Michael Moore: The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills is responsible for matters relating to summer time. I have written to a number of organisations representing groups most likely to be affected by any change to summer time, to seek their views. As the Prime Minister has already made clear, there can be no change to existing policy without the agreement of all parts of the United Kingdom, including Scotland. That agreement is not in place.
Michael Moore: Since my appointment as Secretary of State for Scotland, I have appointed one special adviser. There is only one special adviser post in the Scotland Office and, therefore, I have no plans to make any further appointments in the next 12 months.
Cathy Jamieson: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what (a) gifts and (b) corporate entertainment and hospitality (i) he, (ii) other Ministers and (iii) officials in his Department have received on each date since 11 May 2010. 
All gifts and hospitality received by officials valued over £15 are recorded. In the period since 11 May, one official attended a stakeholders' dinner organised by the Lloyds Banking Group on 30 September, and two officials attended the annual Scottish Financial Enterprise (SFE) awards dinner on 28 October 2010, one by invitation of SFE and the other by invitation of Standard Life.
Cathy Jamieson: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many full-time equivalent staff at each civil service grade are employed in the private office of each Minister in his Department. 
Michael Moore: Under the Government's transparency agenda, we are required to publish our Organogram. The Scotland Office's Organogram is now available centrally and from our website via the following link:
Cathy Jamieson: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what recent discussions he has had with the First Minister of Scotland on the recommendations of the report Serving Scotland Better: Scotland and the United Kingdom in the 21st Century, published by the Commission on Scottish Devolution. 
Michael Moore: I discussed the recommendations of the Commission on Scottish Devolution with the First Minister of Scotland on 16 September 2010. I have also engaged with other Scottish Ministers on the Government's coalition commitment to implement the recommendations of the Commission on Scottish Devolution.
Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister what recent meetings (a) civil servants and (b) special advisers in his Office have had with the Director-General of the BBC; and whether pensions were discussed at those meetings. 
The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Member to the list of official meetings by Ministers with external organisations which is published on a quarterly basis, in accordance with the Ministerial Code. Officials and special advisers have meetings with a wide range of organisations and individuals on a range of subjects.
(2) how much of the bus service operators grant was allocated to the fitting of automatic vehicle location equipment in 2010-11; and how much will be allocated to these purposes in each of the next three years; 
(3) whether he has plans to make available composite performance information derived from automatic vehicle location equipment funded from the public purse to (a) local transport authorities, (b) traffic commissioners, (c) Passenger Focus and (d) bus passengers for the purposes of enabling them to monitor the punctuality of bus services. 
Norman Baker: In 2009-10, 55% of public service vehicles in Great Britain were fitted with automatic vehicle location (AVL) equipment. However, no estimate is available of the proportion of bus services that are operated by vehicles fitted with such equipment.
In April 2010, the Department for Transport introduced an incentive payment to the Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) to support the use of AVL systems in the operation of local bus services. There is no fixed budget for this incentive, as the amount paid each year will depend on the number of buses which meet the eligibility criteria. Since April 2010, the Department has paid around £33,000 for this incentive. We expect that this will increase as more operators submit valid claims. The amount of grant paid over the next three years will depend on the take-up of the incentive by operators.
The Department's approach to improving bus punctuality is based on effective local partnership. Working with local authorities, the Traffic Commissioners, operators and Passenger Focus, the Department has developed a new punctuality regime which recognises the role that local authorities and operators should both play in tackling poor punctuality. The aim is to encourage local authorities and operators to share punctuality data and other relevant information on a voluntary basis to underpin their agreed approach to managing local services. More generally, the Department will work with bus operators to seek to make information on bus punctuality more widely available, but I have no plans to require the publication of composite performance information derived from AVL equipment at present.
refurbishing the existing rolling stock;
purchasing new electric trains, which would be hauled by diesel locomotives on sections of route that are not electrified; and
purchasing new electric trains and offering interchange, with passengers changing trains if travelling to non-electrified parts of the network.
Mr Blunkett: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans the Government has for future capital funding for the proposed high-speed rail line to the city of Sheffield; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Philip Hammond: The settlement for the current spending review period includes the necessary funding to devise and consult on high speed rail lines to both Leeds and Manchester, including options for serving South Yorkshire. Construction will not begin in the current spending review period and capital funding for construction of the lines will be allocated in future spending reviews.
Mike Penning: No evaluation has been undertaken of the Asset camera system by the Department for Transport. Evaluation of all enforcement equipment is subject to Home Office type approval, which may be granted after rigorous testing by the Home Office Scientific Development Branch (HOSDB).
Mrs Villiers: The Mayor and the Secretary of State had frequent discussions regarding Government funding for Transport for London in the run up to SR10, the outcomes of which are set out in the Secretary of State's letter to the Mayor dated 20 October 2010, published on the Department's website:
The Attorney-General: The Bribery Act 2010 will come into force in April 2011. Joint legal guidance for prosecutors in the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) is currently being prepared. This guidance will address how the adequate procedures defence should be approached by prosecutors when it is raised. Prosecutors will also take into account the guidance on adequate procedures which will be issued by the Secretary of State for Justice as required by section 9 of the Act. The defence of adequate procedures applies to 'relevant commercial organisations' as defined under section 7 of the Act; whether any particular body falls within this definition will be considered on the facts in individual cases.
Mr Gale: To ask the Attorney-General in how many and what proportion of cases prosecuted by the Crown Prosecution Service the defendant entered a not guilty plea at each stage of the prosecution and trial in each of the last five years for which figures are available. 
1. Stocklund House, Carlisle-January 2011
2. St Georges House, Wolverhampton-January 2011
3. St Leonards Road, Eastbourne-March 2011
4. Princess House, Swansea-September 2011
5. Beaumont House, Northampton-October 2011
6. Black Horse House, Eastleigh-November 2011
7. Rossmore House, Leamington Spa-February 2012
8. Sunlight House, Manchester-March 2012
9. Froomsgate House, Bristol-June 2012
10. Oxford House, Bournemouth-September 2012.
1. Blackpool-rolling six month break
2. Mansfield-March 2011
3. Birkenhead-April 2011 (exercised)
4. Harrogate-June 2011 (exercised)
5. Warrington-August 2011
6. Liverpool, Royal Liver Building-January 2012
7. Middlesbrough-March 2012
8. Brighton-October 2012.
1. Stocklund House, Carlisle-expired March 2009 (subject to Treasury approval will take new lease from landlord)
2. Riverside Chambers, Taunton-January 2011 (intend to take new Moto will expire 2016)
3. Lysnoweth, Truro-March 2011
4. Newgate House, Rochdale-March 2011
5. New Kings Beam House, Southwark-March 2011
6. Western Range, Southampton-March 2011
7. Ralli Quays, Salford-December 2011
8. Elvet House, Durham-March 2012
9. Heritage House, Grimsby-March 2012.
Hugh Robertson: A list of Olympic and Paralympic teams that have so far agreed to prepare in approved pre-Games training camps, within the UK, is published on the London2012 website at the following link:
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) how much his Department spent on the provision of assistance to British nationals bereaved by murder and manslaughter overseas in 2009; 
Mr Jeremy Browne: The total cost of the provision of consular services in 2009-10 was £132 million. Because of the unique and individual circumstances surrounding the tragic cases of British Nationals bereaved by murder and manslaughter abroad, we are unable to identify the exact amount spent on the provision of assistance in these cases. We have records of 58 British nationals who were murdered or victims of manslaughter in 2009-10.
Consular Directorate does not have provision of funds to assist UK families who have been bereaved by murder and manslaughter abroad. However, Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials can help transfer money from friends and relatives in the UK to pay any necessary costs incurred in-country.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what process the Consular Directorate follows when contacted by a UK national who has been bereaved by murder and manslaughter abroad; and what support and services are offered those so bereaved. 
Mr Jeremy Browne: A member of Consular staff will speak with a family representative to explain what support and assistance the Foreign and Commonwealth Office can offer the family. They will provide the family with copies of two Foreign and Commonwealth Office publications: Support for British nationals abroad guide
Angie Bray: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what his policy is on making representations on the treatment of Christians in countries where Christians are a minority religion to the governments of those countries. 
Mr Jeremy Browne: The Government condemns all instances of violence and discrimination against individuals and groups because of their faith or belief, wherever they occur or whatever the religion of the individual or group concerned.
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO)'s overseas missions have a responsibility to monitor and raise human rights in their host countries. They routinely raise our concerns with host governments, including freedom of religion or belief when appropriate and have done so in relation to the persecution of Christians.
The FCO recently produced detailed policy advice for our overseas missions advising how to promote and protect freedom of religion or belief internationally. Drawn up with the guidance of think tanks, academics and non-governmental organisations, the toolkit advises officers on how to promote and protect the right to freedom of religion or belief. The toolkit and more information can be found at:
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which proposals under consideration by any institution of the EU would involve a transfer of powers or competences from the UK to the EU; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Lidington: There are no formal proposals currently under consideration which would involve a transfer of power or competence from the UK to the EU. We have also promised that there will be no treaty change which transfers competence or power from the UK to the EU in the course of this Parliament.
Alistair Burt: Human rights organisations and other non-governmental organisations in Gaza are increasingly concerned about restrictions on their own activities and on the wider curtailing of personal freedoms.
We share these concerns, including regarding violent harassment of political opponents, violent retribution-including summary executions-against those Hamas deem collaborators with Israel, arbitrary arrests and detentions, torture and a crack down on women's freedom.
The UK calls on all Palestinian militants to take immediate and concrete steps towards the Quartet principles, unconditionally to release Gilad Shalit, who has been held in captivity for just under four years, and to end its interference with the operations of non-governmental organisations and UN agencies in Gaza.
Mr Lidington: The UK has not had any recent discussions with the Icelandic Foreign Ministry on whaling. Whaling is incompatible with EU membership. The UK continues to encourage Iceland to align itself as soon as possible with the EU's common position. Whaling will be discussed as part of Iceland's EU accession process under Chapter 27, Environment. We expect chapter negotiations to begin in spring 2011.
Mr Raab: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs who will lead the UK delegation to the 2010 Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe summit of heads of state of government in Astana; and whether they will raise concerns about the human rights situation in Kazakhstan at that meeting. 
Mr Lidington: My right hon. Friend, the Deputy Prime Minister, will lead the UK delegation to the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe summit of heads of state of government in Astana. I will accompany him. Human rights issues are among the key topics we will raise at the summit, and in bilateral meetings with Kazakhstan and others.
Robert Halfon: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent reports he has received on the number of rocket attacks on Israeli citizens by (a) Islamic Jihad and (b) Hamas in 2010; and what assessment he has made of the likely implications of such attacks for the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. 
Ms Angela Eagle: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what estimate he has made of the number of redundancies arising from the spending reductions proposed in the comprehensive spending review in respect of (a) his Department and (b) its non-departmental public bodies; 
Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he (a) has taken since his appointment and (b) plans to take in the next six months at UN level in respect of human rights in Venezuela; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Jeremy Browne: We have not had discussions with the Secretary General of the United Nations on human rights in Venezuela. However, we do work closely with the UN on the ground. We have helped refugees on the Venezuela-Colombian border in joint projects with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and are in regular contact with them.
Claire Perry: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether an assessment has been made of the potential effects on the (a) mental and (b) physical health of children of the undertaking by a parent of military service in Afghanistan. 
Mr Robathan [holding answer 16 November 2010]: There are currently no plans to conduct a bespoke study into the potential effects on the mental and physical health of children whose parent is deployed on military service in Afghanistan. However, in addition to our Continuous Attitude Surveys, we have strong links with research communities in the UK and allied countries, all of which feed into and help us develop further our welfare policies. The King's Centre for Military Health Research is currently conducting a study to understand better the impact, both the benefits and drawbacks, of military life on the well-being of children of UK Service personnel. In particular the study, which is funded by the US Department of Defense, will examine whether children of military personnel who are suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder are disadvantaged as a result.
Mike Weatherley: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many and what proportion of (a) Royal Navy and (b) Royal Air Force pilots flying (i) helicopters and (ii) aeroplanes were female in the latest period for which figures are available. 
|Total number of female pilots||Female proportion of total number of pilots (percentage)|
|(1) Less than 5%.|
1. Due to ongoing validation of data from the Joint Personnel Administration system, armed forces' data are provisional.
2. Numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5 and '*'denotes a number less than 5.
3. Percentage based on small numbers present a disclosure risk and are therefore presented as 'less than 5%'.
Nick Harvey: The UK armed forces will be restructured to meet current and emerging threats. The Service Chiefs will set out over the coming months exactly how this restructuring will impact upon current manning levels.
As stated in the Strategic Defence and Security Review, we plan to make total reductions of around 17,000 service personnel by 2015. The Royal Navy will decrease by around 5,000 personnel to a total of around 30,000. The Army will decrease by around 7,000 personnel to a total of around 95,000. The RAF will decrease by around 5,000 personnel to a total of around 33,000.
Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what (a) powers of authority and (b) responsibilities the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator has to undertake assessment and approval of any component of the Report of Assessment submitted by his Department when acting as operator as required by the Radiation (Emergency Preparedness and Public Information) Regulations 2001. 
Mr Robathan: The Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator (DNSR) is granted authority and responsibility from the Secretary of State for Defence (via the Defence Nuclear Environment and Safety Board) for the regulation of nuclear and radiological safety, and environmental protection within the defence nuclear programmes.
As part of this, DNSR assesses and approves the Reports of Assessment produced by the Ministry of Defence before they are submitted to the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate in line with the Radiation (Emergency Preparedness and Public Information) Regulations (REPPIR) 2001.
Robert Halfon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department's agencies and non-departmental public bodies spent from the public purse on influencing public policy through (a) employing external (i) public affairs companies, (ii) strategic consultancies and (iii) corporate communications firms, (b) external marketing and (c) other activities in each of the last 10 years. 
Mr Robathan: The Ministry of Defence (MOD)'s on-Vote agencies, trading funds and non-departmental bodies have not sought to influence public policy through the engagement of external consultancy or other activities in the last 10 years. Any use of strategic consultancy tends to be focused on how the MOD's executive agencies and other bodies pursue their own purposes and objectives.
We employ external help only where we cannot do the work ourselves or can demonstrate value for money. We are making significant reductions in this activity this financial year as a result of the tighter controls introduced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 24 May 2010.
Robert Halfon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which of his Department's non-departmental public bodies have undertaken activities to influence public policy for which they engaged (a) public affairs and (b) public relations consultants in each year since 1997; and at what monetary cost in each such year. 
Mr Robathan: The Ministry of Defence's non-departmental bodies have not sought to influence public policy through the engagement of external consultancy since 1997. We employ external help only where we cannot do the work ourselves or can demonstrate value for money.
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 28 October 2010, Official Report, column 449W, on departmental official hospitality, if he will provide disaggregated information on the five most expensive hospitality events hosted by his Department in each of the last three financial years; and if he will make a statement. 
Expenditure on official entertainment is authorised and managed locally where it is aggregated and recorded against a single reporting code for official entertainment on our accounting systems. Disaggregated information at individual event level is therefore held locally by budget managers at the Ministry of Defence's establishments and units in the UK and overseas.
Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had on job losses amongst his Department's civilian staff at Abbey Wood; and what recent estimate he has made of the number of compulsory redundancies which will occur. 
Mr Robathan: The Strategic Defence and Security Review stated that the Ministry of Defence (MOD) civilian workforce would decrease by 25,000 as the requirement for civilian support decreases in line with the development of new force structures, restructuring of defence capabilities, rationalisation of the defence estate and realisation of other front-line savings. But we have taken no decisions on where those changes will be made. Detailed proposals to deliver the changes will be made in consultation with the Department's trade unions as quickly as possible as further work is taken forward. It follows that we cannot yet say what the impact will be upon Abbey Wood or what level of redundancies might be needed, but the MOD is committed to achieving the reductions by voluntary means as far as possible.
Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) which submarine operational berths have been assessed by the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator as being in full compliance with the requirements of the Radiation (Emergency Preparedness and Public Information) Regulations 2001; 
(2) whether his Department has conducted COSYMA modelling of the consequences of a release of radioactivity from a nuclear submarine berthed in Southampton; and what estimate his Department has made of the costs to the public purse of the emergency management and remedial actions which would be required in the event of an accident resulting in the release of radioactivity from a nuclear-powered submarine berthed at the Southampton operational berth; 
(3) what mechanisms are in place to ensure that Royal Navy Fleet Command recognises the authority of the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator to (a) regulate submarine operations and (b) ensure compliance with its recommendations; 
(4) by what date he expects each submarine operational berth assessed by the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator as not in full compliance with the requirements of the Radiation (Emergency Preparedness and Public Information) Regulations 2001 to be brought into full compliance with these regulations; 
(5) whether the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) was consulted on the recent emergency berthing of HMS Astute at the Loch Ewe operational berth; and under what conditions the NII permitted the berth to be used as an unlicensed emergency berth. 
Mr Robathan: The Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator does not assess operational berths against the requirements of Radiation Emergency Preparedness and Public Information Regulations (REPPIR) 2001. This is the responsibility of the statutory regulator, which is the Health and Safety Executive-Nuclear Installation Inspectorate. All UK Operational Berths in use are fully compliant with REPPIR 2001. Any new berth would be subject to the full approval process as required by statutory regulations. Following her grounding there was no requirement for HMS ASTUTE to use the operational berth in Loch Ewe; she proceeded to Faslane under her own power.
The arrangements for the regulation of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion programme, together with the arrangements by which the Defence Nuclear Regulator ensures compliance with the regulatory requirements, are detailed in internal guidance Regulation of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion programme last updated in September 2010.
Code System from Maria (CSYMA) was used to estimate atmospheric release doses arising from the accident sequences identified in the 2008 Nuclear Plant Hazard Identification and Risk Evaluation and is used to underpin the production of Berth Safety Statement and Emergency Arrangements, but the analysis is not site specific.
There have been no specific costings for emergency management and remedial actions by the Ministry of Defence in the highly unlikely event of an accident resulting in the release of radioactivity from a nuclear-powered submarine berthed at Southampton. Cost benefit analysis methodologies are based on the Health and Safety Executive guidelines but are not site specific.
Mr Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with (a) the Secretary of State for Transport, (b) the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, (c) trade unions and (d) industry bodies on the likely effects of the outcomes of the Strategic Defence and Security Review on civil (i) manufacturing and (ii) transportation. 
[holding answer 12 November 2010]: During the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) I
had discussions with other Government Ministers, trade unions, and industry representatives on the industrial implications of the SDSR.
We now plan to enter into an extensive programme of negotiations in the coming months as part of the SDSR implementation process. This will run in parallel with us developing Green and White Papers on our Defence and Security Industrial and Technology Policy.
I have had no specific discussions with these parties on civil transportation. We will be conducting detailed investment appraisals as the SDSR is implemented, including on the civil sector and societal issues.
Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent assessment he has made of the likely effects of the outcomes of the Strategic Defence and Security Review on the defence estate in Northern Ireland. 
The Ministry of Defence keeps its estate under continual review to ensure that it is of the right size and quality to meet operational needs. However, estate rationalisation arising from the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) has highlighted the need for a follow-on programme of work: 'SDSR-Estate Rationalisation and Withdrawing Troops from Germany' that could lead to a further reduction in the size of the estate and to lower running costs.
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much funding his Department plans to allocate to the development of remotely-piloted aircraft capability in the period from 2010 to 2015. 
Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator made to the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate on the standard of the berth safety statement for the submarine operational berth at Southampton; and if he will place in the Library a copy of the correspondence between the Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator and the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate on that matter. 
Mr Robathan: The Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator (DNSR) submitted a technical assessment of the Ministry of Defence's 2008 Radiation (Emergency Preparedness and Public Information) Regulations (REPPIR) 2001 submissions to the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate on 6 October 2008.
Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when the Environment Agency plans further to consult the public on its plans for the Water End Flood Alleviation scheme in York. 
Richard Benyon: The Environment Agency issued a press release on 16 November confirming a public drop-in session to discuss the Water End Flood Alleviation Scheme. It will be held at St Barnabas School, York, on 1 December, between 3 pm and 7 pm. An invitation has also been sent to the hon. Member for York Central today. The Environment Agency will be delivering invitations to the local community on 19 November.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 25 October 2010, Official Report, columns 128-29W, on waste disposal: health hazards, for what reasons it was decided that the Environment Agency should undertake a review of the health effects of combustion processes, including incineration, in light of the Health Protection Agency advice that studies of public health around modern, well-managed municipal waste incinerators are not recommended. 
Richard Benyon: The Environment Agency regulates incinerators and other large combustion processes. The review referred to will provide additional evidence to underpin the agency's role in regulating industrial emissions. It will consider all large combustion processes and any potential effects on health. Emissions from waste incineration are included in the review, although they make up only a small proportion of the total emissions from combustion processes. By contrast, the Health Protection Agency 2009 report addresses emissions from incineration only.
Martin Vickers: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many permanent staff employed by Natural England received an annual salary of more than £25,428 in the latest period for which figures are available; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr Streeter: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent assessment she has made of the merits of alternatives to energy from waste plants as part of her Department's waste disposal strategy. 
Richard Benyon: The Government's approach to waste management, including energy from waste (EfW), is underpinned by the waste hierarchy, which ranks waste management methods in order of environmental preference. This means that for waste which cannot be re-used or recycled, recovery of energy is a preferable route, and that EfW is almost always preferable to landfill (unless analysis of the overall environmental impact, for specific types of waste, shows otherwise). The waste hierarchy will shortly become law through the revised Waste Framework Directive, which seeks to promote waste prevention, increase recycling, and ensure better use of resources, to protect human health and the environment. This will help to underpin the Government's vision of a zero waste economy.
13. Fiona O'Donnell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps his Department plans to take in support of the developmental objectives of the UN women's agency in the next 12 months. 
Mr Andrew Mitchell: I have held recent discussions on this point with the Head of UN Women, Michelle Bachelet, and the UN Secretary-General. We are putting girls and women at the heart of British development policy. We will announce funding for UN Women when we have completed the Multilateral Aid Review.
Mr Duncan: The Department for International Development's (DFID's) direct aid programme closed in 2006. In 2008, responding to needs arising from the conflict, DFID committed £13.5 million emergency humanitarian funding. This support ends in March 2011. On Wednesday my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for International Development, announced new support for landmine clearance. Over the next three years, Sri Lanka will be among those receiving assistance under this programme, helping those still displaced return home.
Richard Harrington: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps he has taken to increase the level of technical assistance to developing countries in Africa; and whether he has assessed the merits of working together with Israel to provide technical assistance to such countries on climate farming. 
Mr O'Brien: We are currently reviewing all our bilateral and multilateral programmes to ensure we focus our resources where we can get most impact. This includes a review of where aid is spent and the instruments used to deliver it. We will ensure that only the best development interventions receive support and will maximise value for money in DFID's development spend. Requirements for technical assistance are led by our country offices and co-ordinated with partner countries. Technical assistance can make a major contribution to poverty reduction. Final decisions will be made in good time to plan programmes for the next financial year.
The UK currently has no direct co-operation with Israel on international development. Israel has recently become a member of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and we hope Israel will consider joining the OECD's Development Assistance Committee (DAC).
Mr Duncan: The current Department for International Development (DFID) programme in the Caribbean does not directly support infrastructure delivery. Through the core funding that DFID provides to institutions such as the Inter-American Development Bank, the World Bank, EU and others, the UK supports a wide variety of infrastructure investments across the region including ports, road building and utility modernisation.
The UK Government are currently reviewing DFID's aid programme, including aid delivered to the Caribbean through both bilateral and multilateral channels, to ensure UK aid is effective and determine how we can achieve better value for money for the taxpayer and accelerate progress towards the millennium development goals (MDGs). Future funding allocations will be decided once these reviews have been completed.
Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much funding his Department has allocated in respect of achieving each millennium development goal in the latest period for which figures are available. 
It is not possible to provide figures for funding provided by the Department for International Development (DFID) in respect of achieving each millennium development goal (MDGs). Accelerating progress towards the achievement of the MDGs is a key priority for DFID and a large proportion of UK aid is
spent on programmes designed to deliver a range of objectives across the MDGs. It is therefore not possible to disaggregate expenditure under each goal.
DFID does track expenditure on individual sectors and a full detailed breakdown for 2009-10 was published in 'Statistics on International Development'. The DFID publication 'DFID in 2009/10' also sets out how DFID is contributing to delivering the MDGs in 22 priority developing countries. Both these documents are available on the DFID website and in the Library of the House.
Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much in cash terms and what proportion of his Department's budget consists of payments to (a) the EU and (b) multilateral agencies. 
Mr Duncan: In 2009-10, the Department for International Development's (DFID) total aid expenditure was £6,629 million, of which total core funding to multilateral agencies was £2,436 million (39%). Of this amount, £1,186 million (18%) was provided to the European Commission (EC); including £397 million through the European Development Fund (EDF) and £789 million through the EC Development Budget.
Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development which 10 countries received the highest amount of bilateral aid from his Department (a) on the latest date for which figures are available and (b) in 2005. 
Mr Duncan: Details of the Department for International Development's (DFID) bilateral aid expenditure are published in "Statistics on International Development", which is available on the DFID website and in the Library of the House. The top 10 recipients of DFID bilateral expenditure in 2005-06 and 2009-10 are reproduced in the following table.
|Rank||Country||£ million||Country||£ million|
Mr Duncan: In 2009-10, the Department for International Development (DFID) provided £6,629 million in aid with the aim of reducing poverty in developing countries. Of this total, £3,952 million (60%) was provided directly to support poverty reduction in developing countries. A further £2,436 million (37%) was provided as core funding to multilateral agencies to fund further programmes in developing countries. The remaining £241 million (3%) was spent on administration costs (including £70 million on Programme Funded Admin) and programmes in other countries (for example countries not on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD's) Development Assistance Committee's (DAC's) list of aid recipients).
Mr Duncan: UK aid to Gaza is primarily delivered through the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). UNRWA has a range of safeguards to ensure that its operations benefit ordinary Gazans rather than Hamas, and that its staff do not engage in political or militant activity. Other UK funding for Gaza since 2007 has supported projects implemented by established and reputable organisations, such as UN agencies, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and international non-governmental organisations like Oxfam, Save the Children and Islamic Relief. We work closely with all partners on project design to ensure that UK funding complies with European Union and UK legislation on terrorist financing. The monitoring of UK-funded projects which we undertake together with implementing partners has revealed no evidence of any financial benefit to Hamas.
Joseph Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if he will increase the level of his Department's assistance to UNRWA for the purposes of meeting the shortfall in its funding requirement. 
Mr Duncan: The UK has a five year (2007-11) core funding commitment to UNRWA worth up to £110 million. In June this year we provided. £19 million and in October we provided an additional £8 million; £3 million for meeting agreed performance targets, and a further £5 million in response to UNRWA's funding shortfall to ensure it can continue to deliver essential services, such as healthcare and education. This brings our total assistance to UNRWA for 2010 to £27 million. This will, among other things, help provide healthcare to 263,000 women and 242,000 children, education for 45,000 children, vocational training for 1,000 vulnerable and disabled people, and food and cash aid for 29,000 extremely poor people.
I recently met UNRWA's Commissioner General, Filippo Grandi, to discuss UNRWA's budget funding shortfall. The UK fully supports UNRWA's fundraising efforts and, in addition to the extra funding we have provided, we are calling on other donors to honour their funding commitments.
Angela Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what funding (a) Sheffield city council and (b) Barnsley borough council will receive under the Building Schools for the Future programme in each of the next five years. 
Mr Gibb: The projected grant payments under the Building Schools for the Future programme are set out in the following tables. The actual phasing of payments may change depending upon the completion of project milestones.
|Design and build projects|
|Private finance initiative projects|
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how much was spent on external consultants and advisers by (a) his Department and (b) each (i) non-departmental public body and (ii) executive agency for which he is responsible in each year since 2005. 
|Financial year||Expenditure (£ million)|
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will change the system of assessing eligibility for education maintenance allowance to take into account the number of young people in a household who are in education. 
Mr Gibb: The education maintenance allowance scheme will close at the end of the 2010/11 academic year and no new applications will be processed from 1 January 2011. It will be replaced by an enhanced Discretionary Learner Support Fund. Decisions about which young people should receive financial support from the Discretionary Learner Support Fund will be made by schools, colleges and training organisations, who are in a better position than Government to determine the needs of individual students. They will target support to those young people who most need it to continue in learning.
Mr Blunkett: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how much of the budget for education maintenance allowance for 2010-11 will be available in each financial year to 2014-15; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Gibb [holding answer 28 October 2010]: The education maintenance allowance scheme will close at the end of the 2010/11 academic year. The most disadvantaged young people will instead be supported by the enhanced discretionary learner support fund, which will enable closer targeting of resource to individual students in need. £26 million has been invested in 2010-11 in a discretionary learner support fund. With the ending of the EMA, this fund will be increased. We anticipate that in 2014-15 this enhanced fund will be three times greater than current funds. Further details will be announced in due course.
Christopher Pincher: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many and what proportion of students in (a) Tamworth, (b) Staffordshire and (c) England received an education maintenance allowance bonus after attaining A-level results lower than three C grades in 2009-10. 
Mrs Grant: To ask the Secretary of State for Education when his Department's Excellence in Cities funding programme ended; and whether any of the funding associated with that programme is still paid to schools. 
Mr Gibb: The Excellence in Cities programme ended in March 2006. Since April 2006, the funding for the programme has been included in the school development grant, which can be spent by schools on any purpose to raise standards. The Government announced in the spending review that school development grant will be rolled into the main school budget in 2011-12. It will be for local authorities, in consultation with their schools forum, to decide whether to take account of the previous levels of school development grant when making allocations to schools.
Mr Gibb: The pupil premium does not apply to 16 to 19-year-olds. The 16-18 funding formula already has an element that ensures students from disadvantaged backgrounds receive a funding premium. This is the funding linked to the disadvantage uplift within the formula and that for Additional Learning Support. Details of the 16-18 funding formula can be found at:
Mr Gibb: Future capital support for primary and secondary schools in England will be informed by the review of DfE Capital led by Sebastian James, which is due to report by the end of the calendar year. We are aiming to confirm allocations for 2011/12 in early December underpinned by principles emerging from the review.
Mr Buckland: To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether his Department's review of special educational needs plans to address the recommendations of the Lamb Inquiry review of social educational needs and disability information in respect of piloting arm's length educational psychology services; and if he will make a statement. 
Sarah Teather: On 6 July I announced that a Special Educational Needs and Disability Green Paper would be published which would take a wide look at a range of issues for children with SEN and disabilities. This will include ways of making the system more transparent, giving parents more choice and involvement in the decision-making process and producing an assessment system which is more supportive and is seen to be fairer in its allocation of resources. The provision of educational psychology services will be considered within the context of these ambitions.
The overall finding of the Lamb Inquiry was that by addressing support needs early, ensuring parents were listened to and that there was a real focus on outcomes, parental confidence increased. The Green Paper will be informed by the Inquiry's findings, including those around the operation of different educational psychology service models, such as those at arm's length of the local authority. We will, for example, be looking with interest at the outcomes of local authority innovative SEN projects which are currently under way. These projects include a focus on the provision of educational psychology services at arm's length and ways of providing direct access to educational psychology services for parents.
Mr Gibb: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State announced on 20 October that the Government are removing the prescription that has built up around the specialist schools programme and giving school leaders greater freedom to make use of the opportunities offered by specialism and the associated funding. All schools will be free to decide how to develop specialisms in the light of the total resources available to them. Schools are no longer required to seek formal designation as specialist.
Sarah Teather [holding answer 9 November 2010]: Decisions on Sure Start grant capital funding applications from any individual setting are a matter for the local authority, not the Secretary of State for Education. Ministers are still considering information and evidence from Essex county council concerning its 2010-11 capital programme, as part of the Department's review of each local authority (LA)'s funding to identify areas where savings may need to be found. When a decision has been made, officials will write to the authority informing it of its revised allocation for the year. Once notification of that allocation has been received, it will be for Essex to determine how to distribute the funding in the light of local needs and priorities.
Julie Hilling: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what recent representations he has received on the effect on teacher (a) retention and (b) recruitment of proposals to (i) increase contributions to the Teacher's Pension Scheme and (ii) to freeze teacher salaries. 
Mr Gibb: The Department has consulted teacher and head teacher unions, employers and governor representatives on changes to the School Teachers' Pay and Conditions Document (the Document) which have taken effect from 1 September 2010. The main changes to the Document result from recent independent School Teachers' Review Body recommendations, which include a 2.3% pay award as the final element of a three-year pay deal for teachers.
In responding to the consultation on the Document, one of the consultees expressed concern about the two-year public sector pay freeze which for teachers who earn the full-time equivalent of more than £21,000, will take effect from 1 September 2011. The Secretary of State has also received correspondence from a Member of Parliament about whether a pay freeze would discourage individuals from entering or remaining in the teaching profession.
Although there will be a two-year pay freeze for teachers from September 2011, the Document does provide maintained schools in England and Wales with the option of making additional payments or providing other financial assistance, support or benefits to retain an existing teacher's services or as an incentive to recruit a new teacher. The Government are also considering how they might reform the existing pay and conditions rules to give schools greater freedoms to pay good teachers more.
Julie Hilling: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government for what reasons he decided to reduce funding allocated through regional housing grants by £370 million; what assessment he has made of the likely combined effect on the provision of social housing of the implementation of that decision and the Government's proposals to reduce housing benefit; what impact assessments he has undertaken of that decision; and whether he has made an assessment of the likely effect of the implementation of that decision on the number of jobs in (a) Bolton at Home and (b) other arms-length management organisations. 
Andrew Stunell: The Government have made clear that our most urgent priority is to tackle the UK's record deficit in order to restore confidence in our economy and support the recovery. In order to tackle the budget deficit all Government Departments have been required to work within a very tight fiscal settlement. Failure to tackle the deficit would have pushed up mortgage rates and made housing less affordable.
The decision to discontinue funding the Private Sector Renewal programme, which received funding of £308 million in 2010-11, reduced by the previous administration from £376 million, is a direct result of these constraints.
Where Private Sector Renewal activities are a local priority, local authorities may chose to direct other funding to provide support packages for vulnerable private sector households. Neither Bolton at Home nor other ALMO would have been direct beneficiaries of funding from this programme.
In the spending review we announced almost £4.5 billion investment in new affordable housing to deliver up to 150,000 affordable homes and a further £2 billion investment in Decent Homes. We are also giving housing associations much more flexibility on rents and use of assets. Our aspiration is to deliver even more homes through our investment and reforms. We will publish details of how these proposals will work shortly.
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what estimate he has made of the number of bed and breakfast places needed for homeless people in each London borough in each of the next five years. 
Under homelessness legislation that applies to England, bed and breakfast cannot be used by a local housing authority to discharge a duty to secure accommodation for applicants who are pregnant, or whose household includes a pregnant woman or a dependant child, unless no other accommodation is available and then for no more than six weeks in aggregate.
This Government are committed to tackling and preventing homelessness. I have established a new cross-Government working group on homelessness bringing together Ministers from eight Government Departments to address the complex causes of homelessness and rough sleeping.
An additional £130 million will be made available, via the Department for Work and Pensions, to local authorities to administer discretionary housing payments to provide extra support for households where needed. I have also provided a further £10 million in this financial year to London local authorities to help support those families most at risk of homelessness. On 20 October I announced that during the course of the spending review over £400 million of homelessness grant will be made available to local authorities and the voluntary and community sector to support the most vulnerable and tackle homelessness.
Bill Esterson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether his Department plans to issue guidance to local authorities on the effects of reduced funding levels on the voluntary sector; and if he will make a statement. 
Robert Neill [holding answer 12 November 2010]: We expect local authorities, as they look to find savings to their budgets, to make reductions to their running costs by introducing new ways of working, including better procurement and more joint working, and by benefiting from the reduction in bureaucratic burdens that are imposed on them from central Government.
As I outlined in my Department's press release of 14 October 2010, councils should not seek to avoid making the savings described above by targeting instead the voluntary sector. We expect councils to devolve and empower people and maintain strong links with voluntary and community groups.
In a tight economic climate, there is a greater need for the diversity and innovation voluntary and community groups can offer. Reinforcing monopolies of local services by retrenching into the town hall is not the way forward. Opening up more of councils' budgets to voluntary organisations can improve effectiveness, increase resilience and save costs.
Grant Shapps: A decision was taken to close the National Housing and Planning Advice Unit with immediate effect on 28 June because this helped to achieve cost savings because it consolidated housing and planning analysis within the Department, eliminating the risk of duplication in research and advice.
In the interests of transparency, and in order to maximise value from the units research programme, all research was transferred to my Department at no extra cost and is published on the Department's website.
Grant Shapps: We did not proceed with the National Tenant Voice as creating yet another central Government quango was not the right way forward for delivering effective tenant empowerment at the local level, and with costs of over £1 million did not represent value for money. Instead, we are giving tenants more power and voice locally through tenant panels, and have provided almost £50,000 for the national tenant organisations to develop proposals for an independent successor body to represent the interests of social tenants.
Harriett Baldwin: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what guidance he has issued to local authorities on the timetable for the ending of regional spatial strategies. 
Greg Clark: The Localism Bill will abolish regional strategies, it will be introduced shortly and we hope for Royal Assent as soon as the parliamentary timetable allows. I also refer my hon. Friend to the written ministerial statement of 10 November 2010, Official Report, columns 15-16WS, and I am placing in the Library a copy of the associated letter from the Government's Chief Planner to local authorities.
Julie Hilling: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether housing associations will be given flexibility to build new homes for traditional social housing rents in circumstances where they judge application of rents at 80 per cent. of market rate to be inappropriate. 
Andrea Leadsom: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (1) if he will bring forward proposals to require the Planning Inspectorate to refuse appeals from developers of wind farms when there is unanimous community opposition to the proposals; 
Robert Neill: In reaching a decision on a planning appeal, a planning inspector will consider whether a proposed development is acceptable in terms of the local council's development plan and other considerations which can include national planning policy and relevant planning issues raised by local communities. The Planning Inspectorate has an important role to play as the arbiter of potential conflicts between the interests of individuals, or local communities, and the needs of the nation. It would therefore be inappropriate to direct the Planning Inspectorate to refuse a planning appeal solely because of community opposition because there may still be strong national or local policy support for a proposal.
We are not proposing to include any specific provisions in the Localism Bill on planning for wind farms. We will publish and present to Parliament a simple and consolidated national planning policy framework covering all forms of development and setting out national economic, environmental and social priorities. We will make an announcement on how we propose to take forward the national planning policy framework and the implications for specific areas of planning policy.
There are requirements on local planning authorities to consult local communities and take their views into account when preparing development plan documents and planning applications must be publicised to allow representations to be made on the planning issues they raise. We will give local people and communities far more ability to determine the shape of the places in which they live by radically reforming the planning system.
Cathy Jamieson: To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities pursuant to the answer of 28 October 2010, Official Report, column 443W, on the Equality Act 2010, when she plans to implement the provisions of that section of the Act. 
Priti Patel: To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities how much the Government Equalities Office spent on co-hosting the EU Women in Power summit in February 2010; and how many civil servants attended the event. 
Lynne Featherstone: The Government Equalities Office (GEO) co-funded the EU Women in Power Summit, which the UK co-hosted with Spain during Spain's presidency of the EU on 3 February 2010. The total cost of the UK contribution was £48,485.
The five former UK Ministers who attended the event were each accompanied by Private Secretaries and were supported by one senior civil servant from the Government Equalities Office. The former Minister for Women and Equalities was also accompanied by one special adviser.
Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will take steps to ensure standards of animal welfare are maintained following implementation of the European Directive on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. 
Lynne Featherstone: I am satisfied that European Directive 2010/63/EU provides a sound and practical framework for the regulation of animal experimentation and testing in Europe and will allow the United Kingdom to maintain its traditionally high standards of welfare and animal protection. At the same time it avoids unnecessary bureaucracy and may offer opportunities to reduce the current regulatory burden in some areas without harming animal welfare.
Mr Raab: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many European arrest warrants were issued for UK citizens in (a) 2004, (b) 2005, (c) 2006, (d) 2007, (e) 2008, (f) 2009 and (g) 2010 to the latest date for which information is available. 
The Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service for Scotland are the designated UK authorities responsible for processing European Arrest Warrants (EAWs). Information is held on Part 1 cases (persons wanted from the UK by another member state) and Part 3 cases (persons wanted by the UK from another
member state). It is not possible to provide information relating to EAW requests for UK Citizens which are made between two other EU member states.
Data on the requests made by EU member states in respect of UK citizens prior to 1 October 2008 are currently unavailable and could be recovered only by a manual examination of all SOCA case records. This would incur a disproportionate cost.
For information on the number of UK nationals surrendered to other member states I refer my hon. Friend to the answer given on 25 October 2010, Official Report, columns 64-66W, to my hon. Friend the Member for Witham (Priti Patel).
Figures for UK Part 3 requests made in respect of UK citizens since 2006 are shown in the following table. Data for 2004 and 2005 is not readily available and could not be obtained without incurring disproportionate cost.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what her most recent assessment is
of the adequacy of the level of funding for community policing in London. 
The spending review set out the overall settlement for policing. There will be an announcement to Parliament in early December setting out the details of allocations of grant to all forces, including any specific grant.
Robert Halfon: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much her Department's agencies and non-departmental public bodies spent from the public purse on influencing public policy through (a) employing external (i) public affairs companies, (ii) strategic consultancies and (iii) corporate communications firms, (b) external marketing and (c) other activities in each of the last 10 years. 
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what departmental policy reviews her Department has undertaken since 6 May 2010; on what date each such review (a) was announced and (b) is expected to publish its findings; what estimate she has made of the cost of each such review; who has been appointed to lead each such review; to what remuneration each review leader is entitled; how many (i) full-time equivalent civil servants and (ii) seconded staff are working on each such review; from which organisations such staff have been seconded; and how much on average such seconded staff will be paid for their work on the review. 
|Review||Date announced||Date findings due to be published||Estimate of total cost of review||Appointed reviewer and remuneration||Number of FTE civil servants working on review( 1)||Number of seconded staff and average cost( 2)|
|(1) Number of civil servants working directly on the reviews (not necessarily full-time). Others will contribute over the course of the reviews.|
(2 )We have interpreted these questions to refer to non-government secondees.
Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate her Department has made of its expenditure on travel undertaken by (a) her and (b) each other Minister in her Department in (i) September and (ii) October 2010. 
Nick Herbert: As set out in the Ministerial Code departments will publish, at least quarterly, details of all travel overseas by Ministers. Information for the second quarter will be published as soon as it is ready.
Luciana Berger: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many interns her Department has engaged in the last 12 months; and how many were (a) unpaid, (b) remunerated with expenses only and (c) paid a salary. 
Nick Herbert: The Home Office, including the UK Border Agency (UKBA) but excluding its other agencies, has engaged 31 interns during the last 12 months. Of these, seven were unpaid and 24 were paid at either the administrative assistant or administrative officer wage (both which are above the national minimum wage). We are unable to confirm how many were remunerated with expenses without incurring disproportionate cost.
In addition, the Home Office, including UKBA but excluding its other agencies, appointed 24 undergraduates under the Fast Stream Summer Development Programme (SDP) and Summer Placement Scheme (SPS), and a
further two undergraduates under the Windsor Fellowship. The SDP and SPS are 6-8 week placements offered to undergraduates from ethnic minority backgrounds and with disabilities respectively, and the Windsor Fellowship is a Leadership Programme offering 6-8 week placements for ethnic minority undergraduates who have been identified as having leadership potential. All 26 were remunerated at the executive officer wage.
Rehman Chishti: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of the implications for UK citizens of the implementation of EU Directive 2006/24/EC on the retention of data. 
Nick Herbert: The Data Retention (EC Directive) Regulations 2009 completed the transposition of the EU Directive 2006/24/EC into UK law. A public consultation was conducted prior to transposition to consider the impact of the regulations and its results were published. The UK is currently contributing to the assessment of the effectiveness of the directive being conducted by the European Commission, as required by the directive.
We believe that the EU data retention directive provides a valuable basis for retaining communications data that is critical for serious crime investigations and to counter terrorism, both in the UK and elsewhere in Europe.
Nick Herbert: The available information for expenditure on services provided by the Institute of Fiscal Studies is shown in the following table. This is expenditure on specialist training and development services. Financial records for the period 2001-02 to 2003-04 are not held centrally and the information could not be collected without incurring disproportionate cost.
|Home Office expenditure on services provided by the institute of Fiscal Studies|
(2) what recent discussions her Department has had with (a) the Association of Chief Police Officers, (b) the Association of Police Authorities and (c) police forces on the future of the Neighbourhood Policing Fund. 
Nick Herbert: In recent weeks I have spoken to chief constables, police authorities and others about the Government's reform plans for policing and the implications of the comprehensive spending review (CSR). Police community support officers (PCSOs) make an important contribution to neighbourhood policing and the visible and available policing in communities the public wish to see. Following the CSR, an announcement will be made to Parliament in early December on the details of police funding, including the specific grant for neighbourhood policing.
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will request HM Inspectorate of Constabulary to review the Metropolitan Police Service's investigation into telephone hacking and blagging; and if she will make a statement. 
Nick Herbert: The Metropolitan police are currently conducting further inquiries into recent telephone hacking allegations. As we have previously made clear, we believe the right course of action is to await the outcome of those inquiries.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|