| Home Page |
Column 439
House of Commons
Thursday 7 March 1991
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[ Mr. Speaker-- in the Chair ]
ROYAL ASSENT
Mr. Speaker : I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that the Queen has signified her Royal Assent to the following Acts :
Census (Confidentiality) Act 1991
Standard Life Assurance Company Act 1991
PRIVATE BUSINESS
Cardiff Bay Barrage Bill
[Lords] (By Order) Order for further consideration, as amended, read.
To be considered on Thursday 14 March.
Midland Metro Bill
(By Order)
As amended, considered ; to be read the Third time.
London Underground (No. 2) Bill
(By Order) Order for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second Time on Tuesday 12 March.
Mr. Speaker : As Bills 2 to 12 have blocking motions, with the leave of the House I shall put them together.
Cattewater Reclamation Bill
(By Order)
Hook Island (Poole Bay) Bill
(By Order)
London Docklands Railway (Lewisham, etc) Bill
(By Order)
Birmingham City Council Bill
(By Order)
British Railways Bill
(By Order)
East Coast Main Line (Safety) Bill
(By Order)
London Regional Transport (Penalty Fares) Bill
(By Order)
London Underground (King's Cross) Bill
(By Order)
Redbridge London Borough Council Bill
(By Order)
British Railways (No. 3) Bill
[Lords] (By Order)
Midland Metro (No. 2) Bill
(By Order)
Orders for Second Reading read.
To be read a Second time on Thursday 14 March.
Column 440
Oral Answers to Questions
HOME DEPARTMENT
Television Licences
1. Mr. McAllion : To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he next intends to review the regulations relating to concessionary television licences for pensioners in sheltered housing.
2. Mr. Skinner : To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent representations he has received on the need for legislation to provide free television licences for all pensioners ; and if he will make a statement.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Peter Lloyd) : My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announceon 28 February our intention to clarify and consolidate the wireless telegraphy regulations. The new ones will be laid very shortly. They will remove the "communal facility" condition for the concessionary television licence, which in practice has proved unnecessary to the operation of the more tightly defined scheme that we introduced in 1988. Since 1 January we have received 30 letters about free or reduced-price television licences for pensioners. We have no plans to review further or to extend the present concessionary scheme.
Mr. McAllion : Concessionary licences are granted to some but not all pensioners who live in warden-controlled houses, they are granted to some whose incomes are well above income support levels, but denied to others whose incomes are on or below income support levels, and they are denied to those who need them most--single pensioners living alone without family or friends to visit them. Has not the time come to end such cruel contradictions? Will the Minister stop such random discrimination against pensioners and undertake to grant concessionary licences to all pensioners who need them?
Mr. Lloyd : Our scheme is fair because it applies to all those in local authority or housing association homes that are clearly within an exclusive boundary and where there is a warden at work for 30 hours a week. The hon. Gentleman suggests that we should extend that to all pensioners. If we did, many pensioners would be enjoying a benefit which is not enjoyed by others who are very much worse off. The right hon. Member for Birmingham, Sparkbrook (Mr. Hattersley) recognised that when he made it clear last week that the concessionary scheme should not apply to all pensioners. He was talking about a scheme that extends to those who are least well-off. The hon. Gentleman and the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner), whom I hear chuntering, should address their questions to their own Front-Bench spokesmen.
Mr. Skinner : I do not have any problem with that. I addressed questions to Members on my Front Bench when the Labour party was in power and I shall do it again when we return to power after the general election.
There is nothing fair about the system when some pensioners do not get free television licences because there is a means test, some because they are not disabled in a
Column 441
certain way and some because they do not live on the right side of the street. Now the Government have introduced another anomaly whereby pensioners have to have qualified before May 1988. Why cannot they be treated in the same way as those at Buckingham palace?Mr. Lloyd : The hon. Gentleman has shown why the right hon. Member for Sparkbrook has such difficulty drawing up a scheme that he can agree with his Front Bench, let alone the rest of the Labour party. The scheme that we have is carefully constructed to enable people in the original scheme--those in local authority homes with some warden control--to have the concession, and there it remains.
Mrs. Maureen Hicks : To illustrate my question to my hon. Friend may I draw his attention to one of my constituents, Mr. Rushton? Perhaps he can visualiseMr. Rushton, who lives in a high-rise block of flats in the middle of Heathtown in Wolverhampton in which many other elderly people live. He has a concierge on duty to look after his needs. Next door--
Mr. Speaker : Order. Could we have a question about it, please?
Mrs. Hicks : I shall be brief, Mr. Speaker. Next door are two high- rise blocks of flats, Tremont house and Lincoln house, which have wardens. People in the two blocks of flats next door to Mr. Rushton have £5 television licences, but the elderly people in the adjacent building, Longfield house, have to pay the full price because they have no warden. Does not he think that there is a ridiculous anomaly in that system and will he investigate it?
Mr. Lloyd : Whichever way one draws up a scheme, there will be someone on the wrong side of the rules. The rules enable local authorities so to organise their provision for the elderly that they can come into the scheme. That is why, since the scheme was introduced in 1988, more people enjoy the concessionary licence than before. It is quite possible for local authorities to organise themselves within the scheme.
Mr. Roger King : Is my hon. Friend aware that the level of licence fees is directly related to the cost of the provision of broadcasting services by the BBC? Is he fully satisfied that we are getting the correct value for money from that organisation, or does he agree with some industrialists that the costs should be gone over with a fine-toothed comb and some of the waste sorted out?
Mr. Lloyd : As my hon. Friend knows, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary allowed the BBC to increase its licence fee by less than the retail prices index for the coming year, because he took on board suggestions that there was scope for the BBC to increase its efficiency. No doubt by addressing itself to that, the BBC will be able to make further savings in due course.
Mr. Corbett : Will the Minister confirm that in the coming changes in the regulations, which have been announced, he will deal with the case of my constituent who is in a block of properties that were otherwise council-tenanted? Under the right to buy, a flat was bought and then sold to someone under pensionable age, so all the people in the block lost that concession. Will the changes at least end that anomaly? Does the Minister understand that Labour will exempt low-income groups,
Column 442
including pensioners, from the licence fee and raise the cash to do so by ensuring that the fee is paid for each set in a hotel or other commercial premises?Mr. Lloyd : That is the suggestion at the moment. I wonder whether it will be the same when the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends have done their figures, because he proposes to increase the take from the retail and hotel trade from £5 million to £100 million. I hope that the trade knows that this extra impost is being placed on it. Labour will do that only by a massive increase in the fee, but I quite understand that the hon. Gentleman has not yet fully thought out the policy.
The hon. Gentleman asked whether I would make the matter clear. Our rules are clear beyond peradventure. If a local authority sells a flat in a block that qualifies under the rules, it is being extremely foolish, because there is no obligation on an authority to sell in those conditions.
Sir Anthony Grant : Will my hon. Friend take into consideration pensioners--there are some in my constituency--who pay taxes but who absolutely loathe television and do not understand why they should be expected to subsidise it for others?
Mr. Lloyd : As the regulations clearly say, those capable of receiving a British broadcasted programme must pay the licence fee, which goes to the BBC. That matter will come under review as we move towards the renewal of the BBC charter in 1996.
Fire Cover, West Yorkshire
4. Mrs. Mahon : To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will carry out an urgent review of fire cover in West Yorkshire, and if he will make a statement.
The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. John Patten) : It is for the West Yorkshire fire and civil defence authority to assess the fire risks in its area in the light of guidance issued by the Home Office. The authority must then determine what resources are necessary to meet those risks. The Government are concerned to ensure that all fire authorities conform to the minimum nationally recommended standards of fire cover and that they do so as efficiently and economically as possible. Her Majesty's inspectorate of fire services will pay particular attention to those points during its next inspection of West Yorkshire fire service, which is to take place very soon --during April this year.
Mrs. Mahon : Is the Minister aware of the damage that the poll tax is doing to authorities such as the West Yorkshire fire service? Does he realise that this year alone the authority--although it has wisely decided to save Sowerby Bridge fire station--faces cuts of £1.5 million, which will lead to the freezing of 100 posts and the axing of seven special firefighting appliances? Is not that disgraceful and does not it show that the Government are exercising double standards? When will they get rid of the poll tax, which is so damaging to both people and services?
Mr. Patten : The authority has been allowed a 19 per cent. increase in standard spending assessment for next year. That shows the Government's considerable commitment to the provision of good fire cover in the interests of people in West Yorkshire and elsewhere.
Column 443
Mrs. Peacock : Why is the West Yorkshire fire authority being pressured by the Home Office to cut some of its services?Mr. Patten : Her Majesty's inspector of fire services will go to West Yorkshire in April to carry out a full inspection of efficiency, effectiveness and the cover and needs of the fire service. He will report to my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.
Mr. Allen McKay : Will the Minister also consider the problem of firefighting mains in West Yorkshire and other areas? Will he consider the possibility of an agreement between the fire service and the water authorities, so that the cost of an extra main does not fall on the poll tax payer?
Mr. Patten : That point has not been made to me before, but I shall certainly pursue it and write to the hon. Gentleman.
Magistrates Courts
5. Mr. Andrew Mitchell : To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will request the Audit Commission to undertake a comparative study of the efficiency and effectiveness of magistrates courts.
Mr. John Patten : My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to an audit gap in the present arrangements for the management of the magistrates court service. We are considering how best to fill that gap, including the possible involvement of the Audit Commission, as part of the process of reaching decisions on the magistrates court scrutiny. At this stage, however, given the scrutiny findings, I do not think that a further value- for-money study would be helpful until my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has made clear his views on the scrutiny in an announcement which I expect not to be too long delayed.
Mr. Mitchell : Is my right hon. Friend aware that a survey carried out recently by the Audit Commission showed that productivity in our courtrooms can vary by a factor of 10--from 250 summonses dealt with in one session to over 3,000? Will he take into account the importance of a survey of not only productivity but the efficiency and effectiveness with which our courtrooms conduct their business?
Mr. Patten : It is perfectly true that the unit costs in magistrates courts vary widely from one place to another and that unit costs have risen considerably in recent years. The outcome of the scrutiny may lead to further value-for-money studies, possibly conducted by the Audit Commission, but at present there is no legislative provision, as my hon. Friend will know from the Local Government Finance (No. 2) Act 1982.
Mr. Randall : Is the Minister aware that it is more than a year since the publication of the scrutiny report? Does he realise that the Government's slowness in deciding what to do about it is delaying the implementation of a number of proposals that could tackle, for example, the serious problem of inconsistency in sentencing and poor cost-effectiveness? Will he be more specific and tell us exactly when we can expect a decision about the report?
Column 444
Mr. Patten : With respect, the hon. Gentleman seems a little muddled. The scrutiny related to the effectiveness and efficiency of the management of the magistrates court system, which is a £280 million-a- year undertaking. It had nothing to do with sentencing issues. We are committed to preserving both local justice and magisterial independence in sentencing. I hope that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will be able to make an announcement in the near future.
Sir John Wheeler : When he is considering the efficiency and effectiveness of the magistrates courts service, will my right hon. Friend look again at the Home Affairs Select Committee report on the Crown prosecution service, in particular the recommendation that draws attention to the efficiency proved by the Hampshire experiment, in which the use of information technology enables the police, the Crown prosecution service and the magistrates courts service to be more effectively used?
Mr. Patten : My hon. Friend, who is the chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, is aware that I keep all his distinguished reports next to my bed for reference in the evening. I shall certainly dig out the one on the Crown prosecution service and look at the point to which he referred. The Hampshire experiment is excellent. It is within our grasp to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the magistrates courts service.
Anabolic Steriods
6. Mr. Menzies Campbell : To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if it is his intention to introduce legislation to make anabolic steroids controlled drugs under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Kenneth Baker) : No, Sir. The Misuse of Drugs Act deals mainly with drugs of addiction. We have decided instead on a range of measures designed to prevent misuse, particularly among young people.
Mr. Campbell : Does the Secretary of State understand that that is a most disappointing reply, in the light of the fact that as long ago as November 1988 the Home Office announced that it intended to make anabolic steroids prescribed drugs under the Misuse of Drugs Act? Does he appreciate that these drugs are freely available throughout the United Kingdom, in gymnasia and fitness centres, that they are acknowledged to cause damage to health and that in at least one case they have caused death? In those circumstances, is not there ample justification for making it a criminal offence to possess the drugs, or to possess them with the intention of supplying them to others?
Mr. Baker : I appreciate the great interest that the hon. and learned Gentleman takes in the subject. The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs has advised that the possession of anabolic steroids should not be an offence, since they are not addictive. That view is shared by our European Community partners. I am, however, concerned about the hon. and learned Gentleman's point that these drugs have dangerous side-effects, particularly for young people in training. We have decided, therefore, that the giving of anabolic steroids to minors--there is no trade in most of these drugs--shall be an offence. We are also undertaking additional research into the extent of steroid misuse and we intend to improve our testing and detecting
Column 445
methods. In addition, we are increasing our educational efforts, the intention being to demonstrate to people that those drugs can be very harmful.Mrs. Currie : Is my right hon. Friend aware that the national competition of the amateur powerlifting association will be held in Derby in June and that amateur powerlifters feel very strongly that further controls are needed for anabolic steroids? Will he guarantee to keep the issue under review and to take into account the views of such valuable bodies?
Mr. Baker : Yes, indeed. It is irresponsible of those who are training youngsters to participate in such sports to provide them with these drugs. There is no doubt that they have harmful side-effects. We are taking strong action. I agree entirely with my hon. Friend that as much publicity as possible should be given to their harmful effects.
Juvenile Courts
7. Mr. Michael : To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what arrangements he intends to make in the way juvenile or youth courts are organised, particularly in relation to waiting room arrangements and supervision once the age limits are raised to 18 years.
Mr. John Patten : Responsibility for listing arrangements in magistrates courts rests with justices' clerks. There are already statutory provisions to ensure that defendants attending juvenile courts are kept apart from adult defendants. The Justices' Clerks Society and the Magistrates Association are being consulted about ways of arranging youth court hearings and we have asked the best practice committee to consider practical best practice procedures for courts to adopt in future, if these are found to be necessary.
Mr. Michael : But it is the Government who are changing the age limit upwards by a year in relation to the juvenile or youth courts. Does not the Minister accept that the message given to young people, particularly young offenders, in the waiting room and in the area around a court, is in some cases almost as important as the message given to them in the court about their activities and future behaviour? Does he agree that the message that they frequently get is entirely wrong and completely contrary to the one that society would like them to receive? Does he further agree that a mechanism should be devised--whether it be advice or instructions--to ensure that 18-year-olds and very young people appearing before such courts are separated, so that very young people do not get the messages that might be given to them by more sophisticated offenders?
Mr. Patten : I agree with both points. The messages that juveniles get from rubbing shoulders with tougher and older accused people who are waiting outside a court can be very bad. That is why, as I pointed out in my initial answer to the hon. Gentleman, we wish to move as quickly as possible towards ensuring that we use the procedures drawn up by the best practice committee, under the Home Office magistrates courts adviser, to ensure that court clerks and others separate younger from older juveniles. We shall also be building into the guidance on the design of court houses exactly the points that cause concern to the hon. Gentleman.
Column 446
Mr. John Greenway : Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Government's decision to create youth courts under the Criminal Justice Bill has been widely welcomed throughout the criminal justice system? On the likely bad impression on young offenders, does my right hon. Friend agree that the worst possible impression is made on them when they are held on remand in prison? Does he further agree that the arrangements that the Government have introduced to ensure that we have a better system of looking after young people--whether in bail hostels or in remand prisons, which the private sector might build--will be conducive to ensuring a much reduced rate of recidivism among young offenders?
Mr. Patten : My hon. Friend is right. The provisions for the introduction of a youth court under the Criminal Justice Bill have been widely welcomed across the spectrum--from those who describe themselves as penal reformers to those who want young people to get the punishment that they think they deserve. I also agree that it is important to end as soon as possible the practice of remanding juveniles in custody in prisons. That is why my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary published his consultation paper on the issue two or three weeks ago. That, too, has been widely welcomed.
On the last part of the question, my hon. Friend has already carved out for himself a considerable reputation as a proponent of the involvement of the private sector in prison and remand issues and we listen carefully to what he has to say.
Iraqi Nationals
8. Mr. Dalyell : To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the Amnesty International report on British treatment of Iraqi nationals.
Mr. Kenneth Baker : I have placed in the Library a copy of a reply sent to Amnesty International on 18 February. I am satisfied that the action taken against Iraqi nationals is in accordance with domestic law and our international obligations. The International Committee of the Red Cross has visited all Iraqis detained and has stated that they are being treated in accordance with the Geneva conventions.
Mr. Dalyell : In view of the recent heavyweight criticism that current United Kingdom law, which allows people to be detained on grounds of national security without being given a reason for their detention, is in breach of international law, do the Government have plans in any way to synchronise United Kingdom arrangements and bring them into line with the proposed international arrangements?
Mr. Baker : I appreciate the interest that the hon. Gentleman has shown in the matter in recent weeks. I do not accept that the action that we have taken is in breach of international standards. In certain other countries, Iraqis were bundled out very quickly indeed. The hon. Gentleman is familiar with the procedures that operate in such cases. The advisory panel is headed by a lord justice of appeal and it has so far dealt with 54 cases. In his judgment on the Cheblak case, the Master of the Rolls examined the basis of the three advisers' procedures and
Column 447
took the view that the arrangements struck a proper balance between the protection of individual rights and the requirements of national security.Mr. Alexander : Have not we behaved impeccably to the Iraqis during the Gulf conflict? My right hon. Friend mentioned, for example, the due judicial process which must be gone through before any of them is ejected. Does my right hon. Friend recollect the threats, emanating from Baghdad of increased terrorist activity? Were not we wise to be safe rather than sorry?
