| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Export Control Act 2002: Extraterritorial Control
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
Following the coming into force of the Export Control Act 2002, what plans they have for full extra-territorial control over the United Kingdom arms brokers operating from overseas, thus evading licensing. [HL4375]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville): Under the Trade in Goods (Embargoed Destinations) Order 2004 and the Trade in Goods (Control) Order 2003, implemented under the Export Control Act 2002, fully extraterritorial controls already apply on UK persons anywhere in the world who seek to trade in military equipment to destinations under a full arms embargo imposed by the EU, OSCE or UK (additional extraterritorial controls on trade to destinations subject to UN embargo are in place under the UN Act 1946), and to those who seek to trade in long-range missiles and their component parts or in torture equipment to any destination.
Child Pornography: Internet Service Providers
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
Which British Internet service companies have followed the lead of British Telecom by installing software to block material showing child pornography; and how many have not yet done so. [HL4353]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The UK has led the world in having Internet service industries (both fixed and mobile), government and law enforcement agencies working together to reduce child pornography on the Internet. According to the Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), less then 1 per cent of child pornography on the Internet is hosted in the UK.
The Government encourage any measure which BT or any other Internet service providers can take to reduce the availability of child abuse images. However, the Government do not have a list of companies that have chosen to follow BT's lead in the blocking of Internet material containing child pornography.
DTI and Home Office Ministers have met with representatives of Internet service providers to discuss how to further reduce access to child abuse images online and this dialogue continues. I understand that, like BT, Vodafone blocks access to sites listed by the IWF and that other service providers are considering similar measures.
1 Nov 2004 : Column WA16
Football Clubs: Takeovers
Lord Morris of Manchester asked Her Majesty's Government:
According to what criteria they can intervene in takeovers of football clubs by non-United Kingdom citizens; and whether they are giving any consideration to strengthening their power to intervene. [HL4494]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Mergers and takeovers are considered by the independent competition authorities against a competition test. Ministers can intervene only in cases which raise tightly defined "public interest considerations". The only considerations currently specified relate to national security and media mergers. There are no public interest considerations relevant to takeovers of football clubs, or to takeovers generally by non-UK citizens, in the Enterprise Act and there are no plans to change this.
Lord Morris of Manchester asked Her Majesty's Government:
What action is open to them to prevent Manchester United Football Club being taken over by a single owner. [HL4495]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Under the merger provisions of the Enterprise Act 2002 it is for the independent competition authorities to determine whether an acquisition of Manchester United Football Club, if it reaches the qualifying thresholds for investigation, should be allowed to proceed. The legislation does not draw a distinction between how single acquirers and groups of acquirers should be treated.
Combined Heat and Power
Baroness Byford asked Her Majesty's Government:
How many combined heat and power plants are currently operational; and what were the respective figures for the years 1999 to 2003. [HL4480]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The figures below show the number of CHP schemes in operation at the end of each year since 1999.
|
| |
| Year | |
| 1999 | 1,383 |
| 2000 | 1,522 |
| 2001 | 1,552 |
| 2002 | 1,541 |
| 2003 | 1,506 |
Source:
Digest of UK Energy Statistics 2004, Table 6.1 on page 152
Baroness Byford asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will reach their combined heat and power plants target for the current year; and, if not, by what percentage they will fail. [HL4481]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Whitty): The Government target for combined heat and power, announced in 2000, is to achieve at least 10,000 megawatts of good quality CHP capacity by 2010. There are no interim targets but the Government will continue to monitor progress towards its 2010 target.
Coastal Defences
Baroness Byford asked Her Majesty's Government:
On what criteria their new scoring scheme for defending coastal defence was based; and [HL4478]
Whether the new scoring scheme for defending coastal defence takes into account any way of properly valuing heritage or historical sites; and whether local opinions are taken into account. [HL4479]
Lord Whitty: The Government provide grant aid for flood and coastal defence improvement projects promoted by the operating authorities—the Environment Agency, local authorities and internal drainage boards—subject to eligibility criteria which includes meeting a set threshold priority score. A revised scoring system took effect from April 2003, to apply equally to coastal and inland projects.
Proposed projects are allocated a score based on a combination of three elements—(i) benefits as compared to cost, (ii) the number of people protected as measured by the number of households at risk and (iii) protection and enhancement of environmental assets. Both (ii) and (iii) are measured per unit of project cost. Additionally, the score can be modified slightly to reflect (a) risk, (b) vulnerability of people in the area and (c) protection of heritage assets.
Estimation of project benefits and scores is a matter for the relevant operating authority using the Government's appraisal guidance which is published on the Defra website. Authorities are encouraged to quantify benefits arising from protection of all assets as far as possible, including heritage assets. Higher benefits will tend to increase a project's priority score.
Civil Service: Retirement Age
Lord Patten asked Her Majesty's Government:
1 Nov 2004 : Column WA18Lord Bassam of Brighton: In line with all employers in the public and private sector, the Government believe that the Civil Service should be allowed to determine retirement age policy with regard to its business needs while giving staff as much choice as possible about when they retire. Departments and agencies are free to set the normal retirement age for their own staff subject only to the requirement that the minimum age at which civil servants can retire with an unreduced pension is currently 60.
Against this background, 80 per cent of the Civil Service now has the option to remain in work until 65, and a further 11 per cent has the option to remain in work on short service concessions. Those departments and agencies which have decided that there is a strong case for retaining a retirement age of 60 in the current circumstances will be expected to continue to re-examine the issue and look positively at offering more flexibility to older staff.
The normal retirement age for the senior Civil Service is 60. However, heads of departments and agency chief executives have the flexibility to retain members of the senior Civil Service beyond 60 if they judge it to be in the public interest and are satisfied about the fitness and efficiency of the individual to carry out his or her duties.
Once the Department of Trade and Industry announces the consequences for retirement age in the UK of implementing the EU Directive on Equal Treatment, the Civil Service will need to review its arrangements to ensure compliance with any revision to the legal framework.
While retirement age and pension age are not necessarily the same, they are linked. The Government's Green Paper, Simplicity, security and choice: working and saving for retirement (Cm 5677), issued in December 2002, proposed that the rules of public service pension schemes should be changed to make an unreduced pension payable from age 65 rather than 60. Our intention to proceed with the proposal through reviews of public service schemes in consultation with employers and employee representatives was confirmed in our action plan, Action on occupational pensions (Cm 5835), issued in June 2003.
Notices were issued to all civil servants to inform them of the Government's intentions. These said that a pension age of 65 would apply to new entrants to the Civil Service by the end of 2006, and gave commitments that those existing staff aged over 50 at the time of the announcements would be only minimally affected.
More detailed proposals for the implementation of the increase in pension age are being worked up, and we expect further information to be provided to existing staff later this year.
1 Nov 2004 : Column WA17
| Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |