apologised tothe Department for this error.

I issued a warning notice to the trust on 17 May. Thewarning notice is available on the Department’s websiteat:

http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/k/kings%20science%20academy%20warning%20notice.pdf

The warning notice makes clear my requirements,and the possible repercussions.

Languages: Education

Mr Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State forEducation what assessment his Department has madeof the effect of school children studying Latin orAncient Greek on their aptitude for English or otherEuropean languages. [177635]

Elizabeth Truss: The Department for Education isaware of research evidence that suggests a link betweenthe study of Latin and more effective learning of otherlanguages. We are aware of no specific evidence withregard to ancient Greek.

Modern English contains a substantial proportion ofwords derived from Latin and ancient Greek. Study ofLatin equips pupils to learn a related modern language,such as French, Spanish; Italian, Portuguese or Romanian.

Mr Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State forEducation what steps he is taking to encourage schoolchildren to learn foreign languages. [177636]

Elizabeth Truss: The English Baccalaureate is alreadyencouraging more young people to take a language atGCSE level. The number of pupils at the end of key


stage 4 (ages 14 to 16) in England entered for a modernforeign language GCSE increased by over 20% from2012 to 2013.

We have made study of a foreign language compulsoryat key stage 2 (ages seven to 11) as part of the newnational curriculum, which comes into force fromSeptember 2014. Schools will be able to teach anymodern or ancient foreign language.


Mr Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Educationwhether he (a) has appointed or (b) intends to appointan enlarged ministerial office. [177513]

Elizabeth Truss: I refer the hon. Member to theMinister for the Cabinet Office’s answer of 28 November2013.

Overseas Students: EU Nationals

Mr Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State forEducation what estimate he has made of the number ofstudents coming to study in the UK from (a) Romaniaand (b) Bulgaria in (i) each of the last five years and(ii) each of the next five years. [177671]

Mr Laws: No estimate has been made of the number,of students coming to study in England from Romaniaand Bulgaria.

Schools: Sports

Mr Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State forEducation what recent discussions his Department hashad with schools to encourage them to allow communityorganisations and clubs to use their sporting facilitieswhen they are not otherwise in use. [177637]

Mr Timpson: The Department encourages all schoolsto offer the use of their facilities to community organisationsand clubs, should that be appropriate in local circumstances.

The Department for Education is working with theDepartment of Health and Department of Culture,Media and Sport specifically to build links betweenschools and community clubs, and increase the participationlevels of children, young people and parents, in sportand healthy activity.

Through the ’Satellite Club’ programme, run by SportEngland, every secondary school and college in Englandwill be offered a community sport club (’satellite club’)by 2017 on its site. Each club will have a direct link toone or more national governing bodies for sport, dependingon the local area.

Secondment

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State forEducation how many of his Department’s civilservants have been seconded to (a) the private sectorand (b) trades unions in each year since 2010. [177712]

Elizabeth Truss: According to centrally held records,the Department for Education has had one member ofstaff working for the private sector since 2010. Thearrangement was a staff development initiative with areciprocating placement made available. As this was areciprocal arrangement, no payment was involved.

No civil servants have been seconded to any tradeunions.

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State forEducation how many secondees from (a) trades unionsand (b) the voluntary sector have worked in hisDepartment since 2010. [177735]

Elizabeth Truss: According to centrally held records,the Department for Education has had one secondeefrom the voluntary sector since 2010.

No civil servants have been seconded from any tradeunions.

TRANSPORT

Aviation

Alun Cairns: To ask the Secretary of State for Transportif he will make an assessment of the effect on businessesin airports of recent changes by airlines to their policieswhich prevent passengers from bringing items they havepurchased at the airport in addition to their carry-onbaggage allowance. [177120]

Mr Goodwill: We have no plans to make such anassessment. The size and amount of baggage, be itcabin or hold, that a passenger is permitted to take onboard a commercial aircraft is a matter for airlines todecide as private commercial companies.

Car Sharing

Stephen Gilbert: To ask the Secretary of State forTransport how much funding his Department has providedfor car share schemes in each of the next five years.

[177674]

Stephen Hammond: While no funding is being directlyawarded to car sharing schemes over the next five years,car sharing schemes do feature in a number of thetransport projects funded via the £600 million localsustainable transport fund which will run until 2015.Currently just under 50% of the 96 projects approvedfor funding feature elements of car sharing and car clubschemes.

The local sustainable transport fund has now beenextended into 2015-16 and £100 million capital fundingis to be administered via the local growth fund on acompetitive basis. A separate revenue funding stream of£78.5 million will be managed by the Department forTransport and will be allocated via competition.

Cycling: Safety

George Galloway: To ask the Secretary of State forTransport (1) if he will bring forward legislativeproposals to make (a) sensors for the blindspot and(b) other cycling safety equipment a legal requirementon all new (i) heavy goods vehicles and (ii) passengerservice vehicles; [177231]

(2) if he will bring forward legislative proposals tomake (a) sensors for the blindspot and (b) othercycling safety equipment a legal requirement on allexisting (i) heavy goods vehicles and (ii) passengerservice vehicles. [177232]


Mr Goodwill: The Department for Transport has ledmoves at the UN-ECE to improve the mirrors fitted tonew heavy goods vehicles. Once implemented at EUlevel these new mirrors will help cycle safety by increasingthe driver’s view of the passenger side.

The International Standards Organisation (ISO) isdeveloping a standard for camera monitoring systemsfitted to road vehicles. The Government anticipates thestandard will be included within the UN-ECE regulationas a means to improve further the driver vision for newlarge vehicles. It is possible that these new mirrors andcamera systems could be fitted to existing large vehicles.

There are no plans currently to introduce requirementsfor sensing systems to detect cyclists alongside heavyvehicles. A full assessment of these systems will beneeded before reaching a decision to impose additionalcosts on operators of these vehicles.

George Galloway: To ask the Secretary of State forTransport if he will launch a public educationcampaign to encourage all cyclists to engage in safecycling practice. [177233]

Mr Goodwill: Cycling safety is one of the THINK!road safety campaign priorities for 2013-14. This autumnI launched the first paid-for media campaign targetingdrivers and cyclists with cycle safety messages.

Working in partnership with Transport for London(TfL), THINK! adopted TfL’s ‘tips’ campaign andextended it to run in five cities across England wherecyclist KSIs are highest (outside of London). Thesecities included Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham, Bristoland Cambridge.

The campaign consisted of “outdoor” advertisingrunning in roadside locations. Outdoor media was chosenas it enables us to reach and remind drivers and cyclistsat the point of action and when behaviour is more likelyto be positively influenced (i.e. when they are driving orcycling). The campaign consisted of a series of tips,developed to be even-handed and balanced in theirapproach and to educate and remind both drivers andcyclists about the correct way to drive and ride, andreduce the number of collisions on the road.

The campaign launched on 21 October and ran forfour weeks; coinciding with the end of British summertimeand the clocks going back. A review of the campaignsperformance will be carried out shortly and the resultswill inform our cycling approach going forward.

High Speed 2 Railway Line

Dan Byles: To ask the Secretary of State forTransport if he will provide a figure for the total cost toHS2 Ltd of running all phase one community forummeetings and all phase one bilateral meetings, takingaccount of associated costs including those of stafftime, travel expenses, materials and preparation timeand all other relevant costs. [177322]

Mr Goodwill: Information is not available in the formrequested and can be obtained only at disproportionatecost.

The HS2 Phase One community forums have been animportant part of the engagement process and haveprovided an opportunity for members of the communityto put their issues, ideas and priorities to the engineers

and environment teams developing the design. Theforum process has been valuable in the development ofthe scheme and its mitigation.

Mrs Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State forTransport whether anyone working for or on behalf ofHS2 Ltd or his Department met Lord Heseltine or anyperson on his behalf or provided information, draftedor prepared any part of the speech delivered by LordHeseltine to the Royal Town Planning Institute onHigh Speed 2. [177324]

Mr Goodwill: Special advisers and Department forTransport officials met Lord Heseltine on 31 October tobrief him on the recently published Strategic Case forHigh Speed 2. This was part of a wider strategy ofstakeholder engagement.

Subsequently, officials provided Lord Heseltine withfurther information in order for him to draft aspects ofhis pre-arranged speech on Local Growth, which hedelivered at the Royal Town Planning Institute on12 November.

Pedestrian Crossings

Sir Peter Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State forTransport (1) when the pelican crossing was given typeapproval; when highway authorities were advised notto install new pelican crossings; and what process ofdecision-taking and action would be required to stopthe introduction of any new pelican crossings; [177220]

(2) what information his Department holds on therelative risks to pedestrians on or near the differenttypes of signal-controlled pedestrian crossings; [177221]

(3) what the outcome was of his recent meeting withthe Safer Roads Foundation and Michael Woodford todiscuss safer light-controlled pedestrian crossings.

[177222]

Mr Goodwill: Pelican crossings were first prescribedin law in 1969. In the 1990s, in response to concernsraised by pedestrians about intimidation on the crossingduring the flashing green man/flashing amber phase,the Department developed the puffin crossing, whichwas first prescribed in 1997. Puffin crossings providegreater benefits for road users by using detectors toautomatically extend the crossing time for those whoneed it, and to cancel unwanted demands to reducedelays to drivers.

The decision on what type of crossing to provide isfor local authorities. The Department’s guidance in thePuffin Good Practice Guide (published in 2006 andavailable at

http://assets.dft.gov.uk/publications/puffin-good-practice/puffin-good-practice-guide.pdf

clearly explains the benefits of puffin crossings andencourages local authorities to use them. Many localauthorities have already made it their policy to onlyinstall puffin crossings.

Research commissioned by the Department showedthat pelican crossings converted to puffin crossingsshowed an average reduction in, accidents of 17%. Thereport is available to download from:

www.trl.co.uk/online_store/reports_publications/trl_reports/cat_traffic_engineering/report_puffin_pedestrian_crossing_accident_study.htm


The meeting with the Safer Roads Foundation andPACTS discussed the installation and use of both pelicanand puffin crossings. As part of revising the TrafficSigns Regulations and General Directions (TSRGD),the Department will be updating its guidance on designingand installing appropriate crossings.

Rescue Services: Belfast

Katy Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for Transporton how many occasions the Maritime Rescue Co-ordinationCentre, Belfast, was staffed at below risk-assessed levelsin October 2013. [177556]

Stephen Hammond: Belfast Maritime RescueCoordination Centre (MRCC) was staffed at below riskassessed levels in October 2013 on five occasions out of62 shifts.

These situations are mitigated by “MRCC pairing”where each MRCC is connected to at least one otherMRCC which is available to provide mutual support. Inrespect of Belfast MRCC, mutual support is availablethrough a fixed link from Stornoway MRCC and dial-uplinks from the MRCCs at Shetland, Aberdeen, Liverpoolor Holyhead.

Every effort is being made to recruit staff. Recentlythe Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) successfullyrecruited more coastguards filling 28 vacancies, with afurther 31 recruits in the final stages of appointment. Afurther recruitment campaign was launched on 6 November.With this, and now that negotiations with the tradeunion have concluded with 79% of PCS members votingto accept the new terms and conditions, the MCAbelieves that this will help stabilise the current staffingissues.

Rescue Services: Liverpool

Katy Clark: To ask the Secretary of State forTransport on how many occasions the MaritimeRescue Co-ordination Centre, Liverpool, was staffed atbelow risk-assessed levels in October 2013. [177554]

Stephen Hammond: Liverpool Maritime RescueCoordination Centre (MRCC) was staffed at below riskassessed levels in October 2013 on 20 occasions out of62 shifts.

These situations are mitigated by ’MRCC pairing’where each MRCC is connected to at least one otherMRCC which is available to provide mutual support. Inrespect of Liverpool MRCC mutual support is availablethrough a fixed link from Holyhead MRCC and dial uplinks from the MRCCs at Milford Haven, Swansea,Belfast or Aberdeen.

Every effort is being made to recruit staff. Recentlythe Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) successfullyrecruited more coastguards filling 28 vacancies with afurther 31 recruits in the final stages of appointment. Afurther recruitment campaign was launched on 6 November.With this and now that negotiations with the tradeunion have concluded with 79% of PCS members votingto accept the new terms and conditions, the MCAbelieves that this will help stabilise the current staffingissues.

Rescue Services: Stornoway

Katy Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for Transporton how many occasions the Maritime Rescue Co-ordinationCentre, Stornoway, was staffed at below risk-assessedlevels in October 2013. [177555]

Stephen Hammond: Stornoway Maritime RescueCoordination Centre (MRCC) was staffed at below riskassessed levels in October 2013 on eight occasions outof 62 shifts.

These situations are mitigated by “MRCC pairing”where each MRCC is connected to at least one otherMRCC which is available to provide mutual support. Inrespect of Stornoway MRCC, mutual support is availablethrough a fixed link from Belfast MRCC and dial-uplinks from the MRCCs at Shetland or Humber.

Every effort is being made to recruit staff. Recentlythe Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) successfullyrecruited more coastguards filling 28 vacancies, with afurther 31 recruits in the final stages of appointment. Afurther recruitment campaign was launched on 6 November.With this, and now that negotiations with the tradeunion have concluded with 79% of PCS members votingto accept the new terms and conditions, the MCAbelieves that this will help stabilise the current staffingissues.

Roads: Safety

Mr Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State forTransport what his policy is on the appointment of aUN Special Envoy for Road Safety. [177186]

Mr Goodwill: The Government supports the UN’sDecade for Action on Road Safety. We welcome anymeasures which reduce global road deaths.

Vehicle Number Plates

Stephen Barclay: To ask the Secretary of State forTransport by what date he expects the Driver andVehicle Licensing Agency to share information fromautomatic information licence plates with police forcesin respect of foreign registered vehicles which havebeen in the UK for more than six months. [177581]

Mr Goodwill: No date has been agreed at present.The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency is continuing

to work with the UK Border Force and the police toexplore how data can be used by the police to identifyforeign registered vehicles that have been in the UK forlonger than six months. Once this explanatory work hasbeen completed a plan of action will be developed forimplementing the proposed solution.


Energy: Billing

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State forEnergy and Climate Change what steps he is taking tohelp households with their energy bills. [901309]


Robert Flello: To ask the Secretary of State forEnergy and Climate Change what steps he is taking tohelp households with their energy bills. [901312]

Stephen Doughty: To ask the Secretary of State forEnergy and Climate Change what steps he is taking tohelp households with their energy bills. [901313]

Ian Mearns: To ask the Secretary of State for Energyand Climate Change what steps he is taking to helphouseholds with their energy bills. [901316]

Mr Davey: The Government is providing help toconsumers with energy bills in three basic ways: throughdirect financial support, with energy efficiency initiativesand by boosting competition. With the winter fuelpayment, with the warm home discount, and with coldweather payments, in 2012-13 the Government spentover £2.5 billion on direct subsidies to reduce bills. Withthe Energy Company Obligation and the Green Dealwe are helping consumers to reduce bills permanently.Along with Ofgem, our policies in both the retail andwholesale markets are intensifying competition to helpconsumers reduce their bills this winter and every winter.

Energy: Consumption

Dr Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for Energyand Climate Change what steps he is taking to reduceenergy usage. [901319]

Gregory Barker: Energy efficiency has a key role toplaying in helping consumers reduce their energy bills.

As of September more than 270,000 homes had had measuresinstalled through the Green Deal, Cash Back and ECO schemes.

Earlier this year we concluded the procurement competitionsfor the provision of Smart Meter data and communication services.

The world first Green Investment Bank will drive energyefficiency innovation.

And the recently announced Electricity Demand Reductionpilot will explore opportunities to permanently reduce demand,through financial incentives for businesses.

Energy: Meters

David T. C. Davies: To ask the Secretary of State forEnergy and Climate Change what the predicted costsare for rolling out smart meters to households acrossthe UK. [177377]

Michael Fallon: The latest Impact Assessment for thesmart metering rollout published by the Departmentcan be found at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/78666/IA-Feb.pdf

The Impact Assessment covers Great Britain. It estimatesthe costs of the domestic rollout to be £11.5 billion andthe benefits to be £15.9 billion over the period 2013 to2030. We expect to publish an updated Impact Assessmentearly next year.

Energy: Prices

Julie Elliott: To ask the Secretary of State for Energyand Climate Change what progress he has made on hispolicy to exempt some energy intensive industries fromthe costs of contracts for difference. [177664]

Michael Fallon: The Government concluded itsconsultation on the exemption eligibility for contractfor difference costs on 30 August 2013. The Departmentfor Business, Innovation and Skills is analysing theresponses received.

The Government is also currently consulting on thedetailed design of the supplier obligation, the mechanismby which suppliers will be charged the cost of contractsfor difference. The Government continues to discuss itsproposals for an energy intensive industry exemptionwith industry, and expects to publish its response to theconsultation, along with draft regulations for the exemptionearly in 2014.Link:

Electricity Market Reform: consultation - eligibility for anexemption from the costs of ‘Contracts for Difference’:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/210724/bis-13-974-electricity-market-reform-consultation-eligibility-for-an-exemption-from-the-costs-of-contracts-for-difference.pdf

Julie Elliott: To ask the Secretary of State for Energyand Climate Change which energy intensive industrieswill qualify for exemption from the costs of contractsfor difference. [177665]

Michael Fallon: The Government intends to implementan exemption for the most electricity intensive industriesfrom some of the costs of contracts for difference,where they pose a significant risk to UK competitiveness,subject to state aid approval.

The Department for Business, Innovation and Skillsconcluded its consultation on the exemption eligibilityfor contracts for difference costs at the end of August.This outlined that the Government’s preferred approachis to base exemption on the same criteria as for thecompensation scheme for the indirect costs of the carbonprice floor. The Government is analysing the responsesreceived and expects to release its response to theconsultation early in 2014.Link:

Electricity Market Reform: consultation - eligibility for anexemption from the costs of‘Contracts for Difference’:https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/210724/bis-13-974-electricity-market-reform-consultation-eligibility-for-an-exemption-from-the-costs-of-contracts-for-difference.pdf

Julie Elliott: To ask the Secretary of State for Energyand Climate Change how the exemption from the costsof contracts for difference for energy intensiveindustries will be calculated. [177666]

Michael Fallon: The cost of contracts for difference—i.e.the difference between contracts for difference strikeprices and the wholesale electricity price—will be borneby licensed electricity suppliers. Costs will be collectedthrough the ’supplier obligation’, which is the licencerequirement for suppliers to pay the costs of contractsfor difference.

The detail of that supplier obligation is currentlybeing consulted on. Under those proposals, the supplierobligation will be levied on all suppliers on a pound permegawatt hour basis, i.e. on the basis of electricitysupplied.


The exemption will work by excluding a proportionof the electricity supplied to energy intensive industries(EIIs) from the pound per megawatt levy. This wouldmean that the contracts for difference costs faced bylicensed electricity suppliers would be adjusted to takeinto account the scale of the EII customer base. Wewould therefore not expect suppliers to incorporate thecosts of contracts for difference in the charges made forthe supply of electricity to EIIs as contracts for differencecosts are not a cost caused by the supply of electricity tosuch customers. Market competition should ensure thatsavings made by licensed electricity suppliers are passedon to EIIs.

Julie Elliott: To ask the Secretary of State for Energyand Climate Change what assessment he has made ofthe effects on consumer bills of the exemption from thecosts of contracts for difference for some energyintensive industries. [177667]

Michael Fallon: The Government published updatedcost estimates during the consultation on the exemptioneligibility for contracts for difference costs—this consultationclosed at the end of August. Dependent on its finaldesign, the average impact of the exemption on domestichousehold electricity bills is estimated at an average of£0.90 to £2.30 per year for the period 2016 to 2020 in2012 prices. The actual cost will be dependent on anumber of factors, including realised contracts for differencesupport costs, electricity demand and the final designand scope of the exemption.

Link:Electricity Market Reform: consultation—eligibility for an

exemption from the costs of ’Contracts for Difference’—updatedcost estimates:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/232224/bis-13-1137-electricity-market-reform-eligibility-for-exemption-from-the-costs-of-contracts-for-difference-updated-cost-estimates.pdf

EU Emissions Trading Scheme

Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State forEnergy and Climate Change if he will make an assessmentof the current status of carbon trading in London andthe EU Emissions Trading Scheme. [177696]

Gregory Barker: The UK supports urgent reform ofthe EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) to address thesurplus of allowances in the system, to align the capwith long term targets to reduce emissions 80% by 2050and to strengthen the carbon price to provide a strongsignal to stimulate low-carbon investment. These reformswill also ensure that London remains a global hub forcarbon trading, as it is currently with around 90% theEU market based in London.

Green Deal Scheme

Paul Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Energyand Climate Change what steps his Department istaking to tackle non-accredited Green Deal companieswho exploit consumers. [177538]

Gregory Barker: Any rogue trader not accreditedunder the Green Deal and misrepresenting it will bedealt with under consumer protection law with appropriateaction taken by Trading Standards.

The Department will also shortly be publishing aquick guide to help consumers identify genuine GreenDeal authorised traders, and the guide has already beendistributed among the consumer organisations.

We continue to engage with Trading Standards, CitizensAdvice, Office of Fair Trading, Consumer Futuresand Which? and share information about the GreenDeal, via a Consumer Protection Forum and othermeetings.

Nuclear Power

Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State forEnergy and Climate Change pursuant to his oral statementof 21 October 2013, Official Report, columns 23-25, onthe UK nuclear energy programme, whether his commentin that statement that new nuclear will receive no support,unless similar support is also made available more widelyto other types of generation, reflects a change from thepolicy set out in the Coalition Agreement that newnuclear power stations may be allowed, provided thatthey receive no public subsidy; and if he will make astatement. [177408]

Michael Fallon: The Government policy is as set outin the 7 February 2013 and 18 October 2010 statementsto Parliament, made by the Secretary of State for Energyand Climate Change, the right hon. Member for Kingstonand Surbiton (Mr Davey), and his predecessor.

The text of the statements can be found at:www.gov.uk/government/speeches/edward-davey-speech-to-the-commons-on-new-nuclear-power

www.gov.uk/government/news/written-ministerial-statement-on-energy-policy-the-rt-hon-chris-huhne-mp-18-october-2010

Solar Power

Glyn Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Energyand Climate Change what steps he is taking to ensurethat solar PV is appropriately sited. [901308]

Gregory Barker: The Solar PV Roadmap, publishedin October 2013, sets out our policy on solar PV whichshould be appropriately sited, give proper weight toenvironmental considerations such as landscape andvisual impact, heritage and local amenity, and provideopportunities for local communities to influence decisionsthat affect them. I have written to all local planningauthorities emphasising the importance DECC attachesto ensuring solar PV is appropriately sited.

Separately, DECC is also working with industry andthe National Solar Centre through the Sustainabilityand Land Use Task Force, combined with a series ofregional roadshows, to generate best practice for developersand ensure that this is widely disseminated.


JUSTICE

Courts: Security Guards

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State forJustice how many court security officers for (a) Mitie,(b) G4S and (c) Securitas have been officiallydesignated by the Lord Chancellor under the CourtSecurity Officer (Designated) Regulations 2005 sincethe regulations came into force. [171352]

Mr Vara: Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service(HMCTS) do not hold the requested information forthe period between 2005 and 2009.

Between 2009 and 2012, MITIE were the primarysupplier of Court Security Officers (CSOs) for thecourts within my Department. During that period, atotal of 755 CSOs were designated. No G4S or SecuritasOfficers were designated.

From February 2012 to date, MITIE and G4S are themain suppliers of designated CSOs for HMCTS. Duringthis period, 418 CSOs have been designated for MITIE,460 CSOs designated for G4S. No CSOs have beendesignated for Securitas.

Defamation

Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Justicewhat the Government’s policy is on whether families ofdeceased persons should be able to sue under the law ofdefamation following recent jurisprudence on the issuein the European Court of Human Rights. [177668]

Mr Vara: It is a long standing legal principle that adeceased person cannot be defamed as reputation ispersonal. The Government has no plans to change thelaw in this area. This principle is not affected by therecent European Court of Human Rights judgment inPutistin v. Ukraine, which concerned an applicant whosought redress for damage to his and his family’s reputationaffecting him, rather than damage to the reputation ofthe deceased person.

Family Proceedings: Legal Aid Scheme

Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State forJustice what steps he is taking to ensure that adequatelegal aid is available for family cases; and what plans hehas to adapt the qualifying rules for assistance underthe new regulations. [177413]

Mr Vara: At around £2 billion a year we have one ofthe most expensive legal aid systems in the world and inthe current challenging economic climate we cannotcontinue to sustain this type of spending. It is essentialthat resources are focused on cases where legal aid ismost needed—that is where people’s life or liberty is atstake, where they are at risk of serious physical harm orimmediate loss of their home, or where their childrenmay be taken into care. Even after all of our changes wewill still have one of the most generous systems—ataround £1.5 billion a year.

As part of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishmentof Offenders Act 2012 we made sure that where domesticabuse or child protection issues exist in a private family

case, legal aid would remain available. Recognising concernsabout potential difficulties in accessing legal aid, wesignificantly widened the list of evidence that could beused to prove domestic abuse during the passage of theBill. Although, too early to have a definitive picture,latest figures from the Legal Aid Agency show that legalaid is granted to the majority of people who apply forlegal aid on the basis of the domestic violence evidencerequirements.

During debate on the regulations on 27 March 2013,Official Report, House of Lords, column 1114, we committedto monitor and review the operation of the requirementfor evidence.

We expect this review to be completed early in thenew year, following engagement with stakeholders.

Human Trafficking: Convictions

Stephen Barclay: To ask the Secretary of State forJustice how many victims of (a) human trafficking and(b) forced labour have been wrongly convicted in eachof the last three years. [176040]

The Solicitor-General: I have been asked to reply.The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) maintains no

records of the number of prosecutions or convictionsagainst victims of (a) human trafficking and (b) forcedlabour. This information is unlikely to be available evenon a manual check of all case files, which would incurdisproportionate cost.

However, the CPS has issued comprehensive legalguidance to advise prosecutors of the steps they shouldtake in cases where the police have arrested potentialvictims of trafficking and forced labour who have committedcriminal offences and referred them for charge. Ifinformation suggests that they have been trafficked,prosecutors are advised to make full inquiries and considerwhether the case against them should be discontinued.However, a prosecutor can only take these steps if theyhave information from the police or other sources that asuspect might be a victim of trafficking.

Immigration: Appeals

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Justicehow large the current backlog of cases awaitingimmigration tribunal is. [177606]

Mr Vara: The First-tier Tribunal (Immigration andAsylum Chamber) and Upper Tribunal (Immigrationand Asylum Chamber) hear and decide appeals againstdecisions made by the Home Office on asylum, immigrationand nationality matters.

The First-tier Tribunal (Asylum and ImmigrationChamber) and Upper Tribunal (Immigration and AsylumChamber) are administered by HM Courts and TribunalService, an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice(MOJ). Information on appeals before the tribunal ispublished by MoJ in the Tribunal Statistics quarterly.The most recent report is for the period April to June2013, which includes the number of outstanding casesbefore the tribunal. This can be viewed at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/tribunal-statistics-quarterly-april-to-june-2013


Mesothelioma

Grahame M. Morris: To ask the Secretary of State forJustice how many claims have been brought againstGovernment departments by people with mesotheliomasince May 2010. [176141]

The Solicitor-General: I have been asked to reply.The information cannot be provided as it is not

readily available or held centrally. It could be obtainedonly at a disproportionate cost. Mesothelioma claimsare handled by various Government Departments, andagencies, including The Treasury Solicitor. The TreasurySolicitor does not act for all Government Departmentsand agencies and some of these claims are handled byexternal solicitors.

HEALTH

Clinical Commissioning Groups

Charlotte Leslie: To ask the Secretary of State forHealth what guidance his Department provides on aclinical commissioning group’s right to withhold frompublication a register of the interests of its board members.

[177673]

Dr Poulter: The National Health Service Act 2006, asamended by the Health and Social Care Act 2012,requires clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) to publish,or make arrangements to ensure that members of thepublic have access to registers of interest on request.CCGs must describe in their constitution the arrangementsfor making the register of interests publicly available,including for those people that do not have access to theinternet.

NHS England has issued guidance ″Managing Conflictsof Interest: Guidance for Clinical Commissioning Groups″,which states that CCGs should:

make the Register of Interest available upon request for inspectionat CCGs headquarters or local health premises;ensure the document is available upon application (either bypost or e-mail); andmake arrangements with local health authorities for copies tobe made available via local libraries.

A copy of the guidance has been placed in theLibrary.

Depressive Illnesses

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Healthwhat the average age of the onset of depression was in(a) 1983, (b) 1993, (c) 2003 and (d) 2012. [179102]

Norman Lamb: Data on the age of the onset ofdepression is not held centrally.

General Practitioners

Lorely Burt: To ask the Secretary of State for Healthif he will review the training given to GPs on dealingwith patients who have learning disabilities. [177188]

Dr Poulter: The content and standard of medicaltraining is the responsibility of the General MedicalCouncil (GMC). The GMC is an independent professionalbody. It has the general function of promoting highstandards of medical education and co-ordinating all

stages of medical education to ensure that students andnewly qualified doctors are equipped with the knowledge,skills and attitudes essential for professional practice.

The Government has mandated Health EducationEngland (HEE) to provide national leadership on education,training and work force development in the nationalhealth service. This mandate includes a commitmentthat HEE will ensure that general practitioner (GP)training produces GPs with the required competenciesto practise in the new national health service. Consequently,HEE will work with stakeholders to influence trainingcurricula as appropriate.

Health Education England

Liz Kendall: To ask the Secretary of State for Healthhow much Health Education England has spent onconsultancy services in (a) 2012-13 and (b) 2013-14 todate. [177612]

Dr Poulter: Health Education England (HEE)—includingthe 13 local education and training boards (LETBs),which HEE took responsibility for on 1 April 2013—hasrecorded spending on consultancy services as:

£269,000 in 2012-13; and£318,000 for the financial year 2013-14 (up to the end of

October 2013).

The increase in 2013-14 expenditure is due to thechange in status of HEE from transitional form to fullyoperational in April 2013, when they assumed responsibilityfor the 13 LETBs.

Health Services

Liz Kendall: To ask the Secretary of State for Healthhow much was spent by specialist commissioning hubson consultancy services in (a) 2012-13 and (b)2013-14 to date. [177614]

Dr Poulter: NHS England is responsible for directlycommissioning specialised services, and has developedservice specifications on a national basis, to ensure thatpatients can access the same high quality services regardlessof where they live in England.

There are 10 area teams in England, established on 1April 2013, that hold contracts with providers for specialisedservices and ensure that specifications are met. Theseare staffed by teams who are expert in contracting forspecialised services.

NHS England has confirmed that in 2012-13 and sofar in 2013-14, no money has been spent by the 10 areateams on consultancy services in respect of their specialisedcommissioning activities.

Healthwatch England

Liz Kendall: To ask the Secretary of State for Healthhow much Healthwatch England spent on consultancyservices in (a) 2012-13 and (b) 2013-14 to date.

[177613]

Norman Lamb: In 2012-13, Healthwatch Englandspent £24,822 on consultancy services.

In 2013-14, Healthwatch England’s spend to date is£9,462.50 on consultancy services.


Home Care Services

Jim Dobbin: To ask the Secretary of State for Healthwhat steps his Department is taking to improve socialcare provision in domiciliary settings. [177620]

Norman Lamb: I refer the hon. Member to the reply Igave to him on 25 November 2013, Official Report,columns 148-49W.

Muscular Dystrophy: West Midlands

Valerie Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Healthwhat steps he is taking to increase the number ofneuromuscular care advisers and the paediatricneuromuscular consultant provision in the West Midlands.

[177569]

Norman Lamb: NHS England is responsible forcommissioning specialised services, including neuromuscularservices.

NHS England published Neurosciences: SpecialisedNeurology (Adult) in July 2013. This service specificationdescribes the service commissioned by NHS Englandfor patients with a neuromuscular disorder. Care isprovided via a managed clinical pathway that supportsmultidisciplinary and cross organisational working. Themulti-disciplinary team includes neuromuscular careco-ordinators.

The service specification has been implemented from1 October 2013. NHS England is working with providersto ensure they comply with the service description andstandards.

NHS England

Liz Kendall: To ask the Secretary of State for Healthwhat the (a) total budget, (b) total number of staffand (c) budget for staff salaries is for those employedby NHS England but not for NHS England local areateams. [177610]

Dr Poulter: NHS England’s total revenue budget for2013-14 is £95.873 million, of which £2.016 million is tobe spent on administration. How all spending is allocatedis a matter for NHS England. NHS England has informedus that the administration budget for NHS England,excluding area teams and commissioning support units(its National Support Centre), is £332.2 million.

As at the end of October 2013, NHS England had886.15 whole time equivalent staff in post within itsNational Support Centre.

The total pay budget for the total agreed staff numberswithin the National Support Centre (1,106.48 wholetime equivalent) is £75.2 million. There are currentlyvacancies within this staff structure.

Liz Kendall: To ask the Secretary of State for Healthhow much NHS England spent on consultancy servicesin (a) 2012-13 and (b) 2013-14 to date. [177611]

Dr Poulter: NHS England has informed us thatexpenditure on consultancy was £578,000 in 2012-13and £1.78 million in 2013-14.

NHS Property Services

Charlotte Leslie: To ask the Secretary of State forHealth how many (a) communications, (b) press and(c) public relations officers are employed by NHSProperty Services; and what the salary is of eachofficer. [177672]

Dr Poulter: The number of staff with communicationsresponsibilities in their roles in NHS Property ServicesLtd (NHS PS) at each Agenda for Change (AfC) payband are shown in the following table. NHS PS does notemploy any specific press or public relations officers;this work is undertaken by the communications staff.

AfC band Salary Number of staff

VSM1 £130,000-£135,000 18c £54,998-£67,805 18a £39,239-£47,088 67 £30,764-£40,558 11 Very senior manager

These staff transferred into the company from primarycare trusts and strategic health authorities on theirexisting terms and conditions.

As with all national health service funded organisations,we are looking to further rationalise and reduce back-officecosts.

NHS: Finance

Mr Nicholas Brown: To ask the Secretary of State forHealth what discussions his Department has had withNHS England as part of the health funding review ofallocations. [177432]

Dr Poulter: NHS England and the Department havebeen discussing health funding, including progress onthe fundamental review of allocations, at regularaccountability meetings.

Responsibility for resource allocation is a matter forNHS England as set out in the mandate. NHS Englandis overseeing the fundamental review of allocation policyand will draw on the expert advice of the independentAdvisory Committee on Resource Allocation (ACRA)and involve a range of external partners. NHS Englandwill consider the recommendations and findings of ACRAas part of this.

NHS: Redundancy

Mr Nicholas Brown: To ask the Secretary of State forHealth how many NHS employees have taken redundancysince May 2013; and how many such people have sincebeen re-employed in (a) publicly-funded healthcareand (b) other forms of healthcare contracted to theNHS. [177460]

Dr Poulter: This information is not available from thedate requested.

Out-patients: Attendance

Nicholas Soames: To ask the Secretary of State forHealth if he will introduce a system to gather informationon the cost to the NHS of missed appointments. [177633]


Dr Poulter: The financial cost of missed appointmentsis very complex to calculate, for example resourceswasted or time lost due to missed appointments can beoffset by national health service staff using the timeproductively in other ways, such as seeing other patients.The cost of introducing a system to gather informationwould therefore be disproportionate. Locally, NHSorganisations should be seeking to understand andaddress how best to achieve reductions in missedappointments in their areas.

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Adam Smith International

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what the value of contractsawarded by her Department to Adam SmithInternational was in each of the last 10 years. [177647]

Justine Greening: The value of contracts awarded ineach year to Adam Smith International is shown in thefollowing table.

Amount (£)

2008-09 42,266,3392009-10 13,785,8322010-11 33,273,6022011-12 66,409,2592012-13 16,356,209

Information from previous years is not held centrallyin our systems on a comparable basis.

Africa

Fiona O’Donnell: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what steps her Departmentis taking to reduce maternal mortality in (a) Liberia,(b) Sierra Leone, (c) Kenya and (d) Nigeria. [177583]

Lynne Featherstone: DFID is supporting healthprogrammes that focus on maternal health in each ofthese four countries. These programmes deliver a rangeof health interventions from pre-pregnancy to earlychildhood, for example increasing access to modernfamily planning methods, improving coverage and qualityof skilled delivery care at birth, and working withcommunities to increase demand for and use of qualityhealth services. Programmes in these four countries arecontributing towards the UK Government’s commitmentto save the lives of at least 50,000 women during pregnancyand childbirth and 250,000 newborn babies by 2015.

Burma

Alex Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what discussions herDepartment has had with communities in areas ofBurma negatively affected by foreign investment beforethe decision was made to fund the Myanmar Centre forResponsible Business. [177242]

Mr Duncan: Prior to the creation of the MyanmarCentre for Responsible Business, discussions about itspotential work were held both within and outside Burmawith civil society, as well as with business, government,trade unions and experts. Particular attention was paidto regions of the country made especially vulnerabledue to conflict, ethnic and religious strife, and corruption.

Paul Blomfield: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what funding her Departmentprovides for building civil society capacity in Burma.

[177321]

Mr Duncan: DFID has allocated £11 million forbuilding civil society capacity in Burma from July 2011to March 2016.

Paul Blomfield: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development how much her Departmentwill spend on promoting good governance in Burma in2013-14; and what proportion of such funding will bechannelled through (a) the Burmese Government and(b) civil society. [177327]

Mr Duncan: DFID has allocated £12.8 million forgood governance in Burma in 2013-14. This includesfunding through the UN, NGOs and civil society. NoUK aid is given through budget support to the Governmentof Burma.

Developing Countries: Climate Change

Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what assessment she hasmade of the adequacy of future funding arrangementsof the Green Climate Fund; and what recent discussionsshe has had with her international counterparts on theircontributions. [177697]

Lynne Featherstone: The UK Government is workingclosely with our international partners to ensure theGreen Climate Fund is set up to offer good value formoney. Discussions are on-going during the designphase.

Developing Countries: Females

Martin Horwood: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what timetable she has setfor delivering pledges made by the UK at the recentHigh-Level Meeting on violence against women andgirls in humanitarian contexts; and what steps theGovernment plans to take to hold other governmentsaccountable for their pledges. [177578]

Justine Greening: I refer the hon. Member to mywritten ministerial statement laid on 18 November 2013,Official Report, column 40WS. I will update the Housein due course.

Developing Countries: Midwives

Fiona O’Donnell: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what steps her Departmentis taking to address the shortage of midwives indeveloping countries. [177586]


Lynne Featherstone: The UK Government is supportingaction to reduce the number of babies born without askilled attendant, such as a midwife present, and toreduce maternal mortality and increase child survival.We are helping countries where we work to developtheir own health care systems and efforts to build andmaintain health worker capacity. This includes supportto train health workers such as midwives and nurses.

In addition, DFID funds the Health PartnershipScheme that supports partnerships between UK anddeveloping country health institutions aimed atstrengthening health worker knowledge and skills. DFIDalso supports the Global Health Workforce Alliance,which advocates for improved human resources forhealth and supports countries’ health workforceco-ordination and planning.

Developing Countries: Sanitation

Tracey Crouch: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what steps she plans totake to promote the importance of the water andsanitation sector at the Sanitation and Water for Allhigh level meeting in April 2014. [177461]

Lynne Featherstone: The UK will be represented atthe 2014 Sanitation and Water for All (SWA) high levelmeeting. DFID officials are working to ensure that itbuilds momentum around the ongoing importance ofWASH in supporting poverty reduction and sustainabledevelopment. The UK was instrumental in establishingthe Sanitation and Water for All initiative. We remainactive members on the Steering Committee and we areleading work to improve global monitoring.

Kenya

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what assessment she hasmade of the threat presented by al-Shabaab to thehumanitarian effort in northern Kenya. [177255]

Mr Duncan: Al-Shabaab represent a significant threatto humanitarian efforts in parts of North East Kenya.This threat includes kidnap, explosive devices and theft.Humanitarian agencies adapt their operations on thebasis of a regular assessment of risk to ensure that aidreaches those in need.

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what recent reports she hasreceived on the humanitarian situation in northernKenya; and what steps the Government has taken atthe UN in response to funding shortages in the Dadaaband Kakuma refugee camps. [177256]

Lynne Featherstone: We are in touch with agencies onthe ground and have recently made a visit. The rainsstarted late and the current estimates are that the numberin need of food assistance may rise from the existing850,000 across Kenya. UKAid is already supportingprogrammes in Northern Kenya to address this vulnerabilityby providing regular cash payments and livelihood supportto some of the poorest families so that they can bettercope with droughts and supporting health facilities sothey have capacity to treat and prevent acute malnutritionin children. There are plans in place to scale up these

programmes if the situation worsens. The region alsohosts some 525,000 refugees and UKAid is providing£39.2 million over three years to support their assistanceneeds (including £3.2 million in July 2013 to help avert ashortfall in special nutritional products for malnourishedchildren and mothers). DFID is pressing other donorsto do more for refugees and considering a furtherallocation this year given ongoing gaps.

Overseas Aid

John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development which country programmeshave an increase in project spending in excess of fiveper cent for the current financial year; and what theseincreases are in actual and percentage terms. [177648]

Mr Duncan: This information can be found in theDFID Annual Report 2012-13, available at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dfid-annual-report-and-accounts-2012-13

Mr Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of Statefor International Development what the cost to thepublic purse was of developing and launching herDepartment’s Development Tracker platform. [177694]

Mr Duncan: The cost of developing and launchingthe alpha, beta and live versions of the DevelopmentTracker platform was £338,039 excluding VAT and internalsalary costs.

Mr Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of Statefor International Development how many unique visitswere made to her Department’s Development Trackersince its launch from (a) the UK and (b) overseas; andhow many such visits there were to each of thedomain’s sub-pages. [177695]

Mr Duncan: The Development Tracker was launchedon 31 October 2013. Since then, there have been 13,718unique visits, (a) 8,466 from the UK and (b) 5,252from overseas.

There are 13,114 sub-pages within the DevelopmentTracker. It is not possible to provide a list of the numberof visits to each of those pages.

Somalia

Rushanara Ali: To ask the Secretary of State forInternational Development what assessment she hasmade of the effectiveness of the recent UK aid deliveryto Puntland. [177430]

Justine Greening: The effectiveness of UK aidprogrammes in Somalia (including in Puntland) is assessedregularly as part of our programme management cycle.Programmes are countrywide, rather than region-specific,with a geographical focus where development needs aregreatest.


WOMEN AND EQUALITIES

Civil Partnerships

Charlotte Leslie: To ask the Minister for Women andEqualities what progress has been made on the reviewto consider legalising heterosexual civil partnerships.

[177678]

Mrs Grant: Preparatory work for the consultationrequired as part of the review of the operation andfuture of the Civil Partnership Act 2004 under theMarriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013, has beenundertaken. We hope to publish this consultation documentshortly.

Secondment

Chris Ruane: To ask the Minister for Women andEqualities how many of the Government EqualitiesOffice’s civil servants have been seconded to (a) theprivate sector and (b) trades unions in each year since2010. [177716]

Mrs Grant: No civil servants from the GovernmentEqualities Office have been seconded to the privatesector or trade unions.

Chris Ruane: To ask the Minister for Women andEqualities how many secondees from (a) trade unionsand (b) the voluntary sector have worked in theGovernment Equalities Office since 2010. [177739]

Mrs Grant: No secondees have worked in theGovernment Equalities Office since 2010.

CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT

Betting

Mr Sutcliffe: To ask the Secretary of State forCulture, Media and Sport what recent discussions shehas had with the Gambling Commission on in-runninglaying on a betting exchange by those benefiting fromthe time delay between live and transmitted events; andif she will make a statement. [177608]

Mrs Grant: I regularly discuss a range of issues withthe Gambling Commission. Betting in-running is legalunder the 2005 Gambling Act and the GamblingCommission’s current position, after much considerationand public consultation, is that the risk to the licensingobjectives is adequately mitigated by ensuring thatconsumers are warned about the potential disadvantageto which they may expose themselves if they choose tobet in this way. However, the Gambling Commissioncontinues to monitor evidence in this area and to observedevelopments which might have a bearing on that position.

Digital Broadcasting: Radio

Tracey Crouch: To ask the Secretary of State forCulture, Media and Sport if she will take steps toensure that all UK local radio stations are guaranteed aplatform on DAB should digital radio switchover goahead; and if she will make a statement. [177326]

Mr Vaizey: Government recognises the importanceof local commercial radio stations to the communitiesthey serve and is committed to reserving part of the FMspectrum as a platform for local and community radiostations, for as long as it is needed. My officials are alsoworking with Ofcom to consider the potential optionsfor smaller local stations to migrate to digital in the leadup to and after a future switchover. We are very encouragedby the recent research Ofcom has carried out on softwareenabling small scale DAB transmissions, which hasbeen successfully trialled in Brighton.

Tracey Crouch: To ask the Secretary of State forCulture, Media and Sport what assessment her Departmenthas made of (a) the extent of public access to DABradio, (b) the number of listeners that will lose accessto local radio stations and (c) whether audio qualitywill improve for listeners in the event of a UK digitalradio switchover. [177328]

Mr Vaizey: Following the launch of the Digital RadioAction plan in 2010, local DAB coverage has increasedfrom 66% to 72%. In October, the BBC announcedplans to extend coverage for its national DAB servicesfrom 94% to 97.3% of households, and Arqiva hasdeveloped plans for the extension of national commercialDAB services from 84.9% to 91% of households tomatch Classic FM coverage.

We have always said that FM will continue to be anappropriate platform for smaller commercial stationsand community radio. The vast majority of digitalradio sets have FM included and this is mandated in theminimum technical specifications drawn up by industryas part of the Digital Radio Action Plan. This meansthat listeners who switch to digital radio will still be ableto get local services on FM. We recognise the desirefrom small local and community radio stations to havea pathway onto the DAB platform and are workingwith Ofcom on examining the potential of new smallscale DAB solutions following a successful trial earlierthis year in Brighton.

Independent research carried out in Bath by IPSOS/Morifound that households were very positive about digitalradio with 80% of participants rating it as better thananalogue radio.

Tracey Crouch: To ask the Secretary of State forCulture, Media and Sport what estimate she has madeof the cost of a digital radio switchover; and if she willmake an estimate of (a) the incremental annual cost ofimproving local DAB coverage so that coverage reaches90 per cent of households and all major roads at theearliest opportunity and (b) how much funding herDepartment would seek from the Exchequer for apossible digital radio switchover. [177329]

Mr Vaizey: DCMS’ assessment of the costs andbenefits of a digital radio switchover will be set out in acost benefit analysis (CBA). We intend to provide anupdate on our plans for digital radio at the end of theyear.

Tracey Crouch: To ask the Secretary of State forCulture, Media and Sport if her Department willcommission an independent cost-benefit analysis ondigital radio switchover viability prior to taking any


decision on that matter; and if she will publish theresults of her Department’s previous cost-benefit analysison this matter. [177330]

Mr Vaizey: The Government will use a cost benefitanalysis (CBA) to inform any decision about switchover.DCMS has been developing that analysis, and consultedon the CBA’s methodology in summer 2012. In thelight of feedback from the sector, DCMS has continuedto develop its approach in order to inform policy discussionsand decisions, drawing on advice from Whitehall andexternal analysts. We intend to provide an update onour plans for digital radio at the end of the year.

Direct Selling

Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture,Media and Sport if she will make an assessment of theefficacy of the legal framework in the Privacy andElectronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations2003 in relation to the regulatory system for reportingand preventing nuisance telesales or automated calls;and what representations has she received on this matter.

[177309]

Mr Vaizey: The Privacy and Electronic Communications(EC Directive) Regulations 2003 enable the InformationCommissioner’s Office (ICO) to issue a monetary penaltyof up to £500,000 to any organisation that wilfully ornegligently makes calls to Telephone Preference Servicecalls to a particular number. Complaints can be quicklyand easily reported to the ICO online at:

http://www.ico.org.uk/complaints/marketing/2

Since January 2012, the ICO has issued five substantialmonetary penalties totalling £660,000 and action againstother organisations is also under consideration. Also, inspring 2014 the Office of Communications (Ofcom) willbe conducting a review of the effectiveness of the TPSand further details are available at:

http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/consultations/silent-calls/joint-action-plan

We will review Ofcom’s findings carefully to see whatfurther action can be taken to tackle nuisance calls. TheDepartment has received representations from consumergroup representatives, regulators, industry and Membersof Parliament, requesting for action to be taken in thisarea. In response, we are working closely with them tofind effective solutions, and our further thinking will beset out in our action plan, which will be publishedshortly.

Londonderry

Mr Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of Statefor Culture, Media and Sport what plans she has tovisit Londonderry before the end of that city’s year asUK City of Culture. [177584]

Mr Vaizey: In my role as Minister for Culture,Communications and the Creative Industries, I was onan official visit to Londonderry last week.


Mr Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture,Media and Sport whether she (a) has appointed or (b)intends to appoint an enlarged ministerial office.

[177510]

Mrs Grant: I refer the hon. Member to the answergiven by the Minister for the Cabinet Office today.

Secondment

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture,Media and Sport how many of her Department’s civilservants have been seconded to (a) the private sectorand (b) trades unions in each year since 2010. [177709]

Mrs Grant: The number of civil servants that havebeen seconded to (a) The private sector and (b) tradeunions in each year since 2010 is shown in the followingtable:

Financialyear (a) The private sector (b) Trade unions

2010-11 0 02011-12 2 02013 (todate)

0 0

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State forCulture, Media and Sport how many secondees from(a) trades unions and (b) the voluntary sector haveworked in her Department since 2010. [177732]

Mrs Grant: The number of secondees from (a) tradeunions and (b) the voluntary sector that have worked inthe Department since 2010 is shown in the followingtable:

Number of secondees

(a) Trade unions 0(b) Voluntary sector 0

Sports: Schools

Tracey Crouch: To ask the Secretary of State forCulture, Media and Sport what discussions she has hadwith the Secretary of State for Education on changingthe regulations that those applying to build newschools must meet in regard to changing rooms; and ifshe will make a statement. [177378]

Mrs Grant: I have regular discussions with ministerialcolleagues at the Department for Education on a rangeof issues.

Telecommunications

Nadine Dorries: To ask the Secretary of State forCulture, Media and Sport (1) if her Department willbring forward legislation to prevent and penaliseunintentional telephone slamming whereby customersare penalised because of a telecoms company mistake;

[177245]

(2) what assessment her Department has made of thepotential benefits of fining telecommunications companiesthat have slammed telephone lines for reasons otherthan mis-selling of services; [177284]

(3) if she will make an assessment of the adequacy ofcurrent legislation for preventing phone slamming; ifshe will bring forward legislative proposals on phone


slamming which apply in circumstances where phonelines are accidently slammed; and if she will make astatement. [177303]

Mr Vaizey: Slamming, when a fixed-line telephoneservice is transferred by a gaining provider withoutexpress knowledge and consent is prohibited underGeneral Condition 24 of Ofcom’s General Conditionsof Entitlement (GCE). GCE is the regulatory frameworkunder which telecommunications network and serviceproviders are required to operate in the UK. Section 45of the Communications Act 2003 provides Ofcom withthe power to set such binding conditions and Section 96of the Communications Act 2003 provides for Ofcomto issue penalties for breach of General Conditions.Ofcom can, and do, fine companies for slamming andmost recently fined Supatel (trading as TimeTalk) £60,000in June of this year for breach of General Condition 24.

Ofcom rules explicitly prohibit all telephone companiesfrom engaging in inappropriate sales and marketingactivity, and include requirements around obtainingconsent and the type of information that needs to bemade available to consumers when selling services. WhereOfcom identifies clear breaches of the rules, it can takeenforcement action, and has powers to fine companiesand require them to remedy the consequences of anybreach.

There are also a number of safeguards built into theswitching process which are specifically designed toprotect consumers from both slamming and erroneoustransfers, including that consumers should receive aletter informing them of the imminent takeover of theirservice, with a 10-day switchover period during whichthe order can be stopped.

Ofcom is also carrying out a review of switchingprocesses to ensure that switching is easy, hassle-freeand works well for consumers. Better protection forconsumers from the risks of slamming and erroneoustransfers is a key focus of the review and Ofcom has putforward proposals for mandating two key requirementson telephone companies which are designed to addresserroneous transfers associated with home moves. Ofcomhas also committed to look at this issue further in thenext phase of its work on switching.

ATTORNEY-GENERAL

Crimes of Violence: Females

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-Generalpursuant to the answer of 29 October 2013, OfficialReport, columns 399-400W, on prosecutions, when theCrown Prosecution Service (CPS) will report thefindings from its further investigation into theproportion of cases of violence against women andgirls that are charged; whether the findings of thatinvestigation will be published; how many CPS staffare working on that investigation; and what resourceshave been allocated to that investigation. [177333]

The Solicitor-General: Violence against women andgirls (VAWG) is a key priority for the Crown ProsecutionService (CPS) and, in 2012-13, the conviction rates forcases flagged as domestic violence and rape were atrecord highs for the second year running.

The CPS has had detailed discussions with a numberof interested parties to better understand the fall inreferrals of domestic violence and rape cases and, workingwith the National Policing Lead, it will convene a jointnational scrutiny panel on rape early next year and thefindings will be published shortly thereafter. Work onVAWG issues is progressed by a number of staff, whohave responsibilities for a range of issues includingVAWG. No additional resource has been allocated forthis investigation.

The work on domestic violence is being taken forwardby Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HM1C)in their investigation of the effectiveness of the policeresponse to domestic violence and abuse across Englandand Wales. The findings from the inspection are due toreport by April 2014.

Crown Prosecution Service

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-General howmany complaints about the Crown Prosecution Service(CPS) have been referred to the independent assessor ofCPS complaints so far this year. [177311]

The Solicitor-General: The role of the IndependentAssessor of Complaints (IAC) was launched on 5 June2013. A total of 22 complaints about the Crown ProsecutionService have been referred to the IAC so far this year.

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-General howmany victims of crime have requested reviews of aCrown Prosecution Service decision in 2013 to date;and of these how many concerned (a) decisions to takeno further action and (b) discontinuance post-charge.

[177312]

The Solicitor-General: The Crown Prosecution Servicehas received 592 requests for review in the period betweenthe launch of the Victims’ Right to Review scheme on 5June 2013 and 31 October 2013.

(a) 396 of the requests concerned a decision not to bringproceedings (66.9%).

(b) 196 of the requests concerned a decision to terminateproceedings after charge (33.1%). This figure comprises cases inwhich proceedings were terminated by discontinuance and casesin which no evidence was offered.

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-Generalwhat proportion of complaints about the CrownProsecution Service (CPS) made to the independentassessor of CPS complaints have been (a) fully and(b) partially upheld. [177313]

The Solicitor-General: The role of the IndependentAssessor of Complaints (IAC) was launched on 5 June2013. A total of 22 complaints about the Crown ProsecutionService have been referred to the IAC of which 10 havebeen concluded. The proportion of complaints thathave been fully upheld is 40%. The proportion that havebeen partially upheld is 30%.

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-General whatproportion of reviews of Crown Prosecution Servicedecisions made under the Victims’ Right to Reviewhave been (a) fully and (b) partially upheld. [177314]


The Solicitor-General: The Crown Prosecution Servicehas received 592 requests for review in the period betweenthe launch of the Victims’ Right to Review scheme on 5June 2013 and 31 October 2013. The decision of theprosecutor was upheld in 84.3% of cases. The purposeof the scheme is to review the original decision not toproceed with a prosecution or to terminate proceedings.The review will result in the decision being upheld ornot upheld there are no “partially upheld” outcomes.

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-General onhow many occasions the Crown Prosecution Servicehas applied to a court for a local authority to discloseinformation required to support a criminal prosecutionin each of the last five years. [177315]

The Solicitor-General: The Crown Prosecution Servicedo not maintain any centrally held data that wouldidentify the number of times a court application for alocal authority to disclose information has taken place.Such information could be obtained only through amanual search of records which would incurdisproportionate cost.

Flexible Working

Mr Gibb: To ask the Attorney-General how manyofficials in the Law Officers’ Departments make use ofcompressed hours arrangements as part of the CivilService’s flexible working hours scheme (a) above and(b) below director level. [177388]

The Solicitor-General: The number of officials in theLaw Officers’ Departments who are currently makinguse of compressed hours arrangements is detailed in thefollowing table:

NumberDirector level Below director level

TSol* 1 77CPS 0 261SFO 0 31* TSol data also covers the Attorney-General’s Office and HerMajesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate.

Human Trafficking: Young People

Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Attorney-Generalwhether the Crown Prosecution Services flags caseswhere the victim is under 18 years when prosecutingcases of human trafficking as it does in domesticviolence and child abuse cases. [177627]

The Solicitor-General: The Crown Prosecution Service(CPS) uses a “double flag” when prosecuting cases ofhuman trafficking involving victims under 18. The doubleflag involves using both the Human Trafficking MonitoringFlag to identify the number of defendants prosecutedfor these offences, and the Child Abuse Flag to distinguishcases where the victim was under 18 at the time of thecommission of the offence.

Offenders: Deportation

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-General whatguidance has been issued by the Director of PublicProsecutions to prosecutors on how and when torecommend the issuance of conditional cautions toforeign offenders to facilitate their removal from theUK. [177317]

The Solicitor-General: The Director’s Guidance onCharging, fifth edition, published on 6 May 2013 andthe Director’s Guidance on Adult Conditional Cautioning,seventh edition, published in April 2013, assist authorisedpolice officers and prosecutors in applying the ConditionalCautioning Code of Practice in deciding how an offendershould be dealt with and when it is appropriate toconsider a conditional caution.

The code of practice makes specific provision foroffences committed by foreign national offenders wherea conditional caution is proposed to facilitate the removalof the offender from the jurisdiction. The code advisesthat, in appropriate cases, the public interest is in removalof the offender from the United Kingdom and the codepermits consideration in any case where the sentencelikely to be imposed by the court for the offence concernedwill not exceed two years imprisonment.

Prosecutions

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-Generalwhat recent discussions he has had with the Director ofthe Serious Fraud Office on the use of deferredprosecution agreements under the Crime and CourtsAct 2013. [177310]

The Solicitor-General: The Attorney-General and Imeet regularly with the Director to discuss a range ofissues. Recent discussions about deferred prosecutionagreements have been at official level and my office ispart of the wider Government working group on DeferredProsecution Agreements. The consultations on the draftcode of practice closed in September 2013 and SFO andCPS are reviewing the responses. I look forward toseeing the outcome of that review.

Serious Fraud Office

Emily Thornberry: To ask the Attorney-Generalwhat recent requests the Director of the Serious FraudOffice has made to HM Treasury for additional fundsfor specific investigations. [177334]

The Solicitor-General: The SFO’s budget for thisfinancial year was set during the spending review in2010. Any additional funding sought is applied for aspart of the supplementary estimates process which isonly just beginning for this financial year.

I have said before that the Serious Fraud Office mustnot be in a position that lack of resources prevents itfrom conducting an investigation where the public interest,which is determined by the Director of the SeriousFraud Office, demands one. However, it will not alwaysbe possible to give a running commentary on whichinvestigations this affects without the risk of prejudiceto those investigations.


TREASURY

Bank of England

Mr Bain: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequerwhat representations he has received supportingchanges to arrangements relating to another sovereignstate possessing a shareholding in the Bank ofEngland. [177225]

Sajid Javid: The Treasury has not received anyrepresentations regarding another sovereign state owninga shareholding in the Bank of England.

Child Benefit

Catherine McKinnell: To ask the Chancellor of theExchequer (1) how much his Department has spentadministering the high-income child benefit tax chargeto date; [177683]

(2) how many people are employed by HM Revenueand Customs to administer the high-income childbenefit tax charge. [177685]

Mr Gauke: The position remains as set out in answersgiven to PQ128154 on 3 December 2012, Official Report,column 593W, and PQ136528 on 15 January 2013,Official Report, column 662W. HM Revenue and Customswill be able to provide further details on the cost and thenumbers of staff administering the high income childbenefit charge after the first full year of operating thecharge.

Credit: Interest Rates

Jim Shannon: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequerwhat steps the Government is taking to assist peoplewho take out pay-day loans and are having difficultypaying the monies back. [176970]

Sajid Javid: The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)is taking over responsibility for consumer credit regulationin April 2014. The FCA proposes to put a number ofrequirements on lenders to treat borrowers fairly, includingby treating them with forbearance and due considerationif they experience difficulties.

It is important that consumers are protected fromunfair costs, especially as these costs can spiral forpeople struggling to repay. The Government has announcedthat it will bring forward an amendment to the BankingReform Bill to require the FCA to introduce a cap onthe cost of payday loans.

The FCA has also already proposed requirements toensure consumers are not able to borrow more thanthey can afford: lenders will need to undertake thoroughaffordability assessments; the number of times a loancan be rolled over is limited to two, and at the point ofrollover the lender must signpost borrowers to debtadvice via the Money Advice Service (MAS).

Flexible Working

Mr Gibb: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequerhow many officials in his Department make use ofcompressed hours arrangements as part of the CivilService’s flexible working hours scheme (a) above and(b) below director level. [177405]

Nicky Morgan: There are currently no staff memberswho are making use of compressed hours arrangementsas part of the Civil Service flexible working hoursscheme, that are above director level.

There are currently 14 staff members who are makinguse of compressed hours arrangements as part of theCivil Service flexible working hours scheme, that arebelow director level.

Money Laundering

Mr Brady: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer ifhe will revise his Department’s advice to financialinstitutions regarding high risk jurisdictions in relationto the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 [177602]

Sajid Javid: The Treasury revises and issues a newAdvisory Notice after every plenary meeting of theFinancial Action Task Force. The Notice identifiescountries with strategic deficiencies in their Anti-MoneyLaundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing regimes.

The Money Laundering Regulations 2007 requireregulated businesses to apply enhanced due diligenceand enhanced ongoing monitoring on a risk-sensitivebasis in situations which present a higher risk of moneylaundering or terrorist financing.

The Treasury’s Advisory Notice is intended to supportfirms in their application of a risk-based approach tomoney laundering and terrorist financing controls.

Money Laundering: EU Law

Mr Sutcliffe: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequerwhat recent meetings his Department has held on EUanti-money laundering directives; and if he will make astatement. [177607]

Sajid Javid: HM Treasury is leading negotiations forthe UK on the fourth money laundering directive, proposalsfor which were published on 5 February 2013. Treasuryofficials have participated in EU Council Working Groupmeetings at expert level since then. Discussions in theEU Council Working Group have moved to attachélevel, with the last meeting taking place on Wednesday27 November.

I attended the 15 November ECOFIN meeting, wherethere was a brief update on the state of play of negotiationson the directive.

A statement from the Chancellor is not appropriateat this time. We anticipate issuing a statement followingCouncil agreement of a general approach to proposalsfor the directive.

Offshore Funds: Mauritius

Mr Bain: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer ifhe will investigate whether advice to investors on the useof off-shore jurisdictions is offered by UK-registeredfinancial institutions, with particular reference to Mauritius.

[177259]

Mr Gauke: There are currently no plans to investigatewhether advice to investors on the use of off-shorejurisdictions is offered by UK-registered financialinstitutions.


Revenue and Customs: Newry

Ms Ritchie: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequerwhat consultation his Department carried out in thelocal area before the decision to close the HM Revenueand Customs office in Newry. [177641]

Mr Gauke: HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) hasnot taken the decision to close the office in Newry.Newry is one of 21 locations across the UK where someor all staff have been invited to apply for a voluntaryexit scheme because the locations do not fit the mediumto long-term plans of one, some or all of the lines ofbusiness based there. This is a further step HMRC istaking as it becomes a smaller, more highly-professionalorganisation working out of fewer locations.

Royal Bank of Scotland

Dr Alasdair McDonnell: To ask the Chancellor of theExchequer (1) with reference to the reports byLawrence Tomlinson and Sir Andrew Large on RBSpublished on 25 November 2013, what assessment hehas made of the practices of the Global RestructuringGroup at RBS in Northern Ireland; [177593]

(2) what assessment he has made of the findings ofthe reports by Lawrence Tomlinson and Sir AndrewLarge on the practices of the Global RestructuringGroup at RBS published on 25 November 2013;

[177594]

(3) how many businesses in Northern Ireland werecustomers of the Global Restructuring Group at RBSin the last five years; and what representations he hasreceived from these businesses following the reports byLawrence Tomlinson and Sir Andrew Large on RBSpublished on 25 November 2013. [177595]

Sajid Javid: Sir Andrew Large’s report, commissionedby RBS, is an independent assessment of RBS’sperformance in providing credit to small and mediumenterprises. RBS has committed to implement the Largereview recommendations in full.

Dr Tomlinson’s report—published in a privatecapacity—focuses on a number of individual cases. TheGovernment is unable to comment on the veracity ofthe allegations. Nevertheless, they are serious allegations,and it is right that RBS are investigating them; it isimportant that the investigation is concluded thoroughlyand promptly.

RBS is a commercial company in which the Governmentis a shareholder, and it is run on a commercial basis.The Government does not hold detailed information onthe number of businesses that are customers of theGlobal Restructuring Group.

Taxation: British Overseas Territories

Mr Bain: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequerwhat discussions he has had with the UK OverseasTerritories on the publication of their tax ownershipregistries. [177257]

Mr Gauke: The Government is in regular dialoguewith the Overseas Territories regarding tax andtransparency, including most recently at the Joint MinisterialCouncil on 26 November. As outlined in the communiqué,

each of the Territories with a financial centre has publishedan action plan setting out the steps that they will take toensure the collection and availability of complete companyownership information and are launching or have launchedconsultations on the question of establishing a centralregistry of beneficial ownership and whether thisinformation should be publicly available. The UK continuesto encourage all its international partners to join theUK in leading from the front on this issue, includingthrough publicly accessible registries of company beneficialownership.

The communiqué can be found here:https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/261234/131126JMC_2013_communiqueFINAL.pdf

DEFENCE

Afghanistan

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State forDefence what aircraft sustained damage during the hailstorm at Kandahar on 23 April 2013; what the extentof such damage was; and if he will estimate the cost tothe public purse of their repair. [177246]

Mr Dunne: The fixed wing and rotary aircraft damagedby the hailstorm at Kandahar airfield were: HerculesC130J; BAE 125; BAE 146; Chinook; Sea King andLynx. Typically damage was experienced to aircraftskins, flight control surfaces, propellers and rotor blades.

It is too soon to give an estimate of the cost of repairsas some aircraft are still being assessed.

Armed Forces: Recruitment

Mr Kevan Jones: To ask the Secretary of State forDefence how many (a) regular and (b) reserve forceswere recruited to the (i) Army, (ii) Royal Navy and (iii)RAF in the last year for which figures are available byregion. [177307]

Mr Dunne: The information requested for financialyear (FY) 2012-13 is set out in the following table1. Thiswill give an indication of the geographical spread ofrecruitment but does not provide a comprehensive pictureof where these individuals may reside as they may notalways apply to join the Services through their nearestCareers Office, and may choose other means by whichto apply.

Region Naval Service Army Royal Air force

Scotland 190 840 90

North West 400 1,360 160

North East 350 1,560 200

Wales 160 650 90

West Midlands 200 880 120

East 420 1,490 250

South East 420 830 120

South West 480 690 250

London 130 530 60

Northern Ireland 50 270 10

Totals 2,800 9,100 1,350


Regular Army officers are not recruited regionally,but centrally, and for the period in question there weresome 680 recruited. The figures for the recruitment ofthe reserves for FY 2012-13 are not held centrally andcould be provided only at disproportionate cost.1 Rounding. When rounding to the nearest 10, numbers ending in“5” have been rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to preventsystematic bias.

Contracts

Mr Kevan Jones: To ask the Secretary of State forDefence (1) what contracts his Department has withPA Consulting; and what the (a) monetary value and(b) length is of each such contract; [177304]

(2) what contracts his Department has with BechtelCorporation; and what the (a) monetary value and (b)length is of each such contract; [177305]

(3) what contracts his Department has withPricewaterhouseCoopers; and what the (a) monetaryvalue and (b) length is of each such contract. [177306]

Mr Dunne: Any contracts that the Ministry ofDefence (MOD) has with PA Consulting andPricewaterhouseCoopers, prior to 2011, are in the table.It includes contracts let by MOD Trading Funds, butdoes not include pan-Government enabling contracts,Government Procurement Card payments or miscellaneoustransactions.

Since January 2011, as part of this Government’scommitment to increase transparency, central GovernmentDepartments have been required to publish informationon contracts, worth over £10,000, they award on ContractsFinder. This information is available online at:

www.contractsfinder.businesslink.gov.uk

In some instances the contract end date is in the past.This could either be because outstanding payments arestill to be made under the terms of the existing contract,or the contract has been extended and records have notyet been updated to reflect this.

Contract title Contract value (£) Start date End date Supplier

PFI Partnering Contract 6,857,142 14 January 2007 1 March 2013 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Project Starling–Earlyproduction work

3,608,927 19 March 2010 7 April 2011 PA Technology Solutions Ltd

The Ministry of Defence has no current contractswith the Bechtel Corporation.

Defence: Procurement

Mr Kevan Jones: To ask the Secretary of State forDefence with reference to the report entitled Viabilityof the Material Strategy Procurement, which wasplaced in the Library on 19 November 2013, (1) whatassessment he has made of the conclusion of thereport’s authors that any failure of one or more partieswithin any consortia could fundamentally impact thecompetition; [177363]

(2) whether his Department undertook a formalstop/go decision after one of the consortia withdrewfrom the GoCo bidding process on 15 November 2013;and how that decision was taken; [177364]

(3) what governance processes his Department hasestablished to ensure that the negotiated deal does notbecome unbalanced by the need to maintain acompetitive process; and whether his Department hasadopted any of those processes; [177365]

(4) whether his Department had contingency plansin place for a further reduction in the market before thewithdrawal of one of the bidding consortia on15 November 2013; [177366]

(5) what steps his Department has taken to dedicatesenior commercial leadership and capacity to the dealprocess in the GoCo bidding process; [177367]

(6) what steps his Department has taken to engage inregular senior stakeholder discussions at InternationalBoard and PUS level on the GoCo bidding process;

[177368]

(7) what steps his Department has taken to requirebidders to maintain contingency plans aligned to theirrisk profile in the GoCo bidding process; [177369]

(8) what steps his Department has taken to ensurethe risk profiles around each bidder are actively-managed in the GoCo bidding process. [177370]

Mr Dunne: We have already made significant progresson implementing the recommendations outlined in theViability of the Materiel Strategy Procurement reportthat was placed in the Library of the House on 19November 2013. We have strengthened senior governanceof the programme, exercising control at the strategicand negotiation levels respectively to ensure balance.Commercial negotiations are being led at Director-levelwithin the Ministry of Defence (MOD) supported by aDeputy Director and a sizeable commercial team, togetherwith specialist support from our consultancy partners.

The Materiel Acquisition Partners Bid Team is beingactively managed, including for contingency planningand risk—and we will ensure that these are reviewedregularly as we progress through the competition. Werecognise that any changes to the bid teams couldfundamentally impact the competition. As the Secretaryof State for Defence, my right hon. Friend the Memberfor Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond), statedin his written ministerial statement on 19 November2013, Official Report, column 44WS, we will take aformal stop/go decision now that one consortium haswithdrawn, once the MOD, with the Cabinet Office andHM Treasury, have studied the detailed commercialproposal and the DE&S+ proposition. A further statementwill be made once this process is complete.

Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State forDefence whether the Voyager aircraft can fit in anyhangar at RAF Mount Pleasant. [177248]


Mr Dunne: Voyager aircraft do not fit in hangarscurrently available at RAF Mount Pleasant. We haveconsidered any associated operational risks and aresatisfied that the aircraft will deliver the capabilityrequired without the need for a hangar. Our operationaleffectiveness is not affected by this.

Military Bases

Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defencepursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Tewkesburyof 15 April 2013, Official Report, column 285W, onMOD Ashchurch, if he will place in the Library thereport of the review of the vehicle basing options andgreater efficiencies from relocating facilities; and if hewill make a statement. [174919]

Mr Dunne: The Ministry of Defence continues toreview a number of future vehicle basing options. I willwrite to the hon. Member once the review is completedand a decision is made.

MOD Ashchurch

Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defencewhat activities his Department carries out atAshchurch; and which other Ministry of Defence siteshave been identified as having (a) the capacity, (b) thearea of land and (c) the skills mix to replicate eachsuch activity; and if he will make a statement. [174874]

Mr Dunne: The main employer at the Ministry ofDefence Ashchurch site is the Defence Support Group(DSG). DSG carry out a wide range of activities atAshchurch associated with the management, maintenance,repair, inspection and storage of military equipment.

Work to identify alternative locations for these activitiesis still ongoing.

Property Transfer

Mr Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State forDefence when his Department expects to transfer theland earmarked for Portsmouth in its City Deal.

[177616]

Dr Murrison: The Ministry of Defence will shortlycommence negotiations with Portsmouth city councilto agree the terms on which land will be transferred aspart of the Portsmouth City Deal. Horsea Island (East)is surplus to Defence requirements and the expectationis that this will be transferred in the spring of 2014.Tipner Ranges remain in regular Defence use so cannotbe transferred until suitable facilities have been reprovidedelsewhere.

QinetiQ

Mr Kevan Jones: To ask the Secretary of State forDefence what contracts his Department has with QinetiQ;and what the (a) monetary value and (b) length is ofeach such contract. [177308]

Mr Dunne: The Ministry of Defence (MOD) hasaround 290 current contracts with QinetiQ. Any contractsthat the Ministry of Defence (MOD) has with QinetiQ,prior to 2011, is provided as follows. It includes contractslet by MOD Trading Funds, but does not include pan-Government enabling contracts, Government ProcurementCard payments or miscellaneous transactions. It includescontracts with Graphics Research Corporation Ltd,which is wholly owned by QinetiQ.

Since January 2011, as part of this Government’scommitment to increase transparency, central GovernmentDepartments have been required to publish informationon the contracts, worth over £10,000, they award on theContracts Finder. This information is available onlineat

www.contractsfinder.businesslink.gov.ukIn some instances the contract date is in the past.

This could either be because outstanding payments arestill to be made under the terms of the existing contract,or the contract has been extended and records have notyet been updated to reflect this.

Contract titleCurrent contract

value (£) Contract start dateCurrent contract end

date Supplier

Long Term Partnering Agreement 5,040,207,295 14 February 2006 28 March 2028 QinetiQ Ltd

Combined Aerial Target Services 296,700,000 20 November 2008 31 March 2012 QinetiQ TargetServices Ltd

T&E Tasking Arrangement-PTPA 6,820,520 6 April 2008 31 March 2028 QinetiQ Ltd

UAV Autonomy and Mission Management 6,271,201 31 March 2010 30 June 2014 QinetiQ Ltd

Management of DE&S Tasking through the WeaponsTechnology Centre

3,657,760 13 June 2006 31 October 2012 QinetiQ Ltd

The Provision of Safety, Environmental and Airworthinesssupport of Unmanned Air Systems Team UOR Projects

1,631,175 1 April 2004 31 March 2012 QinetiQ Ltd

Meteor ITEAP and UK Acceptance Case-Stage 2 816,165 21 September 2005 31 March 2009 QinetiQ Ltd

Award Software 800,000 27 October 2004 26 October 2011 QinetiQ CommerceDecisions Ltd

Magnetic Assessment Services 783,975 25 September 2007 31 December 2015 QinetiQ Ltd

Provision of Technical Support for VC10 701,500 1 July 2006 30 June 2013 QinetiQ Ltd

BVRAAM Support 524,769 14 June 2006 31 March 2011 QinetiQ Ltd

Assurance 399,125 1 April 2006 31 March 2008 QinetiQ Ltd

Support Saudi Armed Forces Project 380,620 5 June 2003 31 March 2013 QinetiQ Ltd

Provision of Expert Technical Support to the UKRepresentative to the NATO LOS CAT

342,500 1 August 2005 31 March 2015 QinetiQ Ltd

Support to NATO Superintendent 296,000 15 September 2005 3 September 2011 QinetiQ Ltd


Contract titleCurrent contract

value (£) Contract start dateCurrent contract end

date Supplier

IPA UOR Reference Centre 264,251 24 May 2007 31 May 2014 QinetiQ Ltd

Lightning Flight OPS Support 257,199 1 April 2005 31 March 2013 QinetiQ Ltd

Conduct Live Firings of Harpoon at the Hebrides 96,066 19 September 2005 31 Mar 2014 QinetiQ Ltd

GFE Management October 2012 to September 2013 69,200 6 December 2010 28 February 2011 QinetiQ Ltd

Update of Cost Model and Production of InvestmentAppraisal for the Ice Patrol Capability

49,524 1 April 2007 31 January 2013 QinetiQ Ltd

Voyager Security Technical Support May 2012 to May2013 (30 Days)

22,159 3 September 2010 5 August 2011 QinetiQ Ltd

Maritime Strategic Capability Agreement (MSCA) 20,608 1 March 2008 31 March 2023 QinetiQ Ltd

Jaguar Aircraft Equipment Support to DCAE Cosford 17,872 2 Aug 2010 31 Jul 2013 QinetiQ Ltd

Provision of Infrastructure and Services BUTEC Kyleof Lochalsh

12,147 1 Jul 2010 31 May 2012 QinetiQ Ltd

Technical Support to FEW-TSB Foxhill 10,938 1 August 2010 31 March 2013 QinetiQ Ltd

BUTEC Range Management 7,223 12 July 2010 31 July 2014 QinetiQ Ltd

Contract QinetiQ for the use of the Range Facility insupport of the LDCU Trial

3,207 1 October 2007 31 December 2013 QinetiQ Ltd

Support to Tornado Project Team 1 1 October 2010 31 March 2015 QinetiQ Ltd

Sea King Helicopters

Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State forDefence what assessment he has made of the gearboxsafety of the Sea King helicopter fleet after theemergency landing of Sea King HU5 ZA130 (8) 19from HMS Gannet on 13 October 2013. [177247]

Mr Dunne: In accordance with standard operatingprocedures, an immediate investigation was launchedfollowing a precautionary landing of a Sea King Mk 5aircraft from HMS Gannet on 13 October 2013. Theinvestigation was carried out by the Ministry of Defence(MOD) and AgustaWestland, the Design Organisationfor the aircraft, and concluded that the risk of this typeof fault leading to a serious safety issue is very low. As aprecaution, an inspection regime has been instigated toinspect and monitor the gearboxes of all of the MODSea King fleet.

Shipbuilding

Mr Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State forDefence what discussions he has had with his US

counterpart on the use of the UK for the building ofships for the US Navy; and what steps he is taking topromote the UK as a location for naval ship building inthe future. [177218]

Mr Dunne: The Secretary of State for Defence andthe US Secretary of Defence have not discussed the UKbuilding ships for the US Navy. The UK is inhibited bythe restrictions imposed by US Act of Congress 7309.This Act forbids the construction of a military vessel(or any substantial part thereof) at a foreign yard unlessauthorised by the President, in the interests of nationalsecurity. Legal restrictions also exist on the leasing offoreign vessels by the US military.

The UK is actively marketing the Type 26 GlobalCombat Ship globally. Defence Ministers have discussedthe Type 26 with a number of countries and we expectfurther interest once the UK has made its formal investmentdecision, which is expected to be in late 2014.


ORAL ANSWERSThursday 28 November 2013

Col. No.ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE ..................... 385

Decarbonisation..................................................... 385Energy Costs.......................................................... 394Energy Efficiency ................................................... 390Energy Security...................................................... 397Green Levies .......................................................... 388

Col. No.ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE—continued

Green Policies ........................................................ 396Rural Energy Costs ................................................ 398Sellafield ................................................................ 398Switching Suppliers................................................ 387Topical Questions .................................................. 399

WRITTEN STATEMENTSThursday 28 November 2013

Col. No.BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS ............. 19WS

Student Support..................................................... 19WSTrade Foreign Affairs Council and WTO

Ministerial Conference ...................................... 19WS

DEFENCE ................................................................. 21WSForeign Affairs Council ......................................... 21WS

ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE ..................... 21WSWarsaw Climate Change Conference ..................... 21WS

Col. No.ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL

AFFAIRS............................................................... 23WSBovine TB.............................................................. 23WS

HEALTH................................................................... 24WSTobacco Control .................................................... 24WS

TRANSPORT ........................................................... 25WSVOSA/DSA............................................................ 25WS

TREASURY .............................................................. 20WSTurks and Caicos Islands (Tax Agreement)............ 20WS

PETITIONThursday 28 November 2013

Col. No.FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE..... 9P

Trafficking in the Sinai Desert................................ 9P

Col. No.

WRITTEN ANSWERSThursday 28 November 2013

Col. No.ATTORNEY-GENERAL .......................................... 425W

Crimes of Violence: Females.................................. 425WCrown Prosecution Service..................................... 426WFlexible Working.................................................... 427WHuman Trafficking: Young People......................... 427WOffenders: Deportation .......................................... 428WProsecutions........................................................... 428WSerious Fraud Office .............................................. 428W

BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND SKILLS ............. 382WEnterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 ......... 382WFlexible Working.................................................... 382WOlder People: Crime Prevention............................. 383WOverseas Trade: Females ........................................ 383WPrivatisation........................................................... 383WRespiratory System: Diseases................................. 384WShipbuilding: Industry ........................................... 384WStudents: Loans ..................................................... 384WSupermarkets: Sales Promotions............................ 385WTax Havens: Africa ................................................ 385W

CABINET OFFICE ................................................... 396WDrugs: Death ......................................................... 396WElectronic Government: Misrepresentation............ 397W

Col. No.CABINET OFFICE—continued

Ministerial Policy Advisers..................................... 397WMinisters’ Private Offices ....................................... 398W

COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT .. 385WFire Services........................................................... 385WLocal Plans ............................................................ 386WNon-domestic Rates: Appeals ................................ 387WNon-domestic Rates: Parking ................................ 389WRented Housing ..................................................... 389WSocial Rented Housing........................................... 389WWritten Questions: Government Responses ........... 390W

CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT .......................... 421WBetting ................................................................... 421WDigital Broadcasting: Radio................................... 421WDirect Selling ......................................................... 423WLondonderry.......................................................... 423WMinisters’ Private Offices ....................................... 423WSecondment ........................................................... 424WSports: Schools ...................................................... 424WTelecommunications .............................................. 424W

DEFENCE ................................................................. 432WAfghanistan ........................................................... 432W

Col. No.DEFENCE—continued

Armed Forces: Recruitment ................................... 432WContracts ............................................................... 433WDefence: Procurement............................................ 433WFuture Strategic Tanker Aircraft ............................ 434WMilitary Bases ........................................................ 435WMOD Ashchurch ................................................... 435WProperty Transfer ................................................... 436WQinetiQ .................................................................. 436WSea King Helicopters ............................................. 437WShipbuilding........................................................... 437W

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER ................................. 390WElectoral Register: Northern Ireland...................... 390WMinisterial Policy Advisers..................................... 390WPublic Expenditure................................................. 391W

EDUCATION............................................................ 398WChildren: Mental Health ........................................ 398WEducational Exchanges .......................................... 399WFree Schools........................................................... 399WKings Science Academy ......................................... 399WLanguages: Education............................................ 400WMinisters’ Private Offices ....................................... 401WOverseas Students: EU Nationals .......................... 401WSchools: Sports ...................................................... 401WSecondment ........................................................... 401W

ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE ..................... 406WEnergy: Billing ....................................................... 406WEnergy: Consumption ............................................ 407WEnergy: Meters....................................................... 407WEnergy: Prices ........................................................ 407WEU Emissions Trading Scheme .............................. 409WGreen Deal Scheme................................................ 409WNuclear Power........................................................ 410WSolar Power............................................................ 410W

ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURALAFFAIRS............................................................... 376WAdditives: EU Action............................................. 376WBovine Tuberculosis ............................................... 377WBovine Tuberculosis: Lancashire ............................ 378WDeer ....................................................................... 378WDogs: Imports........................................................ 378WFlexible Working.................................................... 379WFlood Control ........................................................ 379WFly-grazing: North East ......................................... 379WFood: Low Incomes ............................................... 379WMarine Conservation Zones................................... 380WOverseas Territories Joint Ministerial Council ....... 380WStaff ....................................................................... 381W

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE .... 369WBurma.................................................................... 369WKenya..................................................................... 370WMinisters’ Private Offices ....................................... 371WSomalia and Somaliland ........................................ 371WVenezuela ............................................................... 371W

HEALTH................................................................... 413WClinical Commissioning Groups ............................ 413WDepressive Illnesses ................................................ 413WGeneral Practitioners ............................................. 413WHealth Education England..................................... 414WHealth Services ...................................................... 414WHealthwatch England ............................................ 414WHome Care Services ............................................... 415WMuscular Dystrophy: West Midlands..................... 415WNHS England ........................................................ 415WNHS: Finance ........................................................ 416W

Col. No.HEALTH—continued

NHS Property Services .......................................... 416WNHS: Redundancy................................................. 416WOut-patients: Attendance ....................................... 416W

HOME DEPARTMENT........................................... 391WEU Justice and Home Affairs................................. 391WEuropean Public Prosecutor’s Office...................... 392WFlexible Working.................................................... 392WHuman Trafficking ................................................ 393WIdentity and Passport Service................................. 393WKings Science Academy ......................................... 394WOffenders: Deportation .......................................... 394WOrganised Crime .................................................... 395WPassports................................................................ 395WSecondment ........................................................... 395WUK Border Agency ................................................ 396W

HOUSE OF COMMONS COMMISSION.............. 376WPay......................................................................... 376WTravel Office........................................................... 376W

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT .................... 417WAdam Smith International ..................................... 417WAfrica..................................................................... 417WBurma.................................................................... 417WDeveloping Countries: Climate Change ................. 418WDeveloping Countries: Females.............................. 418WDeveloping Countries: Midwives ........................... 418WDeveloping Countries: Sanitation .......................... 419WKenya..................................................................... 419WOverseas Aid.......................................................... 420WSomalia.................................................................. 420W

JUSTICE................................................................... 411WCourts: Security Guards ........................................ 411WDefamation............................................................ 411WFamily Proceedings: Legal Aid Scheme.................. 411WHuman Trafficking: Convictions............................ 412WImmigration: Appeals ............................................ 412WMesothelioma ........................................................ 413W

NORTHERN IRELAND .......................................... 372WAir Passenger Duty ................................................ 372WFlexible Working.................................................... 373WMarriage ................................................................ 374WTravel ..................................................................... 374W

SCOTLAND.............................................................. 372WFlexible Working.................................................... 372WSecondment ........................................................... 372W

TRANSPORT ........................................................... 402WAviation ................................................................. 402WCar Sharing............................................................ 402WCycling: Safety ....................................................... 402WHigh Speed 2 Railway Line .................................... 403WPedestrian Crossings .............................................. 404WRescue Services: Belfast ......................................... 405WRescue Services: Liverpool ..................................... 405WRescue Services: Stornoway ................................... 406WRoads: Safety ......................................................... 406WVehicle Number Plates ........................................... 406W

TREASURY .............................................................. 429WBank of England.................................................... 429WChild Benefit.......................................................... 429WCredit: Interest Rates ............................................. 429WFlexible Working.................................................... 429WMoney Laundering ................................................ 430WMoney Laundering: EU Law ................................. 430W

Col. No.TREASURY—continued

Offshore Funds: Mauritius .................................... 430WRevenue and Customs: Newry ............................... 431WRoyal Bank of Scotland ......................................... 431WTaxation: British Overseas Territories .................... 431W

WOMEN AND EQUALITIES.................................. 421WCivil Partnerships................................................... 421W

Col. No.WOMEN AND EQUALITIES—continued

Secondment ........................................................... 421W

WORK AND PENSIONS ......................................... 373WFlexible Working.................................................... 373WJobcentre Plus ........................................................ 374WPersonal Independence Payment ............................ 375WUnemployment: Young People............................... 375W

Members who wish to have the Daily Report of the Debates forwarded to them should give notice at the VoteOffice.

The Bound Volumes will also be sent to Members who similarly express their desire to have them.

No proofs of the Daily Reports can be supplied. Corrections which Members suggest for the Bound Volumeshould be clearly marked in the Daily Report, but not telephoned, and the copy containing the Corrections mustbe received at the Editor’s Room, House of Commons,

not later thanThursday 5 December 2013

STRICT ADHERENCE TO THIS ARRANGEMENT GREATLY FACILITATES THE

PROMPT PUBLICATION OF THE VOLUMES

Members may obtain excerpts of their Speeches from the Official Report (within one month from the date ofpublication), on application to the Stationery Office, c/o the Editor of the Official Report, House ofCommons, from whom the terms and conditions of reprinting may be ascertained. Application forms areavailable at the Vote Office.

PRICES AND SUBSCRIPTION RATES

DAILY PARTSSingle copies:

Commons, £5; Lords, £4.Annual subscriptions:

Commons, £865; Lords, £600.

LORDS VOLUME INDEX obtainable on standing order only. Details available on request.

BOUND VOLUMES OF DEBATES are issued periodically during the session.Single copies:

Commons, £105; Lords, £60 (£100 for a two-volume edition).Standing orders will be accepted.

THE INDEX to each Bound Volume of House of Commons Debates is published separately at £9·00 and can be supplied to standingorder.

All prices are inclusive of postage

Volume 571 ThursdayNo. 84 28 November 2013

CONTENTS


Oral Answers to Questions [Col. 385] [see index inside back page]Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change

Tobacco Packaging [Col. 407]Answer to urgent question—(Jane Ellison)

Business of the House [Col. 415]Statement—(Mr Lansley)

Sexual Violence in Conflict [Col. 429]Statement—(Mr Hague)

Typhoon Haiyan [Col. 441]Statement—(Justine Greening)

Backbench BusinessEuropean Scrutiny Committee Report [Col. 454]

Motion—(Mr Cash)—agreed toSmall Businesses [Col. 459]

Motion—(Anne Marie Morris)—agreed toG8 Summit on Dementia [Col. 497]

Motion—(Tracey Crouch)—agreed to

Mix 96 (Digital Radio Switchover) [Col. 518]Debate on motion for Adjournment

Westminster HallMental Health (Police Procedures) [Col. 139WH]Retail and the High Street [Col. 162WH]Debates on motion for Adjournment

Written Statements [Col. 19WS]

Petition [Col. 9P]Observations

Written Answers to Questions [Col. 369W] [see index inside back page]

Documents

PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES - publications.parliament.uk · “go early”CFDs—has far exceeded our expectations. I believe that there will be some good news on offshore wind shortly