|Previous Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|
Lord Whitty: We have requested this information from the Development Assistance Committee of the OECD and are awaiting a reply. We will place this in the Library of the House as soon as it becomes available.
Lord Whitty: The figures provided in the previous Answer on 4 November do include development education expenditure specifically related to European Union-funded projects overseas. These are attached.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean): Copies of the relevant UN documents and a copy of the preparatory committee's work programme have been placed in the Libraries of the House. The UK delegation will be working with others to consolidate the proposals to be placed before the diplomatic conference in June 1998, with the aim of ensuring a successful conference. Our policy on a number of the detailed issues due to be discussed at the preparatory committee is still under consideration.
Services for alcohol and drugs misusers: £2.5 million
Mental illness services: £73.3 million
Social services training: £35.5 million
Services for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children: £3 million
Baroness Jay of Paddington: £7,814.651 million will be distributed by Personal Social Services Standard Spending Assessments in 1998-99, compared to £7,392. 117 million in 1997-98. Total Standard Spending on Social Services (including specific and special grants) will be £8,292.969 million in 1998-99, compared to £7,846.030 million in 1997-98 plans; an increase of 5.7 per cent.
Baroness Jay of Paddington: There will be a Special Transitional Grant of £350 million in 1998-99 for community care services. Unlike previous years, councils will not be required to spend 85 per cent. of the grant in the independent sector. It will, however, have a condition requiring local authorities to work closely with the National Health Service and to spend a part of the money on preventing people being unnecessarily in hospital, or being unnecessarily in residential or nursing home care following discharge from hospital.
Lord Hoyle: To provide a substantive answer, it would have been necessary to review all London Gazette entries from the date when the New Zealand Army entered the war in 1941 to locate each recommendation
The New Zealand Army served in North Africa, Italy and the South West Pacific. We do not hold records for those who served in the SW Pacific. The task would be made all the more difficult by the need to find this information and obtain the relevant records.
The total cost of these activities by an experienced researcher is estimated comfortably to exceed the £500 disproportionate cost threshold for answering parliamentary Questions announced in another place on 21 July 1997 by my honourable friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury.
The Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Lord Donoughue): From 1 January 1998 it will not be legal to treat a food producing animal with phenylbutazone because data sufficient to calculate a maximum residue limit (MRL) in food have not been produced and no MRL will be fixed. However, we have been guided by a statement by European Commission officials that, if a horse is not destined for human consumption, MRLs are not required. Accordingly, phenylbutazone will continue to be authorised in the United Kingdom for horses not intended for human consumption, but the relevant products will carry a warning statement indicating that they must not be used if a horse is intended for human consumption.
Lord Donoughue: Council Regulation EEC No. 2377/90 requires the establishment of maximum residue limits (MRLs) for veterinary medicinal products in foodstuffs of animal origin. Where an MRL cannot be determined, that veterinary medicine cannot be used in any member state of the European Union in a food producing animal. A statement issued by Commission officials in 1994 makes it clear that it is for national authorities to guarantee that a horse will not be destined
Whether it is lawful for a self-employed person, intending to appoint an employee, to decline to employ a six-months pregnant woman on the grounds of her inability to fulfil her duties due to her anticipated absence from work in circumstances where Section 51 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 does not apply.
The Minister of State, Department for Education and Employment (Baroness Blackstone): In the light of European Court of Justice case law on this issue, it is generally unlawful to decline to employ a pregnant woman in the circumstances described in the Question. Where an employer wishes to recruit an employee for temporary, short-term work the position is undecided. It is lawful to seek such damages through an industrial tribunal under the terms of the Sex Discrimination Act, whatever the stage of pregnancy of the woman and whether or not the prospective employer is self-employed. Tribunals handle large numbers of cases every year where a woman has complained of discrimination against her due to her pregnancy.
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page