|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Simon Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if she will direct the Office of Fair Trading to inquire into the use by insurance companies' approved repairer schemes of language which prevents customers choosing to use alternative local garages. 
15 Mar 2002 : Column 1258W
Miss Melanie Johnson: The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 enable the Office of Fair Trading to act against businesses using standard terms in consumer contracts that cause consumer detriment including ambiguous or unintelligible terms. Any evidence to suggest such unfair contract terms should be passed directly to the Director General of Fair Trading.
Miss Melanie Johnson: A winding up order was made against Exchange Direct plc on 23 January 2002 and the Official Receiver is now responsible for investigating the reasons for the company's failure and the conduct of its directors. The affairs of the company are also the subject of an investigation by police, and the Official Receiver will provide assistance as required.
Miss Melanie Johnson [holding answer 12 March 2002]: The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) consulted on draft guidelines for debt management companies last year. The OFT announced the outcome of its consultation and published the final guidance on 4 December 2001. Breaches of the guidance by companies could lead to the loss of their consumer credit licence.
Miss Melanie Johnson [holding answer 12 March 2002]: I published the results of our consultation on "Tackling loan sharksand more!" on 15 February 2002. The consultation showed overwhelming support for proposals to clamp down on loan sharks and the other priorities identified.
Linda Gilroy: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what actions she has taken following the publication of the Companies Act Inspectors' report into Mirror Group Newspapers plc on 30 March 2001. 
15 Mar 2002 : Column 1259W
Ms Hewitt: Independent inspectors were appointed under Companies Act powers to investigate and report on the affairs and membership of Mirror Group Newspapers plc. They were asked to look, in particular, at the flotation of Mirror Group Newspapers on 30 April 1991.
Following receipt of the report, the DTI's Companies Investigation Branch sought legal advice on whether disqualification proceedings should be instigated under the Company Directors Disqualification Act against any of those involved.
Important lessons have been learnt from the Mirror Group Newspapers affair and, as the inspectors themselves noted, a number of important changes were made prior to their final report. The report made a number of further recommendations which have all been passed for consideration to the different Departmental bodies and regulators that hold responsibility in these areas.
As the inspectors suggested, the Company Law Review considered a number of issues and the Government will be announcing their response to these and the rest of the Review's recommendations in due course. I have recently announced the setting up of a group jointly with the Treasury and including other regulators to oversee and co-ordinate the response in the UK to auditing and accounting issues raised by the collapse of Enron. This work is also relevant to the concerns expressed by the inspectors on the independence of auditors. I have also announced an independent review of the role and effectiveness of non-executive directors in the UK. The review will report jointly to me and the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
(a) Whether the export is permitted under UN Sanctions. UN Security Council Resolution 864 (1993) imposed an arms embargo in relation to UNITA. The supply of arms and related material to Angola is prohibited except through named entry points provided by the Angolan Government. The UK interprets the scope of all such arms embargoes to cover goods and technology on Military List.
(b) UK national policy. It is UK policy not to grant export licences for new military or dual-use equipment for those countries intervening in the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Angola, Burundi,
15 Mar 2002 : Column 1260W
Namibia, Rwanda, Uganda and Zimbabwe) where there is a clear risk that it would be used in the Democratic Republic of Congo (Ministerial statement HC 184 and 185, Date in force 9 February 2000).
(c) If the application passes these stages, we then judge it against the consolidated EU and national arms export licensing criteria. This includes assessing the proposed export against internal repression, internal conflict, external aggression concerns and risk of diversion (criteria 2, 3, 4 and 7).
Mr. Connarty: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the outcome was of the Justice and Home Affairs Council held in Brussels on 28 February; what the Government's stance was on the issues discussed, including its voting record; and if he will make a statement. 
The Council held an open debate on the international co-operation of the European Union against organised crime. The debate focused on the need for enhanced external action, using the range of tools available including funding programmes and agreements based on Article 38 of the Treaty on European Union.
The A points were approved as in document PTS A 8 (6495/02) (a copy of which has been placed in the Library of the House). These included adoption of the Council Decision setting up Eurojust and adoption of implementing rules under the Eurodac Regulation (2725/2000/EC).
A general approach was approved on a Presidency compromise text, subject to six Parliamentary scrutiny reserves (Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Ireland, Italy and the UK), consideration of the opinion which the European Parliament delivered in September 2001 and re-consultation of the European Parliament on the revised text. Two amendments were agreed at the Council itself: (a) to include the language on fundamental rights which is used in Article 1(3) of the European Arrest Warrant text; and (b) the drafting of a further ground for refusal in Article 6 relating to the ne bis in idem principle. I will provide the European Scrutiny Committee with the consolidated English text resulting from the Council when it is issued. I will also write to the Chairman of the Committee about the term "general approach".
15 Mar 2002 : Column 1261W
The Council endorsed a two-stage approach to drawing up an agreement with the USA on judicial co-operation in criminal matters, in accordance with the conclusions of the special JHA Council on 20 September 2001. The first stage will consist of continuing informal exploratory talks with the United States, and, in parallel, work within the Council on the scope and principles of an agreement or agreement. After this, a formal negotiating mandate would be adopted, if possible at the JHA Council on 25 April 2002. There was general agreement in the Council that particular attention would need to be given to human rights safeguards in relation to issues such as the death penalty and special courts and to data protection. There was also general agreement on the need for clarity about the areas in which an European Union (EU)/United States (US) agreement could add value to existing bilateral arrangements.
Commissioner Schreyer presented the Commission's Green Paper to the Council. In a brief debate which followed, all but one of the speakers questioned the need for a European Public Prosecutor. A number of delegations pointed out that the decision to establish Eurojust had just been adopted and Eurojust should be given the chance to perform the role it had been given in relation to fraud against the Community budget.
The Council took note of a presentation by the Director of Europol on law enforcement work to protect the euro before and during the changeover period. The Director reported that recorded incidents of counterfeiting were low in number and sophistication.
The Council endorsed a provisional management solution, whereby Denmark will temporarily host the secretariat of CEPOL pending a decision on the location of the permanent secretariat. This will facilitate implementation of this year's annual work programme.
There was broad agreement on the principle of amending the Europol Convention to allow Europol staff to participate in joint investigative teams in a support capacity and to authorise Europol to ask Member States to initiate investigations, in accordance with the conclusions of the Tampere European Council. The Article 36 Committee was asked to work on finalising the necessary amendments. Debate focused on the possibility of introducing a simplified procedure for
15 Mar 2002 : Column 1262W
amending the Europol Convention. All delegations agreed on the need for a simplified procedure for amending the Europol Convention, but there was no consensus on the actual mechanism. The Presidency presented three options:
The first option raised constitutional difficulties for a number of Member States, and options (ii) and (iii) attracted most support. I indicated that the UK could accept any of the three options in principle, but we considered that option (iii) was the simplest and that option (ii) might prove difficult in practice. This was referred to the working group for further consideration.
The Austrian Minister presented a paper describing national experience of air marshals and proposing that the EU should consider such a system. This received a cautious response. Together with a number of other Ministers, I noted that the Transport Council was considering this and other aviation security issues. It was agreed that the issue should be referred back to Coreper to consider whether it should be taken any further in the JHA area.
Justice and Interior Ministers met with their counterparts from the candidate countries in the margins of the Council. A Joint Declaration on drugs was approved. The Candidate Countries also provided updates on their progress in improving border controls at their external borders.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|