Mr. Baker : I fully support what my hon. Friend says. At the outbreak of hostilities, Saddam Hussein called on Iraqis and other sympathisers across the world to take action to support him. We were absolutely right to follow the principle that it is better to be safe than sorry. Although hostilities in the Gulf have now ceased, it would be imprudent to believe that international terrorism, whether from the middle east or from other countries, will cease. We must therefore continue to be vigilant.
Mr. Winnick : Is the Home Secretary aware that I, for one, totally accept that while we were in military conflict with a notorious terrorist dictatorship it was necessary on national security grounds to take various actions? [ Hon. Members :-- "Shame."] I am not going to apologise for that--least of all to those who did not support the military conflict in any way.
Is the Home Secretary aware, however, that I should like to see progess in one form of activity? Is not there a strong case for those who appear before the three advisers to have legal representation or some other form of representation so that our democratic process is not harmed?
Mr. Baker : I have known the hon. Gentleman in the House for many years, dating back to when he represented another seat. I have always thought of him as an hon. Member who is not afraid to stand up and speak his mind on any subject, as he has done with great fearlessness in the past few weeks. I appreciate the concern that he and others have expressed about this matter. In practice, lawyers have made representations--sometimes directly to the three advisers, who have seen those lawyers if that was what was wanted. Representations have also been made to me by the lawyers. There is, therefore, some flexibility. I believe that those cases have been handled fairly--in fact, with impeccable fairness.
Mr. Andrew MacKay : Is my right hon. Friend aware that the overwhelming majority of people in this country will be gratified and relieved at the action that the Government have taken, which has ensured that no terrorist incident has taken place? Is he further aware that they will equally contrast what has happened to Iraqi nationals in this country with what happened to the Kuwaitis when Iraq moved into that country?
Mr. Baker : The despicable behaviour of some Iraqis during their occupation of Kuwait is not a standard to be followed by any country. We have behaved according to the highest standards. I appreciate that the powers are unusual and as Home Secretary I have therefore been especially careful to ensure that everything has been done to give those people a fair hearing.
Column 448
South Yorkshire Police
9. Mr. Duffy : To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he next expects to review manning policy for the South Yorkshire police.
Mr. Kenneth Baker : I announced on 20 December 1990 that I had approved 18 additional police posts for South Yorkshire with effect from 1 October 1991, subject to confirmation from the police authority that it is prepared to meet its share of the costs of those posts. Any application that the authority makes for our approval to further establishment increases will be most carefully considered.
Mr. Duffy : Will the Home Secretary confirm that those 18 posts did not meet the application of the South Yorkshire police? Given the findings of the Sheffield Star, which I conveyed to him through the post in recent days, about the erosion of the fabric of the South Yorkshire police force, does he agree that those 18 posts do not meet the needs of that police force either? Will he confirm that, during the November inspection, South Yorkshire came out as the least resourced but the most productive of the family of six forces? My hon. Friends and I know what the problem is--it is not the Home Secretary, but the Department of the Environment. Will the right hon. Gentleman seek a firm assurance from the Department of the Environment that it will not allow the capping criteria to prevent the South Yorkshire police from manning up to his standards?
Mr. Baker : The South Yorkshire police asked for a further 50 police officers and we allocated a further 18. However, as I said in my main answer, it may be possible to increase that number later in the year. I am concerned that police services are maintained at a proper level. The level of budget of each authority is not my responsibility. With the agreement of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, I have set out the criteria according to which the police authorities should set their budgets. In a letter to Councillor Bundred on 18 February, I stated : "It is now for each authority to set its budget. In doing so, it should take into account all relevant considerations, including its statutory duties, the approved level of police manpower, the Government's intended capping criteria, the need, as appropriate, for expenditure restraint and the scope for greater efficiency." Mr. Shersby : Will my right hon. Friend confirm that if South Yorkshire encounters difficulties over its police manpower, he will be willing to consider whatever representations South Yorkshire police authority may make on that important point?
Mr. Baker : I will, of course, undertake to do that. As I have said to the House before, I have provided for an increase in police resources for the country as a whole in the coming year of 700 uniformed police officers and 1,100 civilians. However, I am well aware that hon. Members are interested in their own police forces and I can give my hon. Friend the undertaking for which he has asked.
Mr. Hattersley : Is the Home Secretary aware that the South Yorkshire police authority told me on Friday that, far from expanding to meet its new establishment, it will be cutting the number of officers because of poll tax capping? How many other police authorities are similarly afflicted? Will the Home Secretary confirm the estimate given by the
Column 449
chairman of the Association of Chief Police Officers of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, that poll tax capping is likely to mean 1,700 fewer police officers than last year?Mr. Baker : That is highly unlikely. It depends on whether the authority is a multi-purpose authority or a single service authority such as South Yorkshire. Within that context, I expect metropolitan police authorities to set their budgets to maintain operational police manpower at the level that I and my predecessors have approved. I do not expect that to be done by moving police officers into posts held by civilians. I expect police officers to pursue vigorously a policy of streamlining administration, cutting out waste and maximising value for money.
Radio Stations
10. Mr. Robert G. Hughes : To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he last discussed the future of incremental radio stations with the chairman of the Radio Authority.
Mr. Peter Lloyd : My right hon. Friend meets the chairman of the Radio Authority from time to time to discuss a range of matters, but he has not specifically discussed with him the future of incremental radio stations.
Mr. Hughes : I thank my right hon. Friend for his answer. Will he and the Secretary of State note the success and popularity of Sunrise Radio, an Asian radio station operating in west London and my constituency? Despite its popularity, it is rather hemmed in by an inadequate frequency on the medium wave, which means that people living within the reception area find it difficult to receive that station. Will my right hon. Friend talk to the Radio Authority to see whether successful incremental radio stations which broadcast to a loyal audience, as Sunrise does, can move on to a better frequency so that people who want to enjoy it can do so?
Mr. Lloyd : Sunrise Radio is to be congratulated on offering a varied programme which is proving particularly successful in attracting Asian listeners. It suffers from some interference, especially at night. Increasing broadcast power might help, but it would be expensive. Sunrise should contact the Radio Authority--I understand that it has not yet done so--but I will draw my hon. Friend's concerns to the attention of the Radio Authority.
Mr. Darling : When the Minister next meets the chairman of the Radio Authority, will he discuss the growing problem of local and smaller radio stations being increasingly acquired by larger conglomerates? The first casualty is often local output, especially local news, with increasing dependency on Independent Radio News which, however good it may be, is not a local news output. Does the Minister agree that local radio stations such as Sunrise should be encouraged? If concentration continues, it will create little more than another national radio station.
Mr. Lloyd : Local stations should certainly be encouraged. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the licence is given to a broadcasting company to produce a particular
Column 450
sort of broadcasting. If ownership changes, the licence does not change and the station is expected to continue the same output.Domestic Violence
11. Mr. Ashley : To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent discussions he has had with chief constables about the law and domestic violence.
Mr. John Patten : Chief officers were consulted over the drafting of a Home Office circular on domestic violence which was issued last July. It has been widely welcomed.
Mr. Ashley : I welcome the setting up of domestic violence units, but when will they be open at night, when many women need them? When will there be enough of them to give access to those who require them and when will social workers be attached to them?
Mr. Patten : I am extremely grateful to the right hon. Gentleman, who has a long-standing interest in the subject. Domestic violence units exist in police force areas such as the Metropolitan area and West Yorkshire. There is none yet in the Greater Manchester area or in the right hon. Gentleman's area, although I am happy to report that the force general order states that all allegations of domestic violence should be treated as crimes--and quite right, too. There is also close co-ordination with other agencies, such as social workers and the probation service.
By July, Her Majesty's inspectorate of constabulary will have visited exactly half the forces in this area, asking for a specific answer to the question, "What has been done so far on domestic violence?" I shall report back to the House at that stage, in July this year.
Mr. Holt : Will my right hon. Friend take five minutes to discuss with the chief constables the problem of young and juvenile crime in relation to the school leaving age? The highest crime level is currently among those in the year below the school leaving age and has been for 80 years. Would not a more flexible approach to the school leaving age allow those who wish to study to do so, those who wish to train to do that, while those who wish to play truant would not have the opportunity to do so? Our current rigid school leaving age is out of line with that of our colleagues in the European Community and should be looked at by the Government.
Mr. Patten : The school leaving age is not a matter for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, but I entirely agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Langbaurgh (Mr. Holt) that we need to do more about truancy, on which my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science is to make an announcement in the near future.
| Next Section
| Home Page |