| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Hong Kong (Power Station Explosion)
Mr. Caborn: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what progress his Department has made in its inquiry into (a) the cause of the explosion at Castle Peak B power station in Hong Kong in 1992 and (b) the safety of similar power stations in the United Kingdom. [983]
31 Oct 1996 : Column: 185
Mr. Page [holding answer 29 October 1996]: The safety of power stations in Hong Kong is a matter for the Hong Kong Government. However, I understand that a police inquiry being conducted in Hong Kong has not yet reached any conclusions and in view of this we cannot tell whether it may have any relevance to the question of safety at power stations.
The Health and Safety Executive consulted the electricity industry through the Electricity Association's generation safety managers group and asked what action had been taken to avoid a possible read across of the Castle Peak incident to UK power stations. A reply was received from the Electricity Association which detailed the action taken by the five companies that had or operated hydrogen generating plant. I understand that either the design and/or the operation of the plants are different from that at Castle Peak, or that any necessary modifications have been made.
Mr. Caborn:
To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many power stations in the United Kingdom are equipped with hydrogen plants similar to the Hong Kong Castle Peak B plant which exploded; and what steps have been taken to warn them of the possibility of a similar occurrence here. [985]
Mr. Page
[holding answer 29 October 1996]: Five electricity companies operate hydrogen plants in the United Kingdom. The detailed design of the plants is different to that at Castle Peak. While some plant similar to that used at Castle Peak is installed in one United Kingdom power station, detailed consideration of that plant's design by the utility and the manufacturer following the accident confirmed that the plant's design was such not to make it susceptible to the type of incident which occurred at Castle Peak.
31 Oct 1996 : Column: 186
Mr. Caborn:
To ask the President of the Board of Trade what account his Department's inquiry into the cause of the explosion at Castle Peak B power station in Hong Kong in 1992 has taken of (a) reports by the Hong Kong Governor's board of inquiry and (b) the investigation by the Hong Kong police into a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. [984]
Mr. Page
[holding answer 29 October 1996]: Investigations by the Hong Kong police are matters for the Hong Kong Government.
Following a request by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Health and Safety Executive consulted the electricity industry through the Electricity Association's generation safety managers group on what action had been taken to avoid a possible read across of the Castle Peak incident to United Kingdom power stations. This included forwarding to the association a copy of the technical report by the China Light and Power Company which had been prepared on the recommendation of the coroner who investigated the cause of the explosion at Castle Peak B power station.
Housing (London)
Mr. John Marshall: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will list (a) the level of rent arrears, (b) the number of empty council houses and (c) the level of council tax and similar arrears for each London local authority. [238]
Mr. Clappison: The latest available information is as follows:
31 Oct 1996 : Column: 185
| LA Rent arrears(1) at end March 1995 | LA vacants(2) at 1 April 1995 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amount (£000) | Percentage of rent roll | Number | Percentage of dwellings | Council Tax arrears(3) (£000) | Community charge arrears (£000) | |
| Barking and Dagenham | 942 | 2.0 | 427 | 1.6 | 1,440 | 1,558 |
| Barnet | 1,401 | 3.8 | 124 | 0.9 | 6,678 | 10,281 |
| Bexley | 505 | 2.5 | 139 | 1.6 | 1,679 | 2,644 |
| Brent | 13,750 | 29.3 | 301 | 1.8 | 8,892 | 26,035 |
| Bromley | 0 | 0.0 | 5 | 6.3 | 1,963 | 1,944 |
| Camden | 8,986 | 10.7 | 543 | 1.8 | 12,379 | 22,095 |
| City of London | 256 | 4.2 | 24 | 1.1 | n/a | n/a |
| Croydon | 2,208 | 4.7 | 265 | 1.6 | 5,392 | 4,246 |
| Ealing | 10,809 | 19.1 | 210 | 1.3 | n/a | n/a |
| Enfield | 4,037 | 9.9 | 342 | 2.2 | 8,815 | 8,396 |
| Greenwich | 14,984 | 19.6 | 795 | 2.5 | 6,494 | 9,737 |
| Hackney | 32,675 | 31.6 | 3,894 | 9.8 | 4,588 | 10,470 |
| Hammersmith and Fulham | 6,553 | 15.1 | 343 | 2.1 | 6,752 | 7,186 |
| Haringey | 20,318 | 33.4 | 303 | 1.5 | n/a | n/a |
| Harrow | 793 | 3.6 | 108 | 1.6 | 3,595 | 4,787 |
| Havering | 561 | 2.2 | 219 | 1.6 | 1,506 | 3,628 |
| Hillingdon | 933 | 2.2 | 159 | 1.2 | 4,857 | 6,586 |
| Hounslow | 2,483 | 7.1 | 333 | 2.0 | 4,087 | 15,618 |
| Islington | 16,072 | 16.0 | 1,483 | 4.0 | n/a | n/a |
| Kensington and Chelsea | 2,351 | 9.4 | 108 | 1.4 | 4,672 | 5,083 |
| Kingston upon Thames | 507 | 3.0 | 97 | 1.7 | n/a | n/a |
| Lambeth | 19,491 | 19.8 | 2,176 | 5.1 | 40,172 | 75,423 |
| Lewisham | 7,482 | 9.3 | 1,051 | 3.0 | n/a | n/a |
| Merton | 1,168 | 4.5 | 89 | 0.9 | 3,211 | 4,238 |
| Newham | 7,886 | 13.6 | 735 | 2.8 | 12,052 | 24,397 |
| Redbridge | 1,142 | 5.0 | 515 | 7.6 | n/a | n/a |
| Richmond upon Thames | 1,062 | 5.5 | 246 | 3.2 | 1,887 | 4,056 |
| Southwark | 26,160 | 20.8 | 1,129 | 2.1 | 10,811 | 25,290 |
| Sutton | 1,265 | 5.2 | 76 | 0.8 | 1,215 | 1,555 |
| Tower Hamlets | 3,987 | 5.5 | 1,562 | 4.2 | 4,156 | 5,437 |
| Waltham Forest | 2,404 | 6.6 | 465 | 2.9 | 8,134 | 16,656 |
| Wandsworth | 4,362 | 6.7 | 508 | 2.4 | 2,091 | 181 |
| Westminster | 3,100 | 6.0 | 263 | 1.7 | 4,110 | 67 |
(1)Source:
Housing Subsidy Claim Form (SCF) returns.
(2)Source:
Housing Investment Programme (HIP1) returns.
(3)Source:
Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA).
n/a = not available.
31 Oct 1996 : Column: 187
31 Oct 1996 : Column: 187
Rough Sleepers Initiative
Mr. John Marshall: To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how many hostel places have been provided under the rough sleepers initiative; and what has been their occupancy rate during the past two years. [463]
Mr. Clappison: Since the rough sleepers initiative in central London began in 1990, my Department has provided funding for 986 places in nightshelters and hostels. Most of these places were in temporary hostels which have now closed either because the lease on the building has expired or the site has been redeveloped, in some cases to provide hostel accommodation of an improved standard. During 1996-97, my Department is funding 126 places in two nightshelters and two hostels. Occupancy rates exceed 95 per cent. in two of them and are between 85 and 90 per cent. in the other two.
Under the rough sleepers initiative, my Department also provides funding for an annual programme of winter shelters, open from December to March. In 1994-95, 331 places were provided in seven shelters, with occupancy rates of about 89 per cent. In 1995-96, 315 places were provided in seven shelters with occupancy rates in excess of 89 per cent. My Department hopes to fund an enhanced winter shelter programme in 1996-97, providing up to 450 places in central London and 36 places in Bristol, where the rough sleepers initiative also now operates.
Mr. Merchant:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how he plans to respond to the findings of evaluations of the extent of rough sleeping in 23 areas identified in the Government's strategy paper "Rough Sleepers Initiative--The Next Challenge". [2112]
Mr. Curry:
The success of the rough sleepers initiative has been clearly demonstrated in central London, where it has been operating since 1990. In that time, the number of people sleeping rough on any night has fallen from estimates of over 1,000 to less than 300.
On 4 March this year, I announced that the Government would be making £73 million available for a third phase of the initiative from 1996-97 to 1998-99. The interdepartmental strategy paper "Rough Sleepers Initiative--The Next Challenge" set out our plans for continuing the initiative in central London, where the problem is greatest; expanding the initiative to Bristol, where a major rough sleeping problem had been demonstrated; and assisting evaluations of the extent of
31 Oct 1996 : Column: 188
rough sleeping in 23 other areas where some evidence of a rough sleeping problem existed, with a view to providing further assistance.
Evaluations of the extent of rough sleeping in 23 areas around the country, undertaken by Shelter on contract to my Department, have now been completed. In total, 375 people were found sleeping rough during single night head counts in all 23 areas. I have considered the findings, along with the range of other information collected as part of each evaluation, including the amount and availability of direct-access hostel provision, the range of existing local services providing help for people sleeping rough, and local authority policies on providing housing for people sleeping rough. From this evidence, I have decided that further assistance should fall into three main categories.
First, I have decided to create new rough sleepers initiative zones in Brighton, Kensington and Chelsea and Hammersmith and Fulham, where significant rough sleeping problems have been identified. The local authorities for these areas will be invited to form consortiums of statutory and voluntary sector agencies to develop a local strategy for tackling rough sleeping and to bid for rough sleepers initiative funding, which may be made available for capital projects--such as hostels and permanent accommodation--or revenue projects--such as outreach and resettlement work. I expect the strategies to be based closely on the findings of the evaluations in these areas. The local authorities for Kensington and Chelsea and for Hammersmith and Fulham are being invited to form a single consortium to focus resources on the areas within both boroughs where people sleep rough.
Additionally, I have decided to expand the area covered by the existing central London rough sleepers initiative zones to include parts of the W1 and W2 postal districts in Westminster. My Department will be discussing the arrangements for this expansion with Westminster city council and the chairmen of the existing central London rough sleepers initiative consortiums.
Secondly, I have decided to create a new rough sleepers revenue fund to which local voluntary sector agencies can submit applications for funding of projects, such as outreach and resettlement work. Local authorities, working in close consultation with voluntary sector agencies, will be invited to prepare joint statutory and voluntary sector local strategies for tackling rough sleeping and to identify suitable revenue projects for which applications for funding could be sought. Funding
31 Oct 1996 : Column: 189
decisions will be based on the strength of the local strategies and on the value for money offered by applications. Initially, I will be inviting the local authorities for Bath, Bournemouth, Cambridge, Ealing, Exeter, Leicester, Manchester, Nottingham, Oxford and Richmond upon Thames, where rough sleeping problems have been identified, to prepare and submit such strategies. I expect the strategies to be based closely on the findings of the evaluations in these areas.
Subsequently, my Department will be publishing guidance for local authorities on evaluating the extent of rough sleeping in their areas and developing strategies for tackling any problems which exist. In the light of responses to this guidance, I will consider inviting other local authorities to prepare strategies and suggest projects which might be considered for grants from the rough sleepers revenue fund.
Up to £25 million will be available from 1 April 1997 to 31 March 1999 to fund the new rough sleepers initiative zones and the rough sleepers revenue fund.
The Department of Health will also be making available nearly £2 million over the next three years in areas which have been targeted for help under the rough sleepers initiative and the new rough sleepers revenue fund. This help is being made available through the extension of the homeless mentally ill initiative. It will be available to assist local authorities with outreach services and care costs for those people sleeping rough who have mental health problems. One of the primary aims of this additional funding will be to ensure that this vulnerable group is reintroduced to the services which comprise the spectrum of care for mentally ill people.
Thirdly, my Department will be contacting the local authorities for Barnet, Basingstoke, Birmingham, Gloucester, Norwich, Reading, Tower Hamlets, Tunbridge Wells, Waltham Forest and York to offer advice on the findings of the evaluations and action which they might consider to tackle the relatively minor problems of rough sleeping identified in those areas.
I am determined that the hard core of people who sleep rough are given every opportunity to get off the streets and into a better life. These further measures demonstrate the Government's commitment to ensuring that there is no necessity for people to sleep rough. Shelter, Homeless Network, Centrepoint, CHAR and Crisis have indicated their willingness to work nationally with Government, local authorities and other voluntary sector agencies to help make it unnecessary for people to sleep rough.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